Ugh. 2-2 in the morning, lost to Stefan and Ian as I should have. Beat the other two who I should have. No surprises there. On the afternoon, a bit of the same. Blew two people outta the water, lost a third 'cause karma will kick your ass for trying BEEL(I)NER* on your opening rack. Oh well. Only lost by 40, and 'cause he drew both blanks later on on a board where I really couldn't close things down. I'm now 7.5-6.5 +464 (!), feeling extraordinarily mediocre 'cause oxymorons are fun.
What was most frustrating of all was my 4th game in the afternoon. Opponent, the organizer, was talking on her cell, kept getting up, kinda -- no, very -- distracting. I don't want to blame, that, though, on my loss. But playing like I did, I think I kinda coulda.
There are two positions that are key here, plz take a look. PICTING and KINGCOT racks. Thanks.
http://www.cross-tables.com/annotated.php?u=5411Feuch, even QUACKLE suggests KIANG for the second position.
But Quackle also points out that if I DON'T go out (meaning, I have to have had her tracked right), I can play COT, and then she plays the W, and then I go out with EAU and we tie. Haha, irony of ironies, two ties possible in a tourney. I played like that to lose by one. Apparently, Quackle says I lost by 3, don't know where my math mistake was.
Quackle found a win there, too. I am humbled by the duck. I had tons of time left over and it just goes to show I suck at endgames. I'll be very impressed by anyone who finds it, starting from the rack I played KIANG. Hint: I win by 2. It IS my fault I didn't count to check if COT would be any better, or to see if I could find the crazy setup Quackle found.