In an on-line game I scored 633 points. I believe this is my highest score ever. I don't recall ever scoring in the 600s before, and I doubt that I once did so long ago that I don't remember it, because I wouldn't have been that good back then.
It was my second ever five bingo game. I hit HERNIAS (83), LEISTER (86), SHORTIE (84), MARLINES (80), and REGALERS (80). I never exchanged and also made some strong non-bingo plays. I had 455 with 11 tiles in the bag, but I played two bingos and went out to score 178 points in my last 3 turns.
Great game. Let's hope I have one like that in Philly tomorrow.
Saturday, July 7, 2007
Monday, May 28, 2007
Highs and lows in Philly (primarily the latter)
I went 7-12 in D2 in a three game tourney in Philly this weekend. I came in as the 2nd lowest rated player and I feel that my rating is pretty accurate right now, especially since I haven't been studying much at all lately, so I haven't improved my game too much. I would've been happy with 10 wins and satisfied with 9, but getting only 7 is a huge let down.
I severely outdrew my opponent 3 times and was severely outdrawn 5 times. In "even draw" games I was 4-7. Like usual, in retrospect, I can't really complain about bad luck too much. I went 2-5 on day 1 and 1-4 on day 3. On day 2 I was a solid 4-3 and I had a 3 game winning streak during which I played great, and remembered why I decided to spend memorial day weekend playing Scrabble. In back-to-back games I bingoed 5 times on Edward Stewart (the first time I've ever done that, including on-line and coffee table games), and beat eventual D2 champ (and in my opinion the best D2er there) Elana Lehrer by 90 in a game where the draws were fairly even. That's what I have to hang my hat on in this one.
Eric faired even worse than me in D1 going 5-13 (1 bye). He beat Dave Koenig though which is pretty cool.
I lead things off with a tough loss to Barb Gindlesperger. With the game tight and the bag quickly emptying I left a bingo line open since I had a blank, but she it up and won by 62. Next against Florence Spanfelner I 5 times changed 5 vowel racks and was crush by nearly 150. I split the final two games before lunch, beating Jared Milton and losing to Edward Stewart, both were reasonable close. In the first game after lunch against Jeffrey Jacobson (who I always want to call Jacobson Jeffrey because his name was accidentally transposed on the roster the first tournament I played in with him) I played one of the worst games I've ever played. To begin with I let the phoney bingo NOTIVES stay on the board, despite the fact I know the TONIES stem and know that TONIES + V = no bingos. For some reason it just didn't even register to consider challenging. Then with IGNITES in my rack, and a place to play it. I forgo it instead playing the phoney 3x3 STEINING which is promptly challenged off the board. I play it the next play, but still -- pure foolishness. After that I just completely lost focus. Luckily I thoroughly outdrew Stan Williams the next game for an easy win, but I let the last game of the day, against Peter Barkman, get out of hand early to drop to 2-5 on the day.
I come back the next day mentally rejuvenated. I'm not even too phased after losing my first game to Elana Lehrer to fall to 2-6. She is quite good, and I played decently in a nip and tuck game. I held about a 20 point lead near the end. I figured she had a blank and probably an S, but there was also a decent chance she had the klutzy J or K as both were unseen. There were two bingo lines, but neither one was great. I chose to play off the Q for 28 points in the only decent spot it could play instead of closing off the better of the two lines. Tough call. Probably the right move in general, but not in this instance. She bingos ANISETTE through the N hooking the A on GAM to make GAMA -- terrific play. She then draws the J and K, the last two tiles in the bag. Finally score: 341-392. I beat Marty Fialkow in the next game in large part because I successfully challenge his phoney TOOTIER and then hit up RETEACH for about 90 a few plays later. After that game, Verna Berg draws all 4 S-s and a blank, so despite my phoney bingo that she lets stay -- RAINLIKE, she wins without much struggle. I finally beat David Engelhardt (1-4 lifetime against him) in my next game 477-385. He makes some strong plays to keep it respectable, but I draw both blanks and 3 S-s and bingo four times including the phoney TEATHERS. Embarrassingly I just misspelled TETHERS, but I had so many other bingos (REHEATS, HEATERS, THEATERS, etc.) that he figured it must be good, so he didn't challenge.
