Scrabble Adventures

A few days have passed since the 2006 Toronto Open Scrabble and Human vs. Computer showdown ended. I’ve had some time to think about the experience and evaluate my own personal performance. Overall, I finished with an official record of 7 wins and 11 losses. Unfortunately, I actually only won three games (three ‘byes’ and one forfeit). Going into the tournament, I had hoped to win four games out of sixteen, even though statistically, I was expected to win only 0.1 games (a calculation based on the average player in the tournament). I didn’t reach my goal, but I did learn quite about my play and things that I need to improve. In this regard, I achieved my learning objectives. Being the lowest ranked player in the tournament (not counting unrated players), I had very modest goals.

Game#1 vs. Jeff Fiszbein (NSA Rating 1707)
After a slow start by both of us, the game opened up a bit after his play of RE(C)LEANs for 68 points. A few turns later, I was able to catch-up with my bingo of SCORInG for 77 points to be down 23. But, in the end, Jeff got slightly better tiles at the right times and made great plays at the end to put me away. After my bingo, he made plays of 31, 34, 30, and 39 points to finish the game off. I couldn’t keep up. Final score: 396 – 319 (LOSS).

Game #2 vs Don Ross (NSA Rating 1334)
I was happy to get the first game out of the way. I didn’t expect to win, but was pleasantly surprised that I was at least competitive versus an expert player. Against Don, I got most of the good tiles and made use of them. No outstanding plays, but I was able to score consistently. I played REPRObE for 73 points to pull ahead by 100. A few turns after that, I extended my lead to 155, but Don responded with TAMALES for 64 points to try and make a come-back. In the end, I played a solid game with good tiles. Final score: 426 – 292 (WIN).

Game #3 vs. Pete Zeigler (NSA Rating 1190)
With my confidence high off a win, I was looking forward to my next game. Unfortunately, I got the smack-down. I just didn’t get tiles and Pete got everything. To his credit, he played very well. His first bingo was OESTRED (I missed this spelling mistake – OERSTED is the correct spelling) and then made a great play to find tHEMaTI(C) off of the C sitting on the bottom left corner. One of my worst losses in terms of score, but I didn’t feel bad because I didn’t get good letters (had to trade twice). Final score: 507 – 247 (LOSS – ouch!)

Game#4 vs. Su Edwards (NSAS Rating 1485)
I met Su Edwards at a tournament a few months ago and thought she was one of the nicer people in the Scrabble world. So, I was glad to have an opportunity to play her, even though I didn’t expect to win. She opened with ZINCY for 58 points and I was feeling a bit nervous after my play of CONE for 12 points. I had CEEIOS? but didn’t see any bingo plays (I missed DIOCESE, SENECIO, and COESITE but had nowhere to play them. There were a few 8 letter words, but I had no chance of finding them). I spent the next few turns balancing my rack until I had AEIWST?. I started studying the TISANE? stem prior to the tournament, so my brain just kept seeing those words (much to my disadvantage throughout the tournament). I saw two spots where I could play a bingo (based on my tunnel vision of the TISANE? stem). I played WAInEST and realized my spelling mistake immediately after hitting my clock. Dumb, dumb, dumb! Su challenged that word off and closed off my original spot. Fortunately, I played TAWnIES on the other side of the board but left her chances to play to one of two TWS (which was what I was trying to avoid in the first place). I was able to get a small lead (175 – 172) a few turns later, but she pulled ahead for good after her REPLOTS. I held her on that play, but decided to let it go (actually, I forgot to verify if that RE word was good). She slowly pulled away and won. Final score: 384 – 272 (LOSS).

Game #5 vs. Fern Lindzon (NSA Rating 1698)
After my two losses, I wasn’t feeling too confident about playing against another expert player. My opening rack wasn’t very good and I had to trade, giving away my advantage of playing first. She started with BEAU and I played A(B)IDING to play off some tiles and open up the board (big mistake). She then played TROAKED. WTF is that? I held her on the play, but eventually let it go. I played GIVE(N) and she responded with AJU(G)A – WTF?!!. Even though I was suspicious about her previous play, I was even more suspicious about this one. After about a minute, I let it go. At this point, I was down 121 – 34 and the tile gods weren’t helping me. Two turns later, she played iNDRaFT (78 points). Seeing that I was way behind with bad letters, I decided that I needed to keep the board open to give myself any chance at a comeback. Unfortunately, she played SLURRED (70 points) off of the E that I played – the only spot to play her natural bingo – DOH! I was getting some bad tiles, so I made a play of E(V)EN to balance my rack and leave a possibility of hooking that word onto the TWS lane, as there was only one S and one T left in the bag. I was hoping that I’d get a chance to make a play. Next turn, I played PILSNER off of my previous play for 88 points. I was actually quite proud of that find and play. I made a desperation play of BOAST/SWORT. Fern looked at the play and let it go (I think she felt sorry for me). SWORT is not good. She had good tiles in the beginning and punished me with them. I was suprised that I lost by less than 150 points considering Fern’s plays. Final score: 464 – 322 (LOSS).

