The crossword puzzle in today's NY Times is one that I constructed. For a review of the puzzle click here (the naughty sub-theme discussed, was not intentional, unfortunately). It is part of my continued effort to become a well-known, established crossword puzzle maker. I don't have any on the docket to be published, but I have 3 submitted to the NY Times and 1 to the LA Times. I really like 2 of them, 2 of them I like less so.
I also have a handful of puzzles ready to be submitted after I hear about the other ones. A few of them I think are really good. I decided to be a bit more judicious about my selection of which puzzles I submit, especially to the NY Times. Before I took a bit of a machine gun approach, spray enough bullets and something will be hit. It was fairly effective as out of 1o or so submissions I had 3 published, but it leads to a lot of rejections and is just generally inefficient. Now, I'm going more with the sniper rifle (I just finished the excellent Iraq war memoir "Joker One", which explains the gun metaphors). I am only going to submit the puzzles I really I like and I think have a good chance of being published. The main drawback is that what I think is good and what an editor thinks is good are not always the same. Still, we'll see how my new strategy goes. I still really enjoy making crosswords puzzles, just for the sake of making of them, so I always have that to fall back on.
Tuesday, May 19, 2009
Saturday, May 9, 2009
Par for the Course (Of Course)
My string of perfectly average Scrabble tournaments continues. In the annual Annapolis tournament, in 7 games I went 4-3 with a +12 spread . I think my rating will take a slight hit as my expected win total was probably somewhere between 4 and 5 against the field I played. I was rated 6th out of 20-some and surprisingly I did not play anyone with a higher rating than me. Anyway, on to the games.
My first opponent is Teresa Schaeffer and she beats me in a low-scoring, closed-board game, 309-341. After falling behind early, I have both blanks late, but also have the Q and the board is not bingoable. I use the blanks for a 66-point non-bingo (TUQUES) to pull within 5, but I can't pull out a victory. I make a mistake at the end playing ORZO instead of BOZO, but it only costs me spread points. I could not have won at that point.
Next up is Stan Williams. This is my sixth time playing Stan in a tournament, and heading into this game I'm 4-1 against him (now 5-1). It's a shoot-out early. I hit back-to-back bingos for 68 and 87 (ATONIES and MALTEDS) and he counters with a 54 point play (EXPAND) and a 75 point bingo of his own (TUBBERS). I break it open about at about the midway point, though, with CAROUSEL for 68, and subsequently cruise to victory, 478-376.
My opponent, Jermaine Harris, completely botches the next game and I capitalize, eking out a 365-360 victory. With a 9-point lead and no tiles left in the bag Jermaine plays TORIS, instead of several sure winners. I challenge the phony off the board (any mathematician worth his salt knows TORI is a plural) and after that the game is mine.
Dour Ralph Moore snatches a victory from my clutches in round 4. I have a 62-point lead near the end, it's my turn, there are three tiles left in the bag, one nice bingo line open, one so-so bingo line open and I'm pretty sure he has a blank. The strategy is to block the best line and try not to empty the bag. I do block the line, but I also empty the bag, because I'm more worried about dumping garbage in my rack than I should be. To make things worse I subsequently draw the J to add to my cluster-eff of tiles. Ralph deftly bingos through the other line and I lose 405-433. It was definitely a mistake emptying the bag, but again it was probably just lost spread points. I don't think there is any scenario that, following his bingo, allows me to score and clear enough of my rack to pull it out. Instead of being 3-1 at the lunch break I have to (dis)content myself with 2-2.
My first game after lunch is one of those games. One of those games you just get whooped and can do absolutely nothing about it. These games especially suck in a 7 game tourney because they just destroy your spread. On my first play I leave myself GENA, which is decent, and then proceed to draw E, E, and E. It was that type of game. My opponent, Laura Moyer, starts with COX for 37, FEZ for 44 and QUIETER for 101. Later in the game she bingos TRAINER (73) and VERIEST (91). I lose 344-514.