Next came my five bingo game against Edward Stewart. I lead it off with GRANOLA. But quickly fall behind due to a huge play by him with the Z on a double letter/triple word that I unsuccessfully challenge (BAIZE) for 86 points. On the next play I change, so I lose two plays in a row. Several turns later with him up by 56 on consecutive plays I hit AERATION, INDITES and PRESIDE. After playing YOK for 35 I lay down VENIRES for my 4th bingo in 5 turns and my 5th of the game. PRESIDE I was only able to lay down after challenging his phoney bingo PRECOUNT. I would probably have challenged that anyway because it sounds fake, but I'm definitely challenging it if it blocks my bingo. After VENIRES I had DAFT?NG and really wanted him to play an R in an open line, but no dice. Now, with my confidence sky high I'm ready to play Elana in a rematch. Things start out well as I'm able to hit up the 2x2 DETENTES for 86 (incidentally "Detente" was the name of my 9th grade cultures project). I continue to make strong plays to build up a 65 point lead. Then I add LOCKING to the previous played RE for the 9-lettered bingo RELOCKING on a double word for 88. She challenges -- an odd decision since she said she knew RELOCKS was good. If you know RELOCKS is good then there is about a 99.99% chance that RELOCKING is good. Certainly the probability it is no good is much less than the probability the spread difference betweeen not challenging and challenging would ultimately matter. Anyway, Barb Gindlesperger kills my buzz the next game beating me soundly. I have to fight through awful racks the entire game, but I can't complain too much because I make the bone-headed challenge of ARCADIAS early in the game thinking that maybe ARCADIA is the plural of ARCADIUM -- a word I invent on the spot. The next play she hits up LYNX for 44 where I would've played had I not lost my turn. I try to get back into the game with the phoney IODATISE, which she doesn't challenge, but it's not nearly enough. One reason I tried a phoney against her is because I saw Jared Milton open with OFFTUNE against her without challenge. I couldn't believe it.
I'm coming into the final day at 6-8 with high hopes for a strong finish, but it wasn't to be. I'm severely outdrawn by Jared Milton (all 4 S-s both blanks) and David Engelhardt twice (JKQXZ both times, once with all 4 S-s), and I absolutely botch one against Peter Barkman. My only win is a 4 point eker against Stan Williams (the only player with a worse tournament than me) in which the S-s and blanks are among the last 20 tiles to come out of the bag. My game against Peter really hurt. Due to a few bingos early I have a 40+ point lead with the game winding down. The board is largely shut-off and many of the bingo-prone tiles are gone. The Z is unseen. Peter plays NODI opening a bingo line and putting IT right below a triple letter square. Immediately I should recognized that he might be setting up a phat Z hook, but I don't. Instead of playing LOG across the ODI for a decent score that simultaneously blocks the Z hook and the bingo line, I play GOY under the NO for more points thinking only of the bingo line. He draws on A after playing NODI (he didn't have one before) and hits ZA/ZIT for 63. I'm on the verge of storming out of the venue (a la Marlon in "World Wars"), because I'm so pissed at myself for not seeing that obvious hotspot, but I'm still up by 1 point, so I try to keep my composure. Ultimately it doesn't matter as he gets the agile letters for the closed-board endgame and I'm stuck trying to play off a Q an F and an K. He ends up winning by a bunch because I also mis-track and get stuck with a shit-ton of points.
Seven and twelve. That certainly doesn't sound good. It's not god-awful, but not that far from it.
I severely outdrew my opponent 3 times and was severely outdrawn 5 times. In "even draw" games I was 4-7. Like usual, in retrospect, I can't really complain about bad luck too much. I went 2-5 on day 1 and 1-4 on day 3. On day 2 I was a solid 4-3 and I had a 3 game winning streak during which I played great, and remembered why I decided to spend memorial day weekend playing Scrabble. In back-to-back games I bingoed 5 times on Edward Stewart (the first time I've ever done that, including on-line and coffee table games), and beat eventual D2 champ (and in my opinion the best D2er there) Elana Lehrer by 90 in a game where the draws were fairly even. That's what I have to hang my hat on in this one.
Eric faired even worse than me in D1 going 5-13 (1 bye). He beat Dave Koenig though which is pretty cool.
I lead things off with a tough loss to Barb Gindlesperger. With the game tight and the bag quickly emptying I left a bingo line open since I had a blank, but she it up and won by 62. Next against Florence Spanfelner I 5 times changed 5 vowel racks and was crush by nearly 150. I split the final two games before lunch, beating Jared Milton and losing to Edward Stewart, both were reasonable close. In the first game after lunch against Jeffrey Jacobson (who I always want to call Jacobson Jeffrey because his name was accidentally transposed on the roster the first tournament I played in with him) I played one of the worst games I've ever played. To begin with I let the phoney bingo NOTIVES stay on the board, despite the fact I know the TONIES stem and know that TONIES + V = no bingos. For some reason it just didn't even register to consider challenging. Then with IGNITES in my rack, and a place to play it. I forgo it instead playing the phoney 3x3 STEINING which is promptly challenged off the board. I play it the next play, but still -- pure foolishness. After that I just completely lost focus. Luckily I thoroughly outdrew Stan Williams the next game for an easy win, but I let the last game of the day, against Peter Barkman, get out of hand early to drop to 2-5 on the day.
