| Player 1 |
|
#player1 Quackle Quackle
#player2 Bill Bill
>Quackle: ACFIOVV 8G VIVO +20 20
>Bill: ADDILOW 7J WOALD +15 15
#note Chose this over other stuff to be as open as possible. Though you would think that Quackle's big advantage in Collins is all the extra bingos playable on open boards (and, well, it is), it also kills me a lot by stacking parallel plays early in the game with all the extra short words, then nailing me when I have to belatedly open.
>Quackle: ABCFGHT 6F CHAFT +29 49
>Bill: DIINRTU H1 NUTRI. +21 36
>Quackle: BEGIIJT 4D JIBE. +28 77
>Bill: DEEIIMN 8L MIEN +39 75
>Quackle: EEGINOT 9M EGO +16 93
>Bill: DEEILNP 10J PLED +18 93
#note Not a strong play. UNPILED is best for valuation and other plays give better bingo opportunities.
>Quackle: EINOTTY 5B EYOT +27 120
>Bill: EIINORY 6B NOY +30 123
#note I knew Quackle would like OY over this, but bingoing looked like it might be difficult so I wanted the extra seven points. I was also afraid of being hit from B2-6, but that doesn't seem to be a huge threat.
>Quackle: EIINPRT 2F PI. +11 131
>Bill: DEGIIMR L10 .MIGRE +20 143
#note Trying to open again, but this is probably more than is necessary. GLIM seems pretty good. Maybe YOGI, but it's pretty dangerous.
>Quackle: EFINRTX 15K R.FIX +45 176
>Bill: DIRSSSW 13I SWI.S +20 163
#note Interesting draw.
>Quackle: ADEGKNT K9 G.AD.E. +31 207
>Bill: ?ADRRSS K5 DS. +22 185
#note Quackle likes it. No really good way to open.
>Quackle: EHKNOTU 14N KO +33 240
>Bill: ?AOORRS 12G ORA +6 191
#note Some of the choices that Quackle puts ahead of this deserve consideration, but I don't think anything that doesn't open more can be right, and I don't think anything opens quite as much as this. VOR maybe, but Quackle even likes ROO at 12G better (even after simming), with five A's and zero O's unseen, and ROO even makes rows 11, 13 and 14 harder to hit than ORA.
>Quackle: EEHNTUU 13C UNETH +33 273
>Bill: ?AOQRST 11A QuARTOS +86 277
>Quackle: AACERUZ D8 CUR.A. +22 295
>Bill: AEILNTU 10D .E +4 281
#note I saw the chance to fish for ALIQUANT right away, but didn't give it much thought at first, preferring to take a 51 point Q play and force Quackle to have drawn into a bingo. Then I noticed 10D REZ and realized that the crazy fish might actually be correct this time. Three different ways of going after ALIQUANT lead in win percentage: fishing of the E, going for the whole tamale; playing QUANT for 45 and hoping to add ALI-; and playing QUA and hoping for the wraparound trip-trip (or possible bingo as backup, I suppose). I'm interested in whether anybody can help in analyzing this position, because it seems that all of the plans can be foiled. After QUANT, Quackle has a bingo or REZ most of the time, and if it has REZ and I get ALIQUANT I'm still not going out, so I probably won't score enough to win. After QUA (which actually has the highest win % by a significant margin) Quackle can usually block with AQUA(E) or QUALE and I'm sunk if I haven't drawn the Z or a bingo, and if it has QUALE then REZ probably won't even be enough. I think fishing the E gives me the best chance because there's the most guesswork involved for Quackle, but still if it has the Z it can wait on it and block, and if it doesn't it can assume that I don't have it yet, so I'm fishing for ALIQUANT and there's a 1/3 chance that I draw the Z, and if it has the blank and can play something on the triple from the Q (which it almost certainly can if it has the blank and the Z's in the bag) it can probably go out first and outrun me even if I get REZ. Sorry for that awful run-on sentence, but basically it seems after the E fish that I lose unless Z? are both in the bag or I draw a bingo somewhere else, and it doesn't look like bingos elsewhere are happening. How well does Quackle's pre-endgame emulate how a human player should be thinking about this? I know there are some who are not big fans of Quackle in this situation, but it does see the usefulness of going for ALIQUANT from my perspective, so shouldn't it be able to play it pretty well from its side? Yes, I suppose that it's not going to infer that I'm going for ALIQUANT like a human maybe would and would have to consider other bingo possibilities along with it. And why does QUA do a lot better in win % (about 53% after a lot of iterations compared to 34% for QUANT and E fishes), is there another advantage that I'm missing? And finally, why do E fishes in "innocuous" parts of the board sim just as well as putting it at 10E? Isn't giving myself a chance to hit it if I draw the Z instead of an A important?
>Quackle: ?ABEENZ 10D ..Z +63 358
#note So Quackle has the Z, but decides not to wait on it. Isn't this wrong, at least from a human perspective? Yes, there are other possible bingos from Quackle's perspective. But if I don't have a shot at ALIQUANT then does fishing really give me a chance, if Quackle can take REZ and not empty the bag? Thus, wouldn't a thinking opponent know that I was fishing to some subset of AAILNTU, meaning that the only bingo I could have elsewhere is ANNULATE if I fished to AALNTU and drew E, which of course I would've had last turn and I don't think there would be any reason to pass on it (trading ANNULATE and REZ/ZO, or let's say AZO/REZ, leaves me down 21 which I have a good chance of overcoming if I draw an outplay). Of course, I could be fishing for another bingo and trying to trick the opponent into thinking I'm going for ALIQUANT and passing on REZ. Would you assume I'm going for ALIQUANT and play QuEAN or QuEEN, or would you consider my motives unclear, take REZ, and hope that if ALIQUANT was my intention, I missed the fish? Anyway, there are so many things going on here that I really hope somebody else finds it interesting enough to comment on. I'm going to be posting about it in the forums under positions, so if you have any comments you can make them either here or there (there would probably be preferable).
>Bill: AAILNTU A8 ALI.UANT +212 493
>Quackle: ?ABEEEN 15A .ENEBrAE +80 438
>Quackle: (L) +2 440
|
