You play CUL in a strategic bid to get your opponent to challenge it off the board. I play CUL because I can't remember which threes are valid. We are not the same 😎
Nice idea to Kevin! You also need to think about when you challenge and exchange. That's harder to calculate, since you need to look more than one turn ahead, something you didn't really mention in your assessment of the situation. But those are the scenarios you need to think about. Also thinking about how much you are willing to sacrifice on average after challenging CUL* and accounting for that in the calculation, which is pretty impossible to assess properly in a timed game.
Very true, since from Kevin's perspective he doesn't know I'm sitting on a bingo. You're totally right, if I didn't have a playable bingo I'd almost certainly have challenged and exchanged. Like you said pretty much impossible to quantify accurately but definitely another factor against trying this tactic
Good video, Mack. You might consider yet another nuance: the player who plays cul really quickly, hastily, and then scores and looks up at his play, and scowls, just "slightly", without saying anything. Such behavior I've seen and some consider coffeehouse, yet it's also a natural reaction to being careless. I've been known to play phony twos once in a blue moon, and it hurts each time.
I witnessed a similar incident many years ago. Alice opens with LOAFIER* and Bob challenges it off. Bob has a dream opening rack including a blank. Unlike the CUL* scenario, Bob has full knowledge of Alice’s rack so he tries to sneak in a few extra points by opening LO instead of an easy seven-letter bingo. The only problem is Alice then plays three consecutive bonuses of her own, starting with AEROFOIL. Bob is then heard to mutter “I deserve it” Incidentally, Bob is one of the nicest players in the Australian scrabble community and I regret having to spend less time on tournament Scrabble during the past few years due to other commitments. Obviously, I have altered the real names (but the genders of both players are correct).
Computer analysis couldn't really tell us but your exhaustive attempt certainly came close if not completely at explains it. Thanks, I enjoyed that detailed analysis and well done for spotting the 'trap' Kevin laid and I think you are right, it was pretty obvious what he was attempting with such a suspicious start from a rated player.
Just ask Josh Sokol -- you can absolutely do this in a real game. It's a phony, so your opponent would have the option of letting it stay on the board or challenging it off just as with CUL*. It's unfortunate that Woogles doesn't allow this. In reality it's probably not worth it against an aware opponent since they can just challenge it off and exchange back to not give you anything, but it's a fun idea for sure!
What if you just have a terrible rack with no good plays, so you open with a 3-letter phony? Your opponent goes through this complex thought process and decides to let the play stand, to prevent you from potentially scoring an 8-letter bingo. But in reality, you just grabbed 10 free points while exchanging 3 tiles. Also, if you do this kind of thing repeatedly, you'll get a reputation as that player who opens with phony words. Then when you have a rack like Kevin's, you can play CUL and your opponent will probably challenge it, because there you go again with the phony words. And that's when you score big!
Haha this is getting too complicated! But in all seriousness, you do make a very interesting point... hard to quantify for sure whether this would be smart, but maybe someone will test it out (though I don't think me lol)
It's possible he made this play specifically _because_ he was playing such a strong opponent. In chess, it is common for lower rated opponents to intentionally play risky and "chaotic" opening moves, knowing that a conservative by-the-book game will almost certainly result in the stronger player outplaying them in the long run. In Kevin's case, while the gamble might result in a reduced bingo chance if you let the phony stand, it also guarantees 10 extra points in all the resulting continuations. Yes, it would reduce his bingo percentage from ~7/10 to ~5/10, but all bingos would in essence score ten more points (i.e. even if the gamble "fails", the resulting bingos are worth more). From a lower-rated opponent's perspective, it might seem like a win-win: either the phony comes off and he gets a higher bingo percentage, or the phony stands and the resulting bingo draws are worth more.
I tried a variation of this a couple years ago when I first returned to club and tournament play. I was playing Andy Hoang at the newly restarted Triangle Scrabble Club in North Carolina, and I was going first with opening rack CELNPUU. I saw if I had an O on the board I'd have UNCOUPLE, so I played UNCUP*, which I wasn't sure on, thinking if it was no good and he challenged, I had a decent chance to get UNCOUPLE. He held for a bit and challenged, then played something but without an O. Though CUPULE, a word I'd forgotten, was likely best, UNCUP* would be even better if it stayed, since it would keep EL. I figured my ploy was innocuous enough that I might luck out and get an O from him after a challenge. Given how rusty I was, especially on something like 5s, it seemed like a good gambit.
