| Player 1 |
|
#player1 Joshua_Sokol Joshua Sokol
#player2 Thomas_Reinke Thomas Reinke
>Joshua_Sokol: AAFLLOU H8 AFOUL +18 18
#note I don't understand why I sim opening plays that are clearly correct. I must have wasted at least 10 Scrabble games doing this.
>Thomas_Reinke: EIIIMOR 8D MOIR.I +11 11
>Joshua_Sokol: AAAALOZ 7I AA +6 24
#note let it be known that I hate scoring when I have the Z. So far, so good. He doesn't have the Z so if he sniffs out my setup, at the worst he should be scoring like 39.
>Thomas_Reinke: DEEIJKT 6J KITED +40 51
#note Imp... Impossible! He just scored 1 more point than my maximum allowed comeback score. What is this sorcery?
>Joshua_Sokol: AALNOOZ 5I ZOA +35 59
#note ZOL# is not allowed in this lexicon, and yet you can extend it to DANAZOL nonetheless. How much closer to the Reinke's annotating style can we get?
>Thomas_Reinke: ?EEJSTV M3 JET. +22 73
>Joshua_Sokol: ABLNORU 7C BUNA +17 76
#note This turn hit me straight in the umbo. Which means it didn't faze me at all, despite how umbonal it was. This is literally the only sentence using the word UMBONAL I can possibly think of. Why does UMBO take NIC, NAL and NATE while AMBO does not? In the game, I was aware of this illogism, and so I forwent the best play in honorable protest after spotting it pretty quickly.
>Thomas_Reinke: ?EINSUV 12C VeINU.ES +70 143
#note T: LEVULINS is the only higher scoring bingo, just mentioning that if some of you out there were mistakenly thinking that I was missing tons of high-scoring bingos with this rack.
J: Illogism is not a valid Scrabble word, but that's OK because I didn't type it in all caps. Do you think you know why I'm not providing any straightforward analysis to this game?
>Joshua_Sokol: AGILOPR C9 PAR.O +26 102
#note If your answer to the question on that last slide was "because you're [imitating] a Reinke", congratulations, you have won second place! You are a clever crevalle.
>Thomas_Reinke: ACEEEIW 4L E.EW +22 165
#note As a side note, I had to stare at my scoresheet for at least 10 seconds to recognize what word was played on this turn. Can you believe that we have now been playing with this word for over 4 years?
>Joshua_Sokol: EGILLTY F6 G..LY +21 123
#note Honestly, with a move like this, they should have sent me straight to the LITE division where I belong. Division 2 (Collins), that is, not Collins (Division 2). Confused yet? As long as you aren't offended.
>Thomas_Reinke: ACEEFIS 13I FICES +39 204
#note At this point I really wanted to throw my fices at Charles, but he was too far away from my table so I contented myself with a long sigh of "why you gotta do me like that, I blame your twin brother".
>Joshua_Sokol: AEHILNT O1 THE. +30 153
#note I'm about to lose my next 4 games in a row and the only thing that can save me is leaving an A on my rack instead of an E. *Joel Sherman told me to put that in there on behalf of a certain man from the Sun. I would post a screenshot of this play simming 2.4 points higher than THA(W), but you already know that I am Quackle's highest briber.
>Thomas_Reinke: AELORRX 11C .AX +39 243
#note 39?!? More like -- oh wait, you're right, nevermind.
>Joshua_Sokol: AGIILMN 12L MAGI +26 179
#note Silly me. I made this play because I thought AOL's computerized voice said "you've got magi". Turns out I was confused, yet again, and have no memory of anything that happened before MSN messenger.
>Thomas_Reinke: BELOORR O8 BLOO.E +24 267
#note Like this over the obvious BROILER because it didn't give bingo lines back. See, I am capable of thinking about things other than raw point totals. That's what separates us from the machines.
>Joshua_Sokol: CEILNOV I3 CO. +17 196
#note The actual reason I am not analyzing anything is because I made a huge mistake on my next move that totally overshadows any of the good plays I made earlier on
>Thomas_Reinke: ADDERRT D2 ERRAT.. +18 285
#note T: This was at board 2, and there was someone watching over my shoulder as I struggled over this play. I don't know who it was. If it was you, I'm sorry that I made you watch me deliberating for several minutes only to make a nonsensical play.
EARDRUM is the superior version of this.
J: Nevermind, that was Thomas. Huge mistake.
>Joshua_Sokol: EHIILNV 2A LIV.N +16 212
#note I can still win this game if Thomas suddenly thinks that one of the letters on column C is actually on column B, but that's up there with catching him with the Q, drawing GNS? and using my English opening next turn. Wait, that's chess isn't it?
>Thomas_Reinke: DDINOPT A1 P.OD +27 312
#note no, ENGLISH is good in TWL, but it doesn't put the H on the L1 square like I thought it did last turn, so my knowledge of English would not be as impressive as I thought. Maybe I can impress Thomas with another type of opening.
>Joshua_Sokol: ?EGHINU B9 UH +30 242
#note I was committed, OK? Committed to not playing a bingo this game. I probably could have won if I had spotted UNwEIGH(T) instead of just UNHInGE. Oh, sorry, that's actual analysis. Better to say that I was stuck in some sort of Stockholm Syndrome-esque trance this turn.
>Thomas_Reinke: DEINRTY A6 DENY +32 344
#note Keeping the T for QAT if I need it.
>Joshua_Sokol: ?EGINNS J12 ..GN +9 251
#note If I catch him with EQUINES or if the Q is in the bag I still have a chan--- "You've got mail!" -- Oops, excuse me while I check something
>Thomas_Reinke: DIRRSTT 15H DI.TS +21 365
>Joshua_Sokol: ?EINQSW 14A QIS +35 286
#note OK, I'm back.
...
You drew WQ? Seriously? What did we talk about?
>Thomas_Reinke: ERRT M8 TERR.. +7 372
#note I could have blocked all of his out-plays, but how was I to know he would only chicken out on the two higher-scoring ones and not the most obscure one? This game is so unforgiving!
>Thomas_Reinke: (WEN?) +12 384
|