Game #6 vs. Geoff Gibson (NSA Rating 1041)
I was looking forward to playing Geoff. I had played a very good game against him (a loss) during my first ever tournament (where I played SUBPOENA). This game was over before I even knew what happened. He played LOA(F)IEST, which I should have challenged, but chickened out, thinking that the word was the superlative form of the adjective “loafy”. He played ADROiT(E)R, which I considered and then let go. After thinking for a bit, I thought the word was good (it is). Then he played SOAPIEr. For most of the game, I was stuck with consonants. I would play off three consonants, but get no vowels. For a while, the only vowel I got was the U (three turns in a row). I actually had all four U-s. I managed to play FELINES toward the end. In hind-sight, I should have traded my tiles. This game was like speed Scrabble. When the game was over, we had 14 and 13 minutes left on our clocks. Final score: 446 – 303 (LOSS).

Game #7 vs. Alyssa Michalsky (NSA Rating 910)
I was hoping to end the first day with a win, and playing someone under 1000 was a good change. I don’t know what happened to me, but I used up quite a bit of my clock in the first few rounds. Alyssa tried playing PASTeNS – I challenged that off. A few turns later, she played RESiNGS. I thought about that word for a while because I wasn’t sure if she was trying to trap me – I have a notorious time with the RE words. I challenged it off, but I couldn’t block that spot. She eventually played SiNGERS (why didn’t she play RESiGNS or SiNGERS in the first place?). A turn later, I played FIDGETS to make the score 199 – 192 for her. Whew! I was behind for most of the game and even had to trade two times. Luckily for me, I was able to challenge off two of her words to balance my trades. The game stayed pretty close, but she was able to eke out a small lead by the end of turn 17 (297 – 286). I didn’t get the best tiles, but I was able to track tiles correctly. I had OGE on my rack and I knew she had UUUL left. Unfortunately, I had about 30 seconds left on my clock. She played U(P) to get to 314. In a previous turn, I played VARY near the top (J3 going across), hoping to play OVARY. I was down by 18 and I was looking to score some points because I knew that she couldn’t go out in two. I saw GO/OVARY for 16 points and was looking for a place to play my E. I ended up playing HE/YE for 10 to make the score 314 – 306. She then played LUV to the V. I finished out by playing LOG, but lost. While I was tallying up the score, I realized that I should have played EGO to go out with 17 points plus Alyssa’s ULU (6 points). If I made that play, I would have won by 5 points! I can’t believe that I didn’t see EGO with OGE on my board! This loss hurt. I should have won except for a bone-headed play by me. I’m still at a loss to explain why I had so little time left. Normally, I’m a speedy player (see game vs. Geoff Gibson). Oh well, life goes on. Hopefully, I learn from this game. This one I should have won. Final score: 322 – 312 (LOSS).

Game #8 vs. Tom O’Laughlin (NSA Rating 1020)
I was hoping to get off to a quick start on day two to erase that horrible loss against Alyssa. After a few turns, Tom was able to use his better letters to get to a 100 point lead. Then for some strange reason, I started getting good tiles. I was able to pull to within 40 points when I played FUDGERS. I wasn’t sure if that was a good word, but he accepted it without even hesitating (it’s not good). That play gave me a 28 point lead when he responded with STRAnGE(R) for 77 points and taking a 50 point lead. I was able to make the score 371 – 340 when I played OUTLIER/OYEN on the left TWS. I thought I had seen someone play OYEN before and I thought I was quite clever for finding that spot. Unfortunately, OYEN is not good and my bingo came off (81 points too!). Tom blocked the rest of the board and prevented me from playing anything for high points and pulled out a close game. Final score: 388 – 364 (LOSS).

Game #9 vs. Emilie Henkelman (NSA Rating 891)
I was getting a bit frustrated with all of the losing (hey, no-one likes to lose), but I tried to keep a positive attitude. Before coming into the tournament, I promised myself that I would try and play a smart, open game as much as possible. Against Emilie, I was able to do so, aided by very good tiles. Emilie had some excellent scoring plays to pull out to a big lead by the end of turn 5 (134 – 67). I wasn’t getting the best tiles, but I kept making plays to leave myself opportunities to hook or build off of. She traded for some tiles and I played LEATHER (by that time, I had traded twice already and was glad to see some good tiles). After taking the lead (303 to 278) with few tiles remaining, I started to shut down the bingo lanes. I ended up with better letters in the end and finishd her off with a late bingo (DISROBe). Final score: 411 – 326 (WIN – yeah!).