I come back the next day mentally rejuvenated. I'm not even too phased after losing my first game to Elana Lehrer to fall to 2-6. She is quite good, and I played decently in a nip and tuck game. I held about a 20 point lead near the end. I figured she had a blank and probably an S, but there was also a decent chance she had the klutzy J or K as both were unseen. There were two bingo lines, but neither one was great. I chose to play off the Q for 28 points in the only decent spot it could play instead of closing off the better of the two lines. Tough call. Probably the right move in general, but not in this instance. She bingos ANISETTE through the N hooking the A on GAM to make GAMA -- terrific play. She then draws the J and K, the last two tiles in the bag. Finally score: 341-392. I beat Marty Fialkow in the next game in large part because I successfully challenge his phoney TOOTIER and then hit up RETEACH for about 90 a few plays later. After that game, Verna Berg draws all 4 S-s and a blank, so despite my phoney bingo that she lets stay -- RAINLIKE, she wins without much struggle. I finally beat David Engelhardt (1-4 lifetime against him) in my next game 477-385. He makes some strong plays to keep it respectable, but I draw both blanks and 3 S-s and bingo four times including the phoney TEATHERS. Embarrassingly I just misspelled TETHERS, but I had so many other bingos (REHEATS, HEATERS, THEATERS, etc.) that he figured it must be good, so he didn't challenge.
Next came my five bingo game against Edward Stewart. I lead it off with GRANOLA. But quickly fall behind due to a huge play by him with the Z on a double letter/triple word that I unsuccessfully challenge (BAIZE) for 86 points. On the next play I change, so I lose two plays in a row. Several turns later with him up by 56 on consecutive plays I hit AERATION, INDITES and PRESIDE. After playing YOK for 35 I lay down VENIRES for my 4th bingo in 5 turns and my 5th of the game. PRESIDE I was only able to lay down after challenging his phoney bingo PRECOUNT. I would probably have challenged that anyway because it sounds fake, but I'm definitely challenging it if it blocks my bingo. After VENIRES I had DAFT?NG and really wanted him to play an R in an open line, but no dice. Now, with my confidence sky high I'm ready to play Elana in a rematch. Things start out well as I'm able to hit up the 2x2 DETENTES for 86 (incidentally "Detente" was the name of my 9th grade cultures project). I continue to make strong plays to build up a 65 point lead. Then I add LOCKING to the previous played RE for the 9-lettered bingo RELOCKING on a double word for 88. She challenges -- an odd decision since she said she knew RELOCKS was good. If you know RELOCKS is good then there is about a 99.99% chance that RELOCKING is good. Certainly the probability it is no good is much less than the probability the spread difference betweeen not challenging and challenging would ultimately matter. Anyway, Barb Gindlesperger kills my buzz the next game beating me soundly. I have to fight through awful racks the entire game, but I can't complain too much because I make the bone-headed challenge of ARCADIAS early in the game thinking that maybe ARCADIA is the plural of ARCADIUM -- a word I invent on the spot. The next play she hits up LYNX for 44 where I would've played had I not lost my turn. I try to get back into the game with the phoney IODATISE, which she doesn't challenge, but it's not nearly enough. One reason I tried a phoney against her is because I saw Jared Milton open with OFFTUNE against her without challenge. I couldn't believe it.
I'm coming into the final day at 6-8 with high hopes for a strong finish, but it wasn't to be. I'm severely outdrawn by Jared Milton (all 4 S-s both blanks) and David Engelhardt twice (JKQXZ both times, once with all 4 S-s), and I absolutely botch one against Peter Barkman. My only win is a 4 point eker against Stan Williams (the only player with a worse tournament than me) in which the S-s and blanks are among the last 20 tiles to come out of the bag. My game against Peter really hurt. Due to a few bingos early I have a 40+ point lead with the game winding down. The board is largely shut-off and many of the bingo-prone tiles are gone. The Z is unseen. Peter plays NODI opening a bingo line and putting IT right below a triple letter square. Immediately I should recognized that he might be setting up a phat Z hook, but I don't. Instead of playing LOG across the ODI for a decent score that simultaneously blocks the Z hook and the bingo line, I play GOY under the NO for more points thinking only of the bingo line. He draws on A after playing NODI (he didn't have one before) and hits ZA/ZIT for 63. I'm on the verge of storming out of the venue (a la Marlon in "World Wars"), because I'm so pissed at myself for not seeing that obvious hotspot, but I'm still up by 1 point, so I try to keep my composure. Ultimately it doesn't matter as he gets the agile letters for the closed-board endgame and I'm stuck trying to play off a Q an F and an K. He ends up winning by a bunch because I also mis-track and get stuck with a shit-ton of points.
Seven and twelve. That certainly doesn't sound good. It's not god-awful, but not that far from it.
Sunday, April 22, 2007
No tourneys for a while
Looks like I won't be playing any tourneys for a while. I missed Philly this month, and I'll likely miss it next month due to end of the semester ruckus. I really wanted to play a one-dayer in Annapolis on May 12, but I have to proctor my class' final that day -- unfortunate scheduling.
I've started building my rating back up again on-line after a serious slide (see previous entry). I paid for a membership, so that I can use the in-game examiner -- totally worth it. I'm still missing way too many plays that I should see. Tonight I had AIORST? with an E on the board that could end a bingo. JAROSITE, TRAVOISE and OUTRAISE are all words I know from the OSATIRE stem, but for some reason I missed them. Probably just not thinking things through. That's my biggest problem. I just don't spend enough time looking at my racks, which is silly because I'm rarely short on time. I'm still making my best play consistently enough even when it's a word I know. Still tonight I best Eric 3 games out of 4, which is a boon, even if I did mostly outdraw him. My best find was probably STADIUM from ADISTU?, because it was the only playable bingo.
