| Player 1 |
|
#player1 JD JD
#player2 Peter_Armstrong Peter Armstrong
>JD: BEEFLQU 8G FEEB +18 18
#note 8E placement best?
>Peter_Armstrong: FLOUW 7I WOFUL +29 29
>JD: DLOPQUV 6G QUOD +34 52
>Peter_Armstrong: ?EEHHTU -?EE +0 29
>JD: AILMOPV 8L PIMA +42 94
>Peter_Armstrong: CCEERST O8 .CCRETES +89 118
>JD: ALOSTVZ 14K ZLOT. +28 122
#note best by a little is the unintuitive LOVATS at 9D, which sets up the Z for next turn. this isn't too horrible.
>Peter_Armstrong: ILNRY 9C NIRLY +25 143
>JD: AADERSV C5 VERA.DAS +63 185
>Peter_Armstrong: AAGIMNO 15E ANGIOMA +91 234
>JD: AEEIRST E5 ARTE.IES +82 267
>Peter_Armstrong: HNO B6 HON +31 265
>JD: DJKNPRT 11B J.P.D +15 282
#note peter really put some thought into his last play. it would be pretty maniacal if he didn't have an A. Then again if anyone would be capable of making this setup without one, it would be Peter. Without inferring an A, quackle would be fine with me playing PROD at M12 and trying to draw a massive JARK/JOR/ANA play, but with that inference the balanace seems to shift toward blocking (either JAPED or DRAPET holding JKN).
>Peter_Armstrong: ?IIORTV M1 VITRIO..c +72 337
#note whoa! but he did have IVORIST at A1, so I lucked out
>JD: IKNORTT B11 .INK +32 314
>Peter_Armstrong: AGGHIIO -AGGH +0 337
>JD: ?NORTTY N5 NY +28 342
>Peter_Armstrong: AEHO 1K HO.EA +36 373
>JD: ?ORSTTW 2L W.T +21 363
#note I was trying to block a cheap X play and keep the sweet -RS/SNY spot on row 4, but taking the 7 extra points for TROW/ONY is too good to pass up
>Peter_Armstrong: ABG A7 BAG +32 405
>JD: ?EIORST 4G hERITO.S +72 435
#note I don't know what the right play is. row 4 is great, but I didn't want to play short because I didn't feel that comfortable about hitting row 12 (from the S or to the E) if Peter blocked, hence my play. SORRIEST at 12E might be safer by preventing him from bingoing back, but would also make it easier for him to outrun.
>Peter_Armstrong: AEILNUX 11J LINEA. +12 417
#note good play by peter to block Peter, but not enough. Unfortunately, this endgame was tainted by a rules transgression on my part. I spotted that I had underscored VERANDAS as 62 instead of 63, so LINEAR looked like it was going to be a tie if I responded with my planned play of DEG/OWED/DOBE. I didn't inform Peter until after he'd hit his clock because I thought that the protocol was not to interrupt an opponent's train of thought, but the rules say exactly the opposite - alert scoring discrepancies at any time. I think it wouldn't have changed the outcome here because I don't see a better play for Peter, but I apologize to him nonetheless.
>JD: DEEGU 9I DEG +24 459
#note I had 5 seconds. it's 2 points better to block the obvious XU spot with GU, but I took the sure win.
>Peter_Armstrong: UX A12 XU +37 454
>Peter_Armstrong: (EU) +4 458
|