Game #10 vs. Merron Dunlop (NSA Rating 829)
Buoyed by my win, I was hoping that I would be able to beat another lower ranked player. I tried to keep the board open, but couldn’t keep it up when Merron started getting better tiles at the end of the game. I played a phoney – BE(R)ATERS because I couldn’t fit REBATERS onto the board. She let that go. I picked-up both blanks on my final turn. Unfortunately, I had OOOGIA?? with no open bingo lanes. I didn’t know at the time, but those letters can spell OOGONIA. Another discouraging loss. Final score: 366 – 323 (LOSS).

Game #11 vs. Paul Wigley (NSA Rating 997)
I had BRAILER on my rack and so I tried playing it on my first turn. Paul challenged that off and then played WINIEST (ouch!). He tried to play QUORUmS/SWINIEST, which I challenged. I was a bit worried because he had some good tiles on his rack. Luckily, I was able to take his spot and play CARBInES for 67 points to make the score 110 – 104 for me. Without any great letters, I managed to make some nice strategic plays to build up to a 194 – 137 lead. Unfortunately, Paul finally used his good tiles to play SODDInG to take a small lead (221 – 216). He then out-drew me and pulled out the win (I only got the JS, while he go ZXSW). This game was close and could have gone either way. Final score: 375 – 361 (LOSS).

Game #12 – BYE
I was feeling a bit tired, so I just relaxed and took a short nap.

Game #13 vs. Rachel Matlow (NSA Rating 801)
Feeling refreshed, I was looking forward to playing again. Rachel opened with ULU and I played FO(L)IaTED on my play for a quick 62 – 6 lead. I ended up getting most of the good tiles while playing a rather conservative game. I didn’t mean to do it, but the plays sort of closed the board. I had the last S and blank and was leaving myself a chance to bingo by hooking the front of ULU. I played BEANERS/SULU. Rachel said “SULU?”, thought for a while, and then challenged. I knew SULU was good, but was worried about BEANERS. The play came off the board. On my next turn, I thought about playing BEANO/NU but chickened out and played BEANS/SULU instead. Rachel looked at me and said “you seem pretty sure about SULU” but didn’t challenge. Final score: 373 – 290 (WIN).

Game #14 vs. Chris Bonin (NSA Rating 1075)
This game was strange. I had some great tiles, opening with HASTIER and FAQIR. But, Chris made some great plays of QUOTH and DJINN to keep the score very close. I had SALTIER on my rack but didn’t see a place to play it, so I played off of FAQIR to play SLAT(T)IER (phoney). Chris looked at me and let it go because he wanted to open up the board. The board was getting tight already. He played R(E)uMATIC and I held him, and ultimately challenged it off – my concern was that there was an American/alternate spelling without an H. I was able to hold a small lead (320 – 291) when he played his first of two consecutive bingoes: PAInTER and AROIN(T)ED. By the time he played AROINTED, I was down by 100 points and I had EEHSUV? on my rack. I was pretty sure AROINTED was good, but I didn’t have much choice but to challenge. Luckily, Chris wasn’t able to close the TWS and one final bingo lane remained on the bottom of the board. But the word had to end in R (off of his PAINTER). I didn’t see any words with those letters. Apparently, EEHSUV? makes HUMVEES. What surprised me the most was that even though I had two bingoes, Chris was able to stay very close on a few 5 letter plays. Final score: 466 – 394 (LOSS).

Game #15 vs. Shelley Sullivan (NSA Rating 1129)
Shelley opened with RAD. I had AERSTY? on my rack. I wanted to play ESTuARY, but wasn’t sure if RADS was good. So, I played STRAYEd. Shelley then played SLIGHTS of of Ad that was sitting on the board. The rest of the game was pretty close with both of us getting our share of good/bad tiles. Ultimately, Shelley was able to make some very good 5 letter plays and ground out the win (e.g., INVAR and MUFTI). Another tough day of Scrabble. Final score: 357 – 308 (LOSS).

Game #16 vs. Charles Helewa (NSA Rating 829)
Final day. I decided not to bring my equipment and it almost cost me as other people didn’t bring equipment. Fortunately for me, I was able to find a table. Charles never showed-up, so I got the win after waiting at my table for 25 minutes. Final score: ? – ? (WIN by forfeit).