I rebound my next game and beat Ronnie Thomas 434-318. It is actually a very tight game, but she loses 50 points for going over her time limit looking for a 9-lettered, desperation bingo. She eventually settles on AMIRLINES, which of course I challenge off the board. Playing Ronnie is not very fun. She talks throughout the entire game, frequently griping about how bad her tiles are. She even made comments to the people playing next to us about their game. Apparently, bothering just me wasn't enough. Also, she monopolizes the space surrounding the board. She had two jugs of juice, a spilled open bag of cough drops and a several pound bag of walnuts on the table. Oh well, at least I won.
My final game of the day is the best one. I'm playing Ben Lefstein who I am 0-0-1 against. We tied several years ago in the D division in my very first tournament. We've both moved up since then (B divsion). In the Rockville tourney Ben went 13-0 in the C division which is impressive. He starts thing off with BUSTIER for 74, and I counter with QUARTZ for 48. A few plays later he bingos ANTIARS, which I know is good, but he makes BUSTIERS in the process, which I have never seen. Motivated by my misadventures last tournament I challenge, but the play is good. By my next turn I am down by 128. I quickly rally though with LEX for 36, followed by GROANERS for 72 and then RECOPIED for 76. A play later I am up by 3 when he puts down BOATLINE. I challenge again, this time successfully. (Marlon Hill later points out the valid anagram TAILBONE, but this didn't play, anyway). The endgame is rather anticlimactic for such a solid comeback. I get the last blank and the last S and play conservatively to secure a 429-410 victory. Not a bad way to end the day.
I'm not sure when my next tourney will be. Possibly Richard Popper's tournament in Delaware, possibly Nationals (which would be awesome, but also a serious commitment), possibly neither.
My first opponent is Teresa Schaeffer and she beats me in a low-scoring, closed-board game, 309-341. After falling behind early, I have both blanks late, but also have the Q and the board is not bingoable. I use the blanks for a 66-point non-bingo (TUQUES) to pull within 5, but I can't pull out a victory. I make a mistake at the end playing ORZO instead of BOZO, but it only costs me spread points. I could not have won at that point.
Next up is Stan Williams. This is my sixth time playing Stan in a tournament, and heading into this game I'm 4-1 against him (now 5-1). It's a shoot-out early. I hit back-to-back bingos for 68 and 87 (ATONIES and MALTEDS) and he counters with a 54 point play (EXPAND) and a 75 point bingo of his own (TUBBERS). I break it open about at about the midway point, though, with CAROUSEL for 68, and subsequently cruise to victory, 478-376.
My opponent, Jermaine Harris, completely botches the next game and I capitalize, eking out a 365-360 victory. With a 9-point lead and no tiles left in the bag Jermaine plays TORIS, instead of several sure winners. I challenge the phony off the board (any mathematician worth his salt knows TORI is a plural) and after that the game is mine.
Dour Ralph Moore snatches a victory from my clutches in round 4. I have a 62-point lead near the end, it's my turn, there are three tiles left in the bag, one nice bingo line open, one so-so bingo line open and I'm pretty sure he has a blank. The strategy is to block the best line and try not to empty the bag. I do block the line, but I also empty the bag, because I'm more worried about dumping garbage in my rack than I should be. To make things worse I subsequently draw the J to add to my cluster-eff of tiles. Ralph deftly bingos through the other line and I lose 405-433. It was definitely a mistake emptying the bag, but again it was probably just lost spread points. I don't think there is any scenario that, following his bingo, allows me to score and clear enough of my rack to pull it out. Instead of being 3-1 at the lunch break I have to (dis)content myself with 2-2.
My first game after lunch is one of those games. One of those games you just get whooped and can do absolutely nothing about it. These games especially suck in a 7 game tourney because they just destroy your spread. On my first play I leave myself GENA, which is decent, and then proceed to draw E, E, and E. It was that type of game. My opponent, Laura Moyer, starts with COX for 37, FEZ for 44 and QUIETER for 101. Later in the game she bingos TRAINER (73) and VERIEST (91). I lose 344-514.