I think it was a reasonable option if exchanging CUL is close in value to exchanging just the U, because there isn't that much downside over the best other option. Even if it's not likely you'll fall for it, if it's only a point or two worse on average when it fails, maybe it's worth it even just for the fact that you're going to have to think about it and use up some clock time!
Great video. I'd like to see more content where you showcase games against other expert or close to expert players like this. Edit: What makes this even more clever is that many of the words in ?ACELRUT are pretty advanced words as far as being obscure and not necessarily that high prob, I assume he probably knew all of the words in there.
Problem is now he's giving Mack way more floaters to potentially bingo through. He doesn't know that Mack has a 7 on his rack, and floating an R, A, L increases Macks bingo chances, so he still likely won't challenge and now you've blown up your rack and given Mack a bingo
Maybe, though I'd know 6 of his tiles and likely be able to figure out that he was keeping an E and going for floaters, so I'd probably challenge it off and pass (if he keeps phonying or passing, I win -8 to -9)
Giving your opponent a free trade if their opening rack sucks without getting any benefits for yourself, all while being crystal clear about your intentions, probably isn't a good move.
From Kevin's perspective, how about playing a phoney five instead, like *CUTAL? Scores a bit more, keeps a decent leave of ER and more believable to be an unintentional phoney. And from Mack's perspective, bingos to the triple net him 80-20=60, so Mack's more incentivized to challenge off the five and bingo for 72.
That's a viable option as well -- if I do sniff it out it's even worse for Kevin though since he now has even more chances to draw badly and not get a bingo. But you're absolutely right that there's more of a chance I fall for it with a 5 than a 3. Hard to quantify exactly how much more of a chance, but its absolutely worth considering
In the six pass scenario where Kevin exchanges the C to win with low pointers, can't you just exchange the M and very likely win since you have the blank and he probably does not?
If the gambit leads to a bingo 82% of the time and the exchange leads to a bingo 72% of the time, then you have to fall for the trap Ike 88% of the time for it to be worth it, right? Like you said, we can't calculate the real number but I can't imagine your chances of falling for the trap are anywhere near 88%, so trade U seems like the clear winner. Very cool video though. I wish you'd mentioned his other option which is to just pass. In that case it's even more clear what he's up to but in that case, would you pass back?
Interesting thought. Usually if someone passes on the first turn, the obvious response would be to play a short word with few good floaters. But in this particular case, it would be tough for Mack to do that because he would have to forgo his bingo.
Thanks! If Kevin passes I'd probably trade M actually, then if I can get a one-pointer I can safely pass since I'll only have 6 on my rack and can't lose in a six-pass. And my leave is still good enough that, unless I draw another I, I should be able to bingo if Kevin does decide to make a non-bingo play.
Let's not forget that if you don't challenge, there's the possibility for 7s too. And the fully open floaters are the same minus the N, in addition to 3 unique restricted ones. So there should be more ways he could bingo when you don't challenge, and we have to assume he kept the best 4 tiles he had. But the uncertainty of drawing three tiles has to be a bigger factor, I'd think, so I like your decision. There's also the question of reverse psychology, I guess. If he doesn't expect you to fall for the trap, he could maybe do it simply to hope you don't challenge, if it's far better than any valid move. But that's reading far into it, especially since he doesn't know that CUL gives you a strong enough response to let it stay.
I was wondering, how about CUL* one tile lower ? If unchallenged it's of course still a lower bingo percentage as exchanging U, but the bingoes score more (both double-doubles hooking CULT and triple word scores from the C) and you're scoring an extra 10 from CUL. Of course, opponent also potentially scores more (as it turns out, MARTInI for 88 hooking CULT would have come down) but with ARET you probably are favored hitting these bingo lines. Maybe that score difference (plus the fact opponent might fall into the trap) makes it worth the bingo percentage sacrifice
That's very reasonable, though there's also the factor that this placement is highly nonstandard and might raise even more eyebrows, increasing the chance that your opponent does not fall for the trap. So much to think about!