Games #17 and #18 – BYES
I was told that my final two games were to be BYES which sucked because my first opponent didn’t even show-up, meaning I wouldn’t even play a single game on the final day. Fortunately for me, Tony Leah came up to me and told me that I was allowed to participate in the Human vs. Computer showdown. I had thought that I wasn’t going to play because of too much interest from other players, but I was pleasantly surprised. I was able to pick Tony’s brain about what I could to do improve my tournament performance and he suggested that I record my tile racks and then analyze them using Quackle to identify some areas that need improvement.

Game vs. Quackle (COMPUTER PROGRAM)
I was expecting a blow-out, but I was pleasantly surprised. I tried to close the board and thought I did with my play of C(O)X. But, Quackle used my C and played CAS(C)ADED across HOG/HIM. The machine made some outstanding findings (TWOFERS) and just made use of all the better letters it got. I was able to play sEEKING for 86 points. I was playing catch-up from the beginning. Final score: 471 – 314 (LOSS).

Game vs. Maven (COMPUTER PROGRAM)
Having gotten a sense of what playing a computer was like, I played my second game against Maven. Maven opened with JEER. I had ACEOOVT on my rack but didn’t see the obvious OVE(R)COAT (and less obvious EVOCATOR). I played COT to try and close the board a bit. Maven started to open the board with YIRR, and I tried to keep it close by playing ADO. NIX (38 points) came next and I played PI(N)KY for 40 points to make the score 75 – 71 after three turns (Maven went first). Maven played OHO/OP to take advantage of the TWS at the top. I had CDEEOST and didn’t see anything. Apparently, I missed a bingo – ESCOTED or CESTOED. Maven then played NAZI for 29 points with the Z sitting three spaces left of the right middle TWS. I had AAEEEST and wanted to trade, but decided to play (Z)ETA for the points before trading. I had a bad feeling that I was getting set-up. Next play, Maven plays (A)NNULATE down to the TWS for 77 points. We traded words for a few turns. The board was pretty closed up and the score after 8 turns was 281 – 202 for Maven. On Maven’s 9th turn, it played (JO)E. Warning bells were going off in my head because that opened up a bingo lane, which I’m sure Maven had an S to use. Fortunately (or unfortunately) for me, after trying to balance my tiles for a few turns, I had ADENST?. As I mentioned earlier, I started to see the TISANE? stem that I had been studying. I knew that I need to play across, but that would give Maven a chance at a triple-triple. So, I thought NiDATES would be better than DETAiNS. I wasn’t sure if COT took an S at the front to make SCOT, so I went for the sure play. Well, that was the game ending move. I scored my 75 points to make the socre 291 – 277 at the end of 10 turns. Maven was setting up for a bingo and I apparently served up the triple-triple. The play was AVE(N)GERS for 176 points! To make matters worse, I traded my next turn (AAIILTU). I was able to make a good play of (C)H(E)LATE for 35 points on my second last play. Brian Sheppard, the program’s creator and the human handling the “tiles” in this game, congratulated me on a very good find. I felt good. Anyway, on my disastrous play, I should have played hANDSET, hooking COT and making use of a double double. There were quite a few bingoes that I missed. I’m sure that I would have lost, but I was a bit disappointed that I experienced “tunnel vision” with the TISANE? stem, missing some obvious other words and better plays. Final score: 531 – 330 (LOSS).

Final Thoughts
I won three games. But, I learned quite a bit. I think my greatest weakness right now is my limited Scrabble vocabulary. Using Quackle, I simulated several of my games after I got home. I found that I was making most of the best plays. But, I did miss many bingoes. Some words, like ESCOTED or CESTOED I didn’t even know existed.

In my losses to the higher-ranked/expert level players like Jeff Fiszbein, Fern Lindzon, and Su Edwards, I realized that I could keep up with them, but that their superior word knowledge allowed them to make high-scoring plays when I would either pass or net very few points. In my losses to the lower ranked players, I was a bit unfortunate in terms of tiles, but I think I was doing the right thing by keeping the board(s) open. My strategy is good and I need to stick to it. Hopefully I will have another chance to play better in future tournaments. I know I’m going to start studying a bit more and studying systematically.

I was hoping to get a few more wins so that my rating would go up, but I think if I take care of my own play, the NSA rating will take care of itself. I think my rating is up by 16 or so (could be more because I haven’t played 50 tournament games yet) to settle around 757. I just want to be more consistent and make NSA rating close to my club rating (currently 1106 as of Thursday November 16th, 2006).

Kudos to John Chew and Tony Leah for organizing, hosting, and running a very enjoyable tournament. I hope this event becomes a regular tournament.

I looked-up the final showdown betwen David Boys and Quackle and was absolutely amazed by some of the plays by both contestants, but mostly by David Boys. Wow. The true experts play this game at an entirely different level. Maybe I’ll have a chance to get into the 1700+ stratosphere some day …