I've got loads of new stems. I'll put them up soon. I think I'm starting to get dimishing returns with my stems. I'd probably be better off learning the 4s and 5s better. It's just way less fun than learning the bingos.
By the way, the Scrabble Newsletter is a pretty shoddy publication. Trust me, I'm not expecting much from a monthly newsletter put together by basically an unpaid staff, that comes free with a membership to the NSA, but is too much to ask to have somebody give it a cursory read before putting it out? In one recent issue the annotated game board was aligned incorrectly making it impossible to follow, and in another a bunch of clues were missing for the anagram crossword puzzle. Those are things that should be pretty easy to spot and fix. Also, what's the deal with the giant barcode that's always somewhere random on the front page? Can't they put that in the corner? It blocked an entire paragraph of text in the most recent issue, and in the issue that featured the record-breaking game it was right over the picture. Front page -- two guys holding the board and right across their faces is a huge barcode. Great pic. All you have to do to make the newsletter decent is not do stuff like that.
I've started building my rating back up again on-line after a serious slide (see previous entry). I paid for a membership, so that I can use the in-game examiner -- totally worth it. I'm still missing way too many plays that I should see. Tonight I had AIORST? with an E on the board that could end a bingo. JAROSITE, TRAVOISE and OUTRAISE are all words I know from the OSATIRE stem, but for some reason I missed them. Probably just not thinking things through. That's my biggest problem. I just don't spend enough time looking at my racks, which is silly because I'm rarely short on time. I'm still making my best play consistently enough even when it's a word I know. Still tonight I best Eric 3 games out of 4, which is a boon, even if I did mostly outdraw him. My best find was probably STADIUM from ADISTU?, because it was the only playable bingo.
I've got loads of new stems. I'll put them up soon. I think I'm starting to get dimishing returns with my stems. I'd probably be better off learning the 4s and 5s better. It's just way less fun than learning the bingos.
By the way, the Scrabble Newsletter is a pretty shoddy publication. Trust me, I'm not expecting much from a monthly newsletter put together by basically an unpaid staff, that comes free with a membership to the NSA, but is too much to ask to have somebody give it a cursory read before putting it out? In one recent issue the annotated game board was aligned incorrectly making it impossible to follow, and in another a bunch of clues were missing for the anagram crossword puzzle. Those are things that should be pretty easy to spot and fix. Also, what's the deal with the giant barcode that's always somewhere random on the front page? Can't they put that in the corner? It blocked an entire paragraph of text in the most recent issue, and in the issue that featured the record-breaking game it was right over the picture. Front page -- two guys holding the board and right across their faces is a huge barcode. Great pic. All you have to do to make the newsletter decent is not do stuff like that.
Monday, April 16, 2007
Scrabble Low
This weekend might have been the worst two on-line Scrabble days I've had. I remember a time when I temporarily retired from on-line Scrabble that was also pretty bad but this probably topped it. I lost somewhere in the neighborhood of 15 games in a row. I stayed up until 3:22 am -- on a Sunday -- because I needed a win. Stomping Mr. Cqql into submission -- he called me a cheater and logged off after I bingoed the extremely obscure word SOGGIER -- was little consolation. Every time I needed a break I didn't get it.
I wanted to make note of this.
I wanted to make note of this.
Monday, March 19, 2007
Treading Water
I went 3-4 with a -90 spread at the monthly Philly tournament on Sunday. This was below my lower bound goal -- at worst I wanted to be 4-3 -- but given that I was 0-3 before lunch I'm not completely unhappy with it.
I'll get into the games more in a minute, but first I have to comment on the poor sportsmanship shown by several players. Apparently instead of showing the national tournament this year, ESPN has plans to carry a kids tournament. This is probably a good move as, if the Philly group is any indictation, the amount of petty quibbling among players you'll see is less for a bunch of fifth graders than for a bunch of adults. Seriously, it was pretty absurd. For one, people get so attached to their own personal boards and get into a huff if they have to move. At one point, niether I nor my opponent had a board setup (there are half as many boards as players, so this will happen) so we took an open board knowing that the person who it belonged to was playing so-and-so, who was already setup at his board, so the board we took over would be open. When the woman whose board we were at saw this she got super pissed. She started bitching about how we took her board and how, "we better not ever do that again." And how, "I was winning on my board, now I'm losing." Even after my opponent explained and apologized (an apology she accepted) she still continued to bitch about it. At several minutes of listening to her complain I said to her, "it's just a board, get over it." I probably should not have said anything, as it caused some friction between us that lasted the entire tournament, and culminated in a very small and petty quarrel at the end, but I hate it when people are being completely unreasonable and everybody kowtows to it.
Eric experienced a somewhat similar incident when he and his opponent were trying to find a board to play on and everytime they thought they had found one somebody would kick them off, because they wanted their own board, they can't just take the open board, they have to be difficult and kick people off and play on their own boards. I don't understand. For all intents and purposes it's the exact same thing. There are no hometown fans rooting for you at your own board. It's not college basketball.