I just play CUT here if I am your opponent. Exchange U is a close second. I think CUL is a mistake at almost any level, because if you are playing at a skill level where people will be like "i see phony, I challenge phony" and not think any more deeply about the situation, then you might as well just exchange U, or even pass, and if you are playing at an expert level, they pretty much know your rack now, and can play pretty accurately next turn.
passing on the opening turn is allowed but not a good idea as your opponent will likely exchange if they can't bingo immediately, putting you in a worse position
Probably VITRU. If they let it stay it's basically like VIRTU but more defensive (and maybe they don't notice and try to E-hook it and lose a turn!). If they challenge, then there's a decent chance they think I accidentally transposes tiles and just play normally and let me bingo
I am curious what percentage of the time you need to fall for the trap for it to be break even. The 10 points and the change to the board aren't insubstantial either (I assume the board is worse after he plays CUL compared to an empty board, but regardless of which direction it is on average the change in your expected value has to be factored in). Of course if you never fall for the trap playing CUL still has an upper bound as worse than exchanging because as you mention you can always challenge and then pass (or exchange), so either you will let CUL stand if it is better for you or challenge it if it is worse for you (and the fact that you have absolute freedom to make the choice with full knowledge of your specific rack so even if the 10 points + change in board state were a net benefit to him for 95+% of your opening racks it only stands for the 5% that it is a net. benefit to you).
Wow, not easy to think in terms of 8's ending in a U. I see MURIATIC* but it's not in the edition of the OWL I have which is admittedly old, from 2014. It's definitely a word, wonder if it's been added since.
Hmm if I had that rack I would've just played cruel for 20 points and draw 5... playing such as obvious phony would have never come to my mind. In all scenarios it is worse off than just exchanging or fishing if not for the psychological damage to the now-rattled opponent. You can always challenge it off, then pass your turn once just to see his reaction if you are suspicious. (Under another ruleset he would simply give you 5 pts instead of losing his turn for a phony, so I would've done so in a heartbeat).
If exchanging bingos 20% more often than playing the phoney (assuming you accept), and 20% of the 50 bonus points is the 10 he scored from CUL, then isn’t it basically a wash in terms of expected points? So the question becomes whether you are likely to be able to score more points from an empty board, or from the board where he has played CUL and you don’t have access to the centre double and can’t make any nice overlaps. And, to me at least, it looks like you might score more on average from the empty board.
That's definitely an option (see my comment below about playing VITRU* with IORSTUV), like maybe CAULT* or something -- if it stays he's a bit further away from bingoing since he's played more tiles, but he does get 20 points keeping ER which isn't terrible, so I think that's a reasonable idea
One thing you didn't mention: in this case you happened to have a Bingo that allows you to compare challenge vs. leaving it on the board (TIRAMIS(u) vs. MARTINI). This isn't something Kevin can know. Even for an opponent of a very strong skill level, what happens if you don't have the 8-letter bingo in hand? Would you challenge it off just to get a 7-letter bingo on the board and purposefully fall into Kevin's trap because the 7-letter bingo would be worth too much to not play, or is it preferable to leave CUL on the board and play a non-bingo because ruining Kevin's plan is more important? If the answer is "it depends", then the follow up question would be "on what?" Also, if you don't have a rack where bingo-ing is possible (either a 7 or an 8), how often will you challenge CUL off the board there? (Also: would you play something or exchange after challenging?) From Kevin's POV I think there's significantly more to consider than his own bingo chances or not; what you might do in cases where you can bingo back vs. when you can't can significantly change the value of making a play like CUL (worth 10 points and denying you a first turn) from Kevin's POV.
All very valid points -- I think most likely when I don't have a bingo or big play back I challenge off CUL and then exchange to give him nothing to work with, as pointed out by Josh Sokol above
2 หลายเดือนก่อน
Would it be better for him to phony a bingo? You would be (pointwise) much more motivated to challenge it off, right?
Then Mack would know all of Kevin’s tiles and would know what letters he’d need for a real bingo. Then he would proceed to play a word that doesn’t use any of the letters he’d need.