I rebound my next game and beat Ronnie Thomas 434-318. It is actually a very tight game, but she loses 50 points for going over her time limit looking for a 9-lettered, desperation bingo. She eventually settles on AMIRLINES, which of course I challenge off the board. Playing Ronnie is not very fun. She talks throughout the entire game, frequently griping about how bad her tiles are. She even made comments to the people playing next to us about their game. Apparently, bothering just me wasn't enough. Also, she monopolizes the space surrounding the board. She had two jugs of juice, a spilled open bag of cough drops and a several pound bag of walnuts on the table. Oh well, at least I won.
My final game of the day is the best one. I'm playing Ben Lefstein who I am 0-0-1 against. We tied several years ago in the D division in my very first tournament. We've both moved up since then (B divsion). In the Rockville tourney Ben went 13-0 in the C division which is impressive. He starts thing off with BUSTIER for 74, and I counter with QUARTZ for 48. A few plays later he bingos ANTIARS, which I know is good, but he makes BUSTIERS in the process, which I have never seen. Motivated by my misadventures last tournament I challenge, but the play is good. By my next turn I am down by 128. I quickly rally though with LEX for 36, followed by GROANERS for 72 and then RECOPIED for 76. A play later I am up by 3 when he puts down BOATLINE. I challenge again, this time successfully. (Marlon Hill later points out the valid anagram TAILBONE, but this didn't play, anyway). The endgame is rather anticlimactic for such a solid comeback. I get the last blank and the last S and play conservatively to secure a 429-410 victory. Not a bad way to end the day.
I'm not sure when my next tourney will be. Possibly Richard Popper's tournament in Delaware, possibly Nationals (which would be awesome, but also a serious commitment), possibly neither.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
Great Words
I have a tournament coming up this Saturday. It's only a one-day event. I haven't had time to do any studying recently, but I'm looking forward to it.
Most Scrabble players don't pay any attention to a word's definition. It' s superfluous information. All that matters is whether it is a valid play or not. I'm not really an exception to this, but every now and again I'll look up a definition. Usually it's something boring -- a chemical or a monetary unit of a small nation. But sometimes it's a gem. Here are 5 great words with definitions taken from the Official Scrabble Player's Dictionary.
1. Iotacism -- excessive use of the letter iota
The only time I think I've every used the letter iota is as a symbol to represent an isomorphism in writing mathematics. I used it sparingly though. I have my problems, but iotacism is not one of them.
2. Reremind -- to cause to remember (again)
"Rerepeat" and "rereview" are also valid, "rereremind", however, is no good.
3. Vasty -- vast
Makes sense.
4. Thirlage -- an obligation requiring feudal tenants to grind grain at a certain mill
Pretty obscure, but you'd be surprised how frequently you find the need to use it once you know it.
5. Outcavil -- to surpass in caviling
"Man, that guy sure does carp a lot."
"Puh-lease, I've got a friend who can outcavil him easily."
Most Scrabble players don't pay any attention to a word's definition. It' s superfluous information. All that matters is whether it is a valid play or not. I'm not really an exception to this, but every now and again I'll look up a definition. Usually it's something boring -- a chemical or a monetary unit of a small nation. But sometimes it's a gem. Here are 5 great words with definitions taken from the Official Scrabble Player's Dictionary.
1. Iotacism -- excessive use of the letter iota
The only time I think I've every used the letter iota is as a symbol to represent an isomorphism in writing mathematics. I used it sparingly though. I have my problems, but iotacism is not one of them.
2. Reremind -- to cause to remember (again)
"Rerepeat" and "rereview" are also valid, "rereremind", however, is no good.
3. Vasty -- vast
Makes sense.
4. Thirlage -- an obligation requiring feudal tenants to grind grain at a certain mill
Pretty obscure, but you'd be surprised how frequently you find the need to use it once you know it.
5. Outcavil -- to surpass in caviling
"Man, that guy sure does carp a lot."
"Puh-lease, I've got a friend who can outcavil him easily."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)