Also while observing play I saw somebody blantantly butting into a game he wasn't involved in. With the game already in hand, the soon-to-be-winner went to make a play, then before announcing his score, decided against it, taking some more time to think -- perfectly legal. The nosy observer said, "c'mon, just make the play and take the victory, don't be worried about spread points. You're worried she's gonna play OY, just make the play. [Turning to another observer]. I hate the way this guy plays. He's always going for spread points. They don't matter just take the win." But actually spread points matter very much, especially in a small tournament, so it's reasonable, smart even, to consider them. And even if it weren't, it's completely out of line to make such comments aloud about a game you're not involved in. Had I been playing I would have told the person this, but the guy who was making the plays is only 14, so he probably isn't that comfortable talking back. Eventually he made his play and subsequently won the game. At this point his opponent started being super pouty -- scowling, throwing her score card around, speaking very curtly. Intentionally doing all the little things to let everybody know she was pissed, basically being a total baby about losing. That's such bad sportsmanship -- just fill out the scorecard and thank your opponent. You can vent all you want and be as mopey as you like later in private.
Anyway, on to the games. I played Dave Engelhardt first just as I did in the last tournament, and just as in the last tournament he edged me in the end. I took the lead late by bingoing SATIATED through an open E, but my subsequent draw was DDNNRRI and the only other vowel I drew the rest of game was a single U. He had vowels for the end game, I didn't and there was nothing I could do to avoid a loss. Lorraine Burton crushed me in the next round. I was trying to not get frurstrated by bad draws, but it was to no avail. I know I'm better than her, but she got the tiles. My next match was even worse. Scott Kitchen gave me a serious whooping, 483-340. He drew both blanks, 2 Ss, the Q, the Z, and the X, and he drew9 of the 12 Es. I couldn't compete. Going into the lunch break I was not happy at all. Eric had only slightly more success in D1. He was 1-2 with a bad spread.
In the first game after lunch I beat Mark Miller. Mark is one of the top D2 players, his peak rating is nearly 1800, so beating him is good. It gives me something, at the very least, to hang my hat on. I made a good challenge against him when he played COILINGS (later Eric and I agreed that in general you should challenge the -INGS words, unless you're sure it's good), only to make the gaffe of making a play that put an open RE on the board, allowing him to bingo RECLOSING on his next move. Considering I knew his tiles, that's really idiotic. Still I was able to grab a decent lead and play defense for a 391-365. In the next game I put up my highest point total of the day and lose to Stan Williams 419-447. With me up by about 40 he bingos SCOUTING and CAUSING on consecutive plays to go up by over 100. I hit a bingo and parlay the X and Z into big points, but it's not enough. I'm not unhappy about this loss, at least I was able to compete. I win my final two games to make my tournament record at least respectable. I edge Marty Fialkow, the fastest player in the tournament, by 9 (he had 18 minutes left on his clock at the end, I had 30 seconds), and then I crush Lorraine Burton by 141 in a rematch. The latter of these games is particularly gratifying as this time around I get the tiles. I hit up JUICER, TALKIEST and RELEARNS all for big points. My top play on the day is TRIPLETS for 80, but given the circumstances I think my best find was SATIATED. I had to find a bingo, as there was only one open lane and I knew he'd close it next turn, and I had AA in my rack, and I'm usually not good with the double A words. I also hit up a few new stem bingos (ESTRUAL and ENTOILED) and it's always nice to see a payoff like that.
Overall I beat 2 people rated higher than me and 1 rated lower than me. I lost to 2 people rated higher, and 2 rated lower. I'm expecting a small drop in my ratings, but it shouldn't be anything too substantial. Also, I think I was severely outdrawn in 2 games (Lorraine I and Scott), and I think I severely outdrew my opponent in 1 game (Lorraine II), and in the other 4 games the draws were more or less equal. That puts me at 2-2 with a +40 spread in "even-playing-field" matches. I'd like to get that ratio up to 3:1 for the next tournament. Eric finishes at 2-5, but 2-5 in D1 is at least as good as 3-4 in D2.
I'll get into the games more in a minute, but first I have to comment on the poor sportsmanship shown by several players. Apparently instead of showing the national tournament this year, ESPN has plans to carry a kids tournament. This is probably a good move as, if the Philly group is any indictation, the amount of petty quibbling among players you'll see is less for a bunch of fifth graders than for a bunch of adults. Seriously, it was pretty absurd. For one, people get so attached to their own personal boards and get into a huff if they have to move. At one point, niether I nor my opponent had a board setup (there are half as many boards as players, so this will happen) so we took an open board knowing that the person who it belonged to was playing so-and-so, who was already setup at his board, so the board we took over would be open. When the woman whose board we were at saw this she got super pissed. She started bitching about how we took her board and how, "we better not ever do that again." And how, "I was winning on my board, now I'm losing." Even after my opponent explained and apologized (an apology she accepted) she still continued to bitch about it. At several minutes of listening to her complain I said to her, "it's just a board, get over it." I probably should not have said anything, as it caused some friction between us that lasted the entire tournament, and culminated in a very small and petty quarrel at the end, but I hate it when people are being completely unreasonable and everybody kowtows to it.