Was his best option not to just pass? That way he’d get the same effect as having the phoney challenged off the board but without the gamble of having it allowed, like what actually happened. If you pass back he can always then exchange the u and then play.
I don't know why you wouldn't just exch. U or UC? I guess it's a psychological thing but surely any expert is going to realize you are phonying on purpose so play just as defensively (assuming they don't have a bingo of their own as was the case here)?
@@Iridescence93 In the video, he said he could challenge and pass, which in this case would be better than exchanging because his rack is already perfect
![ไลฟ์สุ่ม iPhone 295 บาท... โกงมั้ย?[ โกงมั้ยครับ ep.97 ] | DOM](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/gdstHEE4UUE/mqdefault.jpg)
My Opponents First Move, A 16 Minute Dissertation
Kevin took clearly the best option, because the story content had he been able to pull it off is by FAR the dominant factor.
As a content creator I wholeheartedly endorse this stance
You play CUL in a strategic bid to get your opponent to challenge it off the board.
I play CUL because I can't remember which threes are valid.
We are not the same 😎
i play cul because i get english mixed up with french, we are also not the same
Hahaha
Nice idea to Kevin! You also need to think about when you challenge and exchange. That's harder to calculate, since you need to look more than one turn ahead, something you didn't really mention in your assessment of the situation. But those are the scenarios you need to think about. Also thinking about how much you are willing to sacrifice on average after challenging CUL* and accounting for that in the calculation, which is pretty impossible to assess properly in a timed game.
Very true, since from Kevin's perspective he doesn't know I'm sitting on a bingo. You're totally right, if I didn't have a playable bingo I'd almost certainly have challenged and exchanged. Like you said pretty much impossible to quantify accurately but definitely another factor against trying this tactic
Good video, Mack. You might consider yet another nuance: the player who plays cul really quickly, hastily, and then scores and looks up at his play, and scowls, just "slightly", without saying anything. Such behavior I've seen and some consider coffeehouse, yet it's also a natural reaction to being careless. I've been known to play phony twos once in a blue moon, and it hurts each time.
Thanks Joe!
To be fair, I think the least expected thing to Kevin in that situation is for you to play a triple word score bingo ending in a U
Haha U would think so!
I witnessed a similar incident many years ago.
Alice opens with LOAFIER* and Bob challenges it off. Bob has a dream opening rack including a blank. Unlike the CUL* scenario, Bob has full knowledge of Alice’s rack so he tries to sneak in a few extra points by opening LO instead of an easy seven-letter bingo. The only problem is Alice then plays three consecutive bonuses of her own, starting with AEROFOIL. Bob is then heard to mutter “I deserve it”
Incidentally, Bob is one of the nicest players in the Australian scrabble community and I regret having to spend less time on tournament Scrabble during the past few years due to other commitments. Obviously, I have altered the real names (but the genders of both players are correct).
Computer analysis couldn't really tell us but your exhaustive attempt certainly came close if not completely at explains it. Thanks, I enjoyed that detailed analysis and well done for spotting the 'trap' Kevin laid and I think you are right, it was pretty obvious what he was attempting with such a suspicious start from a rated player.
What if he just played "U" on the center tile? Wouldn't that be the same idea but more likely to bingo if it stays on?
woogles doesn't allow it (though I believe over the board competitive games do)
But then it's obvious what you're doing
Scrabble's rules mention that you can't play one-letter words, even though it's only possible on the first turn.
Just ask Josh Sokol -- you can absolutely do this in a real game. It's a phony, so your opponent would have the option of letting it stay on the board or challenging it off just as with CUL*.
It's unfortunate that Woogles doesn't allow this. In reality it's probably not worth it against an aware opponent since they can just challenge it off and exchange back to not give you anything, but it's a fun idea for sure!
What if you just have a terrible rack with no good plays, so you open with a 3-letter phony? Your opponent goes through this complex thought process and decides to let the play stand, to prevent you from potentially scoring an 8-letter bingo. But in reality, you just grabbed 10 free points while exchanging 3 tiles.
