| snoot.org message board: posting |
| re: 1943 vs. 1709 :) |
| [42385] by "Mike™" (pool-68-161-137-123.ny325.east.verizon.net) on Sun 26 Sep 2004 14:12:58 [ reply ] |
|
hehe... touche, Tommy Boy. :-)
Though that old 1709 game isn't anything to spit at, we've improved vastly in the last year. Namely, in determining when we're close to a premium DLS word, but in other ways too (i.e. that 1709 game didn't contain any 1-letter plays, since it hadn't been 'discovered' yet). The thing is, though... there are no further improvements to be made nowadays, IMO. It's all luck today with regards to the tile order. That's basically the only way I *might* guarantee a 2000+ game -- if I knew the tile order in advance, I *might* be able to pull one off. Maybe. It might actually be interesting -- though no such games would be placed on the Top 50 for obvious reasons, it would impart a different kind of strategy into playing. Namely, given a specific tile order of 98 tiles, how do you maximize the final score of the game? It's interesting because for any given tile order, there is a *specific maximum* final score that can be achieved. I'd guess the average maximum score would be around 2200 or so -- if you had all 10-letter trips with premium DLS's (approx. 400 pts each), plus unbelievable use of the non-trip area (600 pts) = 2200. hmm.... I wonder, if we were given a game with the exact same tile order of that 1709 game (or any former 1st place game for that matter), what kind of score we'd get today.... hmm... stuff to ponder :) -= Retiree :) =- |