Eric experienced a somewhat similar incident when he and his opponent were trying to find a board to play on and everytime they thought they had found one somebody would kick them off, because they wanted their own board, they can't just take the open board, they have to be difficult and kick people off and play on their own boards. I don't understand. For all intents and purposes it's the exact same thing. There are no hometown fans rooting for you at your own board. It's not college basketball.
Also while observing play I saw somebody blantantly butting into a game he wasn't involved in. With the game already in hand, the soon-to-be-winner went to make a play, then before announcing his score, decided against it, taking some more time to think -- perfectly legal. The nosy observer said, "c'mon, just make the play and take the victory, don't be worried about spread points. You're worried she's gonna play OY, just make the play. [Turning to another observer]. I hate the way this guy plays. He's always going for spread points. They don't matter just take the win." But actually spread points matter very much, especially in a small tournament, so it's reasonable, smart even, to consider them. And even if it weren't, it's completely out of line to make such comments aloud about a game you're not involved in. Had I been playing I would have told the person this, but the guy who was making the plays is only 14, so he probably isn't that comfortable talking back. Eventually he made his play and subsequently won the game. At this point his opponent started being super pouty -- scowling, throwing her score card around, speaking very curtly. Intentionally doing all the little things to let everybody know she was pissed, basically being a total baby about losing. That's such bad sportsmanship -- just fill out the scorecard and thank your opponent. You can vent all you want and be as mopey as you like later in private.
Anyway, on to the games. I played Dave Engelhardt first just as I did in the last tournament, and just as in the last tournament he edged me in the end. I took the lead late by bingoing SATIATED through an open E, but my subsequent draw was DDNNRRI and the only other vowel I drew the rest of game was a single U. He had vowels for the end game, I didn't and there was nothing I could do to avoid a loss. Lorraine Burton crushed me in the next round. I was trying to not get frurstrated by bad draws, but it was to no avail. I know I'm better than her, but she got the tiles. My next match was even worse. Scott Kitchen gave me a serious whooping, 483-340. He drew both blanks, 2 Ss, the Q, the Z, and the X, and he drew9 of the 12 Es. I couldn't compete. Going into the lunch break I was not happy at all. Eric had only slightly more success in D1. He was 1-2 with a bad spread.
In the first game after lunch I beat Mark Miller. Mark is one of the top D2 players, his peak rating is nearly 1800, so beating him is good. It gives me something, at the very least, to hang my hat on. I made a good challenge against him when he played COILINGS (later Eric and I agreed that in general you should challenge the -INGS words, unless you're sure it's good), only to make the gaffe of making a play that put an open RE on the board, allowing him to bingo RECLOSING on his next move. Considering I knew his tiles, that's really idiotic. Still I was able to grab a decent lead and play defense for a 391-365. In the next game I put up my highest point total of the day and lose to Stan Williams 419-447. With me up by about 40 he bingos SCOUTING and CAUSING on consecutive plays to go up by over 100. I hit a bingo and parlay the X and Z into big points, but it's not enough. I'm not unhappy about this loss, at least I was able to compete. I win my final two games to make my tournament record at least respectable. I edge Marty Fialkow, the fastest player in the tournament, by 9 (he had 18 minutes left on his clock at the end, I had 30 seconds), and then I crush Lorraine Burton by 141 in a rematch. The latter of these games is particularly gratifying as this time around I get the tiles. I hit up JUICER, TALKIEST and RELEARNS all for big points. My top play on the day is TRIPLETS for 80, but given the circumstances I think my best find was SATIATED. I had to find a bingo, as there was only one open lane and I knew he'd close it next turn, and I had AA in my rack, and I'm usually not good with the double A words. I also hit up a few new stem bingos (ESTRUAL and ENTOILED) and it's always nice to see a payoff like that.
Overall I beat 2 people rated higher than me and 1 rated lower than me. I lost to 2 people rated higher, and 2 rated lower. I'm expecting a small drop in my ratings, but it shouldn't be anything too substantial. Also, I think I was severely outdrawn in 2 games (Lorraine I and Scott), and I think I severely outdrew my opponent in 1 game (Lorraine II), and in the other 4 games the draws were more or less equal. That puts me at 2-2 with a +40 spread in "even-playing-field" matches. I'd like to get that ratio up to 3:1 for the next tournament. Eric finishes at 2-5, but 2-5 in D1 is at least as good as 3-4 in D2.
Sunday, March 11, 2007
Crushed by Eric
I got crushed in the mini-series against Eric. He won 4 out of the 5 games with an aggregate spread of nearly +400. Some explanation is required. In any Scrabble loss a combination of three factors are at work: 1) good play by your opponent, 2) poor play by you, 3) bad luck. There definitely was a lot of 1) in our series, and I think much, much more 3) than 2). The last three games I drew atrociously. I didn't get a single blank, I didn't have many good stem racks, and when I got point tiles I had them all in my rack at one time. One game I had Q,X and Z all in my rack. I was able to play them off separately each for a decent score (30-35), but between plays Eric drew the blanks successively and hit up two 70+ point bingos. Also, twice I had a good bingo stem with one extra letter that didn't fit (once it was an O, once an A) so I played off the single letter for a modest score (10-15), and both times I drew the exact same letter I just ditched. Obviously, that's the problem with fishing, but if you have a rack like AAEINTR, and the board is open I think playing off an A is usually the right move. The chances of having a bingo rack your next turn is too good to forgo.