Also, if you do this kind of thing repeatedly, you'll get a reputation as that player who opens with phony words. Then when you have a rack like Kevin's, you can play CUL and your opponent will probably challenge it, because there you go again with the phony words. And that's when you score big!
Haha this is getting too complicated! But in all seriousness, you do make a very interesting point... hard to quantify for sure whether this would be smart, but maybe someone will test it out (though I don't think me lol)
It's possible he made this play specifically _because_ he was playing such a strong opponent. In chess, it is common for lower rated opponents to intentionally play risky and "chaotic" opening moves, knowing that a conservative by-the-book game will almost certainly result in the stronger player outplaying them in the long run. In Kevin's case, while the gamble might result in a reduced bingo chance if you let the phony stand, it also guarantees 10 extra points in all the resulting continuations. Yes, it would reduce his bingo percentage from ~7/10 to ~5/10, but all bingos would in essence score ten more points (i.e. even if the gamble "fails", the resulting bingos are worth more).
From a lower-rated opponent's perspective, it might seem like a win-win: either the phony comes off and he gets a higher bingo percentage, or the phony stands and the resulting bingo draws are worth more.
I tried a variation of this a couple years ago when I first returned to club and tournament play. I was playing Andy Hoang at the newly restarted Triangle Scrabble Club in North Carolina, and I was going first with opening rack CELNPUU. I saw if I had an O on the board I'd have UNCOUPLE, so I played UNCUP*, which I wasn't sure on, thinking if it was no good and he challenged, I had a decent chance to get UNCOUPLE. He held for a bit and challenged, then played something but without an O. Though CUPULE, a word I'd forgotten, was likely best, UNCUP* would be even better if it stayed, since it would keep EL. I figured my ploy was innocuous enough that I might luck out and get an O from him after a challenge. Given how rusty I was, especially on something like 5s, it seemed like a good gambit.
10:27 if Kevin played cul 1 space down and Mack plays martinis and cult, Kevin can play cultrate.
It is a good back up plan but it gives a double double
I think it was a reasonable option if exchanging CUL is close in value to exchanging just the U, because there isn't that much downside over the best other option. Even if it's not likely you'll fall for it, if it's only a point or two worse on average when it fails, maybe it's worth it even just for the fact that you're going to have to think about it and use up some clock time!
Great video. I'd like to see more content where you showcase games against other expert or close to expert players like this. Edit: What makes this even more clever is that many of the words in ?ACELRUT are pretty advanced words as far as being obscure and not necessarily that high prob, I assume he probably knew all of the words in there.
Suppose Kevin had played something like CURTLA (shades of HIARNETS). Do you think that would have been more likely to catch you off guard?
I was thinking the same, if he played something worth more like CULTE for 20
Problem is now he's giving Mack way more floaters to potentially bingo through. He doesn't know that Mack has a 7 on his rack, and floating an R, A, L increases Macks bingo chances, so he still likely won't challenge and now you've blown up your rack and given Mack a bingo
Maybe, though I'd know 6 of his tiles and likely be able to figure out that he was keeping an E and going for floaters, so I'd probably challenge it off and pass (if he keeps phonying or passing, I win -8 to -9)
All these comments about playing the phony vs exchanging 1 left me wondering... but what about just passing instead?
Giving your opponent a free trade if their opening rack sucks without getting any benefits for yourself, all while being crystal clear about your intentions, probably isn't a good move.
From Kevin's perspective, how about playing a phoney five instead, like *CUTAL? Scores a bit more, keeps a decent leave of ER and more believable to be an unintentional phoney. And from Mack's perspective, bingos to the triple net him 80-20=60, so Mack's more incentivized to challenge off the five and bingo for 72.
Opens a double-double line and completely blows up the rack. Too many chances to draw dreck by only keeping 2.
That's a viable option as well -- if I do sniff it out it's even worse for Kevin though since he now has even more chances to draw badly and not get a bingo. But you're absolutely right that there's more of a chance I fall for it with a 5 than a 3. Hard to quantify exactly how much more of a chance, but its absolutely worth considering
vettage
Gavette
In the six pass scenario where Kevin exchanges the C to win with low pointers, can't you just exchange the M and very likely win since you have the blank and he probably does not?
