| Player 1 |
|
#player1 Joshua_Sokol Joshua Sokol
#player2 Michael_Fagen Michael Fagen
>Joshua_Sokol: DEFGPTU H4 FUDGE +28 28
>Michael_Fagen: CIIO 6F IO.IC +16 16
>Joshua_Sokol: EGILPST 9B PIGLETS +73 101
>Michael_Fagen: HO 10F HO +28 44
>Joshua_Sokol: AEIOOQX G3 QI +26 127
#note G2 OXO setting up QI is completely insane, right? He took a while to play HO, so I was thinking he wasn't quite balanced, therefore allowing an overlap at F2 or F1 seemed careless
>Michael_Fagen: AEGIRUZ 11G GAUZIER +88 132
>Joshua_Sokol: AEEOOOX J9 OO.E +15 142
#note This keeps AX 12G for next turn, attempts to balance my rack, and doesn't give back too much in return. I could also hit (A)XONE sometimes with all of the N's remaining, but I'm not too hopeful for that.
>Michael_Fagen: ALWY H11 .LWAY +36 168
>Joshua_Sokol: AEIORXY B9 .YREXIA +54 196
#note This is very dangerous, but also scores far more than anything else. Not expecting a challenge.
>Michael_Fagen: DHOT A12 DOTH +61 229
#note ?could have been worse I guess?
>Joshua_Sokol: BIOORSV C12 BO +34 230
#note At this point I was trying very hard not to miss anything. Took way too long to play this.
>Michael_Fagen: ACENU D5 UNCA.E +10 239
>Joshua_Sokol: IKORSVW L8 VOW.R +30 260
#note Possibly in good shape now, but knowing Michael probably not. I regretted not adding the S on for 2 points here. Would you have done that? I should have.
>Michael_Fagen: ?EEIRRT 14G w.TERIER +68 307
>Joshua_Sokol: BDIIKST K4 BISK +29 289
#note just horrible options all around, so it's time to phony and make something happen
>Michael_Fagen: ATU 8L .ATU +21 328
>Joshua_Sokol: DEILSTV L1 VIDE +32 321
#note LIVED is also 31, giving less back, and VISED is 37, and possibly worth it to keep the score closer. I was really close to just playing VIED for 5 less here. Ugh, I think this is where I lost.
My thought process here was that Michael was keeping fairly well, although double Ns are possible. I didn't think the V in VIDE would be a threat for his range of possible leaves, but I was worried about throwing the I out there. I ended up doing some estimative calculations and I figured that it wasn't worth sacrificing 5 points in terms of raw equity loss, but that it might be worth setting up a phantom I hook that Michael would miss and that I would have full access to if I drew the blank. There are no I's left otherwise.
Once I switched VIDE to VIED, I realized that he is probably more likely to see the hook after the play was left on the board on my time, so him missing IVIED would be off the table. I didn't think he had the blank yet, even though playing VATU should probably imply a more aggressive attitude that is usually encouraged by the retention of a blank.
Anyways I'm rambling. I think I should have played VIED or LIVED or VISED instead of this. Failed to consider LIVED or VISED.
>Michael_Fagen: AELMNST 2H MANL.EST +74 402
#note Michael happily said that this was the 5th anagram he saw in this rack of AEILMNST! Had I played VIED L2, would he have seen MANTLE(T)S? He obviously didn't see it in this situation, since he could still lose if I bingo back on row 1. Or maybe he had some weird reason to play this instead of MANTLE(T)S, which is much more doubtful.
Anyways, M2 TALESM(A)N is 94 and much much safer. MANLIEST wins about 80% of the time, MANTLE(T)S 90% and TALESM(A)N 96% or so, per Quackle. Michael still has a commanding lead here.
>Joshua_Sokol: ?AELNST 1C STErNAL +85 406
#note Things looked really bleak. I could forgo the bingo and open a 3x3 lane with 5A LAT(U), but that looked even more bleak. Apparently SALTiNE and NAiLSET are a tad better here. This had the benefit of setting up A(STERNAL), which Michael might miss and could win me the game.
>Michael_Fagen: AADJNPR M5 JAP.N +21 423
#note one of only two wins. Good find by Michael. (T)AJ also wins at N8.
>Joshua_Sokol: EFMNNO N6 ME.ON +32 438
>Michael_Fagen: ADR 13M RAD +14 437
>Michael_Fagen: (FN) +10 447
|