Anyway, I am not complaining about my tiles (I'm a firm believer in the strong law of large numbers), I'm just trying to provide an honest assessment of why I think the series was so lopsided. After the first two games we had drawn pretty evenly and the tally was 1-1 with a +7 spread in Eric's favor. I like to think that's a more accurate depiction of where I'm at these days, but I'm not sure. Last night the playing field was too uneven to tell.
I did have one terrible, almost embarrassingly bad play. I had AEINORS in my rack. I should know this rack well. I have both the AINERS and the OINERS stems basically memorized. I didn't recall the bingo immediately, so instead of taking a few more seconds even minutes if necessary, (my clock was not a factor) to find it I played ARINOSE knowing it was invalid and knowing Eric would challenge. In retrospect I have no idea why I did this. I just botched it. And literally, the split second after I announced my score I saw the real bingo, ERASION. I had the exact same rack a few plays later, and I bingoed, but by that time the game was basically already out of hand. The point swing from that play was tremendous.
Anyway, turns out I was wrong and there is a Philly tourney this month. In fact it's next week. Eric and I are going. Hopefully I'll get a little more sleep before this one, and hopefully I'll draw decently. But, if I don't, so be it. I'm not going to get frustrated. I gotta keep that Joe Edley zen shit going on. Although, it really only helps my mental state with respect to the game. It really doesn't help my game that much. If I draw poorly I usually lose no matter how calm or uncalm I am.
Since my school workload has increased recently, I can set only some modest preperation goals before next weekend. Learn one more page of stems and another quiz worth of 4s.
Anyway, I am not complaining about my tiles (I'm a firm believer in the strong law of large numbers), I'm just trying to provide an honest assessment of why I think the series was so lopsided. After the first two games we had drawn pretty evenly and the tally was 1-1 with a +7 spread in Eric's favor. I like to think that's a more accurate depiction of where I'm at these days, but I'm not sure. Last night the playing field was too uneven to tell.
I did have one terrible, almost embarrassingly bad play. I had AEINORS in my rack. I should know this rack well. I have both the AINERS and the OINERS stems basically memorized. I didn't recall the bingo immediately, so instead of taking a few more seconds even minutes if necessary, (my clock was not a factor) to find it I played ARINOSE knowing it was invalid and knowing Eric would challenge. In retrospect I have no idea why I did this. I just botched it. And literally, the split second after I announced my score I saw the real bingo, ERASION. I had the exact same rack a few plays later, and I bingoed, but by that time the game was basically already out of hand. The point swing from that play was tremendous.
Anyway, turns out I was wrong and there is a Philly tourney this month. In fact it's next week. Eric and I are going. Hopefully I'll get a little more sleep before this one, and hopefully I'll draw decently. But, if I don't, so be it. I'm not going to get frustrated. I gotta keep that Joe Edley zen shit going on. Although, it really only helps my mental state with respect to the game. It really doesn't help my game that much. If I draw poorly I usually lose no matter how calm or uncalm I am.
Since my school workload has increased recently, I can set only some modest preperation goals before next weekend. Learn one more page of stems and another quiz worth of 4s.
Friday, March 9, 2007
Rating slip
My rating dropped from 1450 to 1407 after my weak performance in Philly -- not too bad, I guess. I won't play a tournament for a while, so it'll stay there for a spell. There is a tourney in York, PA only a few hours from here this weekend, but I can't make it. I imagine the next one I play will be the next Sunday-er in Philly, probably next month. There was no Philly tourney one this month.
I've been playing a fair amount on-line (about 2 games a day) and studying stems while I exercise. I'll give the new stems I've learned below. What I really need to do is get the 3s down 100% (about 99% now), get the short J-Q-X-Z words and vowel dumps down 100% (about 90% now), and start putting a dent in the 4s (not sure what % I'm at now). The things is, I enjoy studying the bingo stems much more than anything else, so that's mainly what I study. Plus I really can't devote any time to it outside of my allotted exercise/study-word time. I do have other things going on.
One small consolation from the last Philly tourney is that I tracked and scored almost perfectly. To keep those skills sharp I'm playing a 5 game series against Eric this weekend -- $1 per game and $.01 per point. One of my goals is to be able to play .500 against Eric, so this will be an indication of how far I have to go (although 5 is a small sample size).