But not kill your very powerfull bingo from something that almost never complete. In fact, is huge change to draw something with more points
Yes, but I have to be careful since there's always the chance I trade the M and pull the Z or something
If the gambit leads to a bingo 82% of the time and the exchange leads to a bingo 72% of the time, then you have to fall for the trap Ike 88% of the time for it to be worth it, right?
Like you said, we can't calculate the real number but I can't imagine your chances of falling for the trap are anywhere near 88%, so trade U seems like the clear winner.
Very cool video though. I wish you'd mentioned his other option which is to just pass. In that case it's even more clear what he's up to but in that case, would you pass back?
Interesting thought. Usually if someone passes on the first turn, the obvious response would be to play a short word with few good floaters.
But in this particular case, it would be tough for Mack to do that because he would have to forgo his bingo.
Thanks! If Kevin passes I'd probably trade M actually, then if I can get a one-pointer I can safely pass since I'll only have 6 on my rack and can't lose in a six-pass. And my leave is still good enough that, unless I draw another I, I should be able to bingo if Kevin does decide to make a non-bingo play.
Let's not forget that if you don't challenge, there's the possibility for 7s too. And the fully open floaters are the same minus the N, in addition to 3 unique restricted ones. So there should be more ways he could bingo when you don't challenge, and we have to assume he kept the best 4 tiles he had. But the uncertainty of drawing three tiles has to be a bigger factor, I'd think, so I like your decision.
There's also the question of reverse psychology, I guess. If he doesn't expect you to fall for the trap, he could maybe do it simply to hope you don't challenge, if it's far better than any valid move. But that's reading far into it, especially since he doesn't know that CUL gives you a strong enough response to let it stay.
Why wouldn't he just pass?
If he passes then I just get a free turn to exchange, it'll be blatantly obvious what hes up to so I'm not going to give him floaters
i think this trap would probably be a good play against bestbot because i think that bestbot would always challenge a phony.
That is true, great point! I'll keep that in mind 😉
I was wondering, how about CUL* one tile lower ? If unchallenged it's of course still a lower bingo percentage as exchanging U, but the bingoes score more (both double-doubles hooking CULT and triple word scores from the C) and you're scoring an extra 10 from CUL. Of course, opponent also potentially scores more (as it turns out, MARTInI for 88 hooking CULT would have come down) but with ARET you probably are favored hitting these bingo lines. Maybe that score difference (plus the fact opponent might fall into the trap) makes it worth the bingo percentage sacrifice
That's very reasonable, though there's also the factor that this placement is highly nonstandard and might raise even more eyebrows, increasing the chance that your opponent does not fall for the trap. So much to think about!
I just play CUT here if I am your opponent. Exchange U is a close second.
I think CUL is a mistake at almost any level, because if you are playing at a skill level where people will be like "i see phony, I challenge phony" and not think any more deeply about the situation, then you might as well just exchange U, or even pass, and if you are playing at an expert level, they pretty much know your rack now, and can play pretty accurately next turn.
why would kevin not pass on his first turn? is that not allowed?
passing on the opening turn is allowed but not a good idea as your opponent will likely exchange if they can't bingo immediately, putting you in a worse position
What would you do with a more extreme opening rack like IORSTUV? VIRTU is normally best but against a weaker opponent, what would you play?
Probably VITRU. If they let it stay it's basically like VIRTU but more defensive (and maybe they don't notice and try to E-hook it and lose a turn!). If they challenge, then there's a decent chance they think I accidentally transposes tiles and just play normally and let me bingo
I am curious what percentage of the time you need to fall for the trap for it to be break even. The 10 points and the change to the board aren't insubstantial either (I assume the board is worse after he plays CUL compared to an empty board, but regardless of which direction it is on average the change in your expected value has to be factored in).
Of course if you never fall for the trap playing CUL still has an upper bound as worse than exchanging because as you mention you can always challenge and then pass (or exchange), so either you will let CUL stand if it is better for you or challenge it if it is worse for you (and the fact that you have absolute freedom to make the choice with full knowledge of your specific rack so even if the 10 points + change in board state were a net benefit to him for 95+% of your opening racks it only stands for the 5% that it is a net. benefit to you).