I was playing on-line the other day, a 3 minute game, and my rack was EIKLNRT. I wanted to play TINKLER, but it didn't fit, so I just laid down TRINKLE in utter haste thinking, "what the heck, maybe it's valid." My opponent didn't challenge and instead laid down EXED extending TRINKLE to TRINKLED for 60+ points. I did challenge and since neither TRINKLE nor TRINKLED is valid, EXED came off. I made a play and then my opponent played just ED again making TRINKLED for 30+ points, obviously she thought EXED was the problem the first time, but that's a valid play. I challenged. Again her play came off the board. She then sent me a message that said, "That was really mean, trinkle isn't even a word!" I wrote back saying, "I wasn't sure. That's what challenge is for." After the game I thought about what she said and I came to the conclusion that it's not at all mean. There are basically two reasonable schools of thought you can have on this issue and neither lead to meanness.
1) It's perfectly okay to play any word at anytime regardless of validity. That's what the challenge is for. If your opponent doesn't like you playing phoneys they can challenge, or if they are on-line they can play the void mode.
2) It's poor sportsmanship to play words you know for sure are phoneys. Even if you believe this, I didn't know with 100% certainty the word was phoney. Surely you don't have to be 100% certain on every word you play, as that takes a significant factor of risk vs. reward completely out of the game. Let's say I'm 60% certain a word is good and it's a huge score with the next best play being a very small score. From an expected value standpoint it might be completely worth it to play the word. Now, if they extend my questionable word via a D or an S for a huge amount of points, then that is a risk on their part that they should have considered. Again, from an expected value standpoint it might be completely worth it to challenge. In both cases I could have made what I thought was the best play without trying to trick or deceive my opponent. There is no meanness in that.
Anyway, some new stems:
STONIE -- WATSON WILL RAX THAT LIMP BITCH
RANEES -- MOTTO: LOOK GOOD CROW ON
DARTLE -- ADIOS WAXY SET
ORATES -- HEAR THE ENDLESS CHAMP GAB
ENTERS -- GOES INSIDE A COUPLES VERY WAXY YURT
LINTER -- A GOOSY KID
ARDENT -- CUB VIG SUX
SEALER -- EPOXY STOPPED THE VEXING NICK
RETIES -- A HEP DAZED MAN KVETCHES AND RELACES
RAINED -- POURING BIG CATS AND VINO ON HIM
I've been playing a fair amount on-line (about 2 games a day) and studying stems while I exercise. I'll give the new stems I've learned below. What I really need to do is get the 3s down 100% (about 99% now), get the short J-Q-X-Z words and vowel dumps down 100% (about 90% now), and start putting a dent in the 4s (not sure what % I'm at now). The things is, I enjoy studying the bingo stems much more than anything else, so that's mainly what I study. Plus I really can't devote any time to it outside of my allotted exercise/study-word time. I do have other things going on.
One small consolation from the last Philly tourney is that I tracked and scored almost perfectly. To keep those skills sharp I'm playing a 5 game series against Eric this weekend -- $1 per game and $.01 per point. One of my goals is to be able to play .500 against Eric, so this will be an indication of how far I have to go (although 5 is a small sample size).
I was playing on-line the other day, a 3 minute game, and my rack was EIKLNRT. I wanted to play TINKLER, but it didn't fit, so I just laid down TRINKLE in utter haste thinking, "what the heck, maybe it's valid." My opponent didn't challenge and instead laid down EXED extending TRINKLE to TRINKLED for 60+ points. I did challenge and since neither TRINKLE nor TRINKLED is valid, EXED came off. I made a play and then my opponent played just ED again making TRINKLED for 30+ points, obviously she thought EXED was the problem the first time, but that's a valid play. I challenged. Again her play came off the board. She then sent me a message that said, "That was really mean, trinkle isn't even a word!" I wrote back saying, "I wasn't sure. That's what challenge is for." After the game I thought about what she said and I came to the conclusion that it's not at all mean. There are basically two reasonable schools of thought you can have on this issue and neither lead to meanness.
1) It's perfectly okay to play any word at anytime regardless of validity. That's what the challenge is for. If your opponent doesn't like you playing phoneys they can challenge, or if they are on-line they can play the void mode.
2) It's poor sportsmanship to play words you know for sure are phoneys. Even if you believe this, I didn't know with 100% certainty the word was phoney. Surely you don't have to be 100% certain on every word you play, as that takes a significant factor of risk vs. reward completely out of the game. Let's say I'm 60% certain a word is good and it's a huge score with the next best play being a very small score. From an expected value standpoint it might be completely worth it to play the word. Now, if they extend my questionable word via a D or an S for a huge amount of points, then that is a risk on their part that they should have considered. Again, from an expected value standpoint it might be completely worth it to challenge. In both cases I could have made what I thought was the best play without trying to trick or deceive my opponent. There is no meanness in that.
Anyway, some new stems:
STONIE -- WATSON WILL RAX THAT LIMP BITCH
RANEES -- MOTTO: LOOK GOOD CROW ON
DARTLE -- ADIOS WAXY SET
ORATES -- HEAR THE ENDLESS CHAMP GAB
ENTERS -- GOES INSIDE A COUPLES VERY WAXY YURT
LINTER -- A GOOSY KID
ARDENT -- CUB VIG SUX
SEALER -- EPOXY STOPPED THE VEXING NICK
RETIES -- A HEP DAZED MAN KVETCHES AND RELACES
RAINED -- POURING BIG CATS AND VINO ON HIM
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)