Wow, not easy to think in terms of 8's ending in a U. I see MURIATIC* but it's not in the edition of the OWL I have which is admittedly old, from 2014. It's definitely a word, wonder if it's been added since.
Still not good!
@@mackmeller Wow! Muriatic acid is sold in home improvement stores, used for cleaning pools, concrete, etc.
Hmm if I had that rack I would've just played cruel for 20 points and draw 5... playing such as obvious phony would have never come to my mind. In all scenarios it is worse off than just exchanging or fishing if not for the psychological damage to the now-rattled opponent.
You can always challenge it off, then pass your turn once just to see his reaction if you are suspicious. (Under another ruleset he would simply give you 5 pts instead of losing his turn for a phony, so I would've done so in a heartbeat).
Only problem is this was an online game so I can't see his reaction!
If exchanging bingos 20% more often than playing the phoney (assuming you accept), and 20% of the 50 bonus points is the 10 he scored from CUL, then isn’t it basically a wash in terms of expected points?
So the question becomes whether you are likely to be able to score more points from an empty board, or from the board where he has played CUL and you don’t have access to the centre double and can’t make any nice overlaps.
And, to me at least, it looks like you might score more on average from the empty board.
The fact that it's a phony 3 is what makes it most suspicious, so how about the same gambit but with a phony 4 or 5?
That's definitely an option (see my comment below about playing VITRU* with IORSTUV), like maybe CAULT* or something -- if it stays he's a bit further away from bingoing since he's played more tiles, but he does get 20 points keeping ER which isn't terrible, so I think that's a reasonable idea
Next time I have an opening rack of ccuules, instead of exchanging I'll play cul. 😅
This works better with CCUULAS since villain could challenge and give you the correct floater for CALCULUS🤪
@@BigAsciiHappyStar wow big brain!
One thing you didn't mention: in this case you happened to have a Bingo that allows you to compare challenge vs. leaving it on the board (TIRAMIS(u) vs. MARTINI). This isn't something Kevin can know.
Even for an opponent of a very strong skill level, what happens if you don't have the 8-letter bingo in hand? Would you challenge it off just to get a 7-letter bingo on the board and purposefully fall into Kevin's trap because the 7-letter bingo would be worth too much to not play, or is it preferable to leave CUL on the board and play a non-bingo because ruining Kevin's plan is more important? If the answer is "it depends", then the follow up question would be "on what?"
Also, if you don't have a rack where bingo-ing is possible (either a 7 or an 8), how often will you challenge CUL off the board there? (Also: would you play something or exchange after challenging?)
From Kevin's POV I think there's significantly more to consider than his own bingo chances or not; what you might do in cases where you can bingo back vs. when you can't can significantly change the value of making a play like CUL (worth 10 points and denying you a first turn) from Kevin's POV.
All very valid points -- I think most likely when I don't have a bingo or big play back I challenge off CUL and then exchange to give him nothing to work with, as pointed out by Josh Sokol above
Would it be better for him to phony a bingo? You would be (pointwise) much more motivated to challenge it off, right?
Then Mack would know all of Kevin’s tiles and would know what letters he’d need for a real bingo. Then he would proceed to play a word that doesn’t use any of the letters he’d need.
Was his best option not to just pass? That way he’d get the same effect as having the phoney challenged off the board but without the gamble of having it allowed, like what actually happened. If you pass back he can always then exchange the u and then play.
I don't know why you wouldn't just exch. U or UC? I guess it's a psychological thing but surely any expert is going to realize you are phonying on purpose so play just as defensively (assuming they don't have a bingo of their own as was the case here)?
Passing gives your opponent (i.e. Mack) a free exchange.
@@galoomba5559 but Mack could just challenge the fake word off and then get a free turn to exchange if he wanted to?
Passing makes it 100% obvious what he's trying to do. By using a phoney instead, he is hoping that Mack doesn't realize his plan.
@@Iridescence93 In the video, he said he could challenge and pass, which in this case would be better than exchanging because his rack is already perfect
1 letter off and it being a bad play and all but you wouldve won the game in style points if you followed his phony with culminate