Awesome match between Paul and Gaby in "Marlboro 72's silver pack box"

Would be interested to have the spreadsheet. But i'm kind of an unreal lazy ass myself.

Ok, I haven't checked the actual numbers, but I was thinking this could be the best possibility, in a vacuum.



First it might seem that snaking 4s + 3-zoning 5s > 4-zoning both, but there is the additional 5 in the top zone, connecting that in rack 9 will make 4-zoning both more valuable. Anyhow, there isn't a big difference in score between these two. So if there is 45 in rack 8, it is about the same no matter how rack 7 is played, well not counting gambling with 4s, which I guess could be an option if we considering only winning. There is also an added bonus here, that if we can't snake 4s/5s in rack 8, we can actually play a 1 to an outer zone (right) leaving center without a 1 for rack 9. Or we could play 11 in rack 8 without losing bonus if we can't snake 4s/5s/6s. So we could get +2 bonus either way, which is more than enough to make up the small difference between 4s/5s even if the last rack 5 doesn't hit.

Playing like this leaves open snaking 4s with 44, 5s with 55, and even the miracle 666 to snake 6s. 55 is a huge bonus if it hits. 44 is the same as with others options, well other than 445 in some. And the miracle 666 open is nice as well, it will hit 4 % of the time!

What we don't want to see in rack 8: one 4 with no 5s; 22 isn't great either, but it might be ok if the chain dice with the 2s are suitable.

Interesting. If there is one 5 and one 4 in Round 8 then snaking 4s and 3-zoning 5s is marginally better with no 5 in Round 9, or one 5 and two 4s. Otherwise 4-zoning both chains is marginally better. This gives an almost exact 50/50 split.

This argument massively downweights the importance of snaking 4s, so I'm sold on your play. Nice work TH.

If I make this play, we draw the game and I win the match 6-5, rather than losing on points.

You need to think about setups as a whole, rather than individual chains. The 5- and 4-chains clashing in my setup is no problem at all, if the 5s come early enough then you just snake the 4s around the other way with four dice. Your play needs four dice to snake the 4s anyway. It's actually an excellent setup.

Playing the 4 high in Round 3 is marginally better if Round 4 contains a 6 and no 5 (27%); you have a stronger 6-chain but a weaker 4-chain. However, you have zero chance of getting a really decent setup (two chains which can be snaked and one chain which can be 4-zoned) and if you get a 5 in Round 4 your play is much, much worse than mine; if you don't play the 5 into the middle zone your 5-chain is awful, and if you do play it in then your 5-chain and 6-chain clash horrendously.

If you are going to play the 4 to the top of the middle zone in Round 3 then you should not play the 4 into the left zone. This leaves perfect Dynasty open if Round 4 contains a 6 and a 5. But then this only works sometimes like 36% of the time and you run into problems with your bonus setup.

Round 6: I think you have a point. I've been convinced because of TH's point about the relative values of snaking 4s and 3-zoning 5s vs. 4-zoning both chains.

Ok, let's see if this link works, never used this site before.

Spreadsheet

I wrote some quick instructions on the first page of the spreadsheet, hopefully I didn't screw up anything in those. It shouldn't need anything other than OpenOffice (I have version 3.4.1). I don't think the different language version should be a problem. Feel free to pm me if you need help with something.

Zac, in the past when I played tourney games that my opponent had already completed his score showed up in the recent scores next to mine. I liked that a lot, can we bring it back?

As a part of my Whiner King/Head Moaner/Whatever campaign, today's rustlements for everyone to enjoy!

Played three matches against Dynasty, lost all despite game scores being 8-10 with one draw, so 7-9-1 or 7.5-9.5. I felt like I didn't deserve to lose all three, and sure enough EVs going into last racks looked a lot different than 7.5-9.5. Assuming I didn't make big mistakes, in total, about 10.5-6.5. So going by these I should've in fact won the two bigger matches and the best of one was about a flip as mentioned earlier today.

Especially the 4-5 loss was rustling since the EV going into rack 9s in that was about 6-3. So should've won by 3, lost by 1, difference of 4 out of 18. Now this was actually supposed to have a real function, to show how much variance there can be even in a single best of 9 match. So everyone has a chance to win the official tourney!

Also, I now have realised how Dynasty wins that many DCs, it isn't especially difficult when you hit all the last racks.

OK, I'm gonna say it:

No-one cares.

Finally won something with more than 4 players, just a "crabshoot" but still. For the record, after XI crabshoot the winners are:

-TH10: 3
-Derwi: 2
-Gaby: 1
-Donk4: 1
-Anton09: 1
-Treep: 1
-Kokirixx: 1
-Np: 1

For now, TH is the incontested KING CRAB.

Thank you very much sir, will try this right now if i understand how to to it.

Congrats for the win!

These Crabshoots are fun tourneys imo. Seems like we can get a new one going about once a day. 8 players is the right size to fill quite quickly, and finish as well, these don't often run for days, when only 8 players need to play their games, and it is one game per match for each player. Also not much of a time commitment to have to play 1-3 games in total.

Yw. Did you get it to work?

I also use red font in tourney names to help me see which tourneys are still ongoing. I add the tourneys in the order which they are created (the ones I play), this is the easiest way to keep track of them imo.

Red font example:

I believe I have won 100% of all crapshoot tourneys I have played in. Yeah, I'm real good.

Crapshoots? I think you mean crabshoots.

But yes, I think I speak for all of us when I say: thanks for not entering more than one of them so that others have had the chance to win some as well!

Ok, now I can explain this. There was a game where 60k would've been possible, if I had only played 1s correctly. The failed 60k.

It was a part of this. Sick tourney, two games, where it was possible to score the new number 1 of all time, one of them for 60k+.

Now the failed 60k game disappeared.

Looks the same as what happened in that one game in a match with Dynasty vs. Derwi, game disappeared, but result still stands.

How the **** did you knew that before playing said games? In my tourney lobby those games were - and not hidden. Like if you did not play them already? Probably a bug then?

Yeah and now your score is not there anymore?

Edit: concerning the spreadsheet, i need to create an account, will do this this afternoon. Also, it was game 5? I can create a puzzle out of it if you want.

I had played the game until rack 9, just hadn't placed the final rack.

Oh, sorry, didn't consider that downloading would require opening an account.

I wonder if there is some other site where it isn't required?

Go ahead with the puzzle if you wish.

How about this site.

I think that works without an account.

It works! Great great job on the spreadsheet. Thanks again, i'll start entering results after F1 qualification (in my town hey).

Good that the link works, let's hope the spreadsheet does as well.

In the first link I managed to test download it without any problems, but I forgot to consider that I was already logged in because I had to be to upload it there.

Go Kimi!

Ok, if you don't have TH spreadsheet already, you should. Teh nuts. Took me 3 hours to enter all my tourneys bur for now it's gonna be sooooo easy. There's a lot of work in this SS. Thanks again. TH even put an in-cells drop-down for opponent name.

Now the results are not so great .



Toughest 5



Valtteri Bottas stoled his thunder, pretty sure that Finnish born with a steering wheel in their hands.

Also, for some reason, my 32-players counter is at -1 ?

TH10 mentioned that as well. It was an accident that it worked that way, but I do intend to bring it back. More detail below for anyone who cares.

---

Recent scores were previously sorted by "last updated." Whenever a challenge (daily challenge/tournament/timed) is completed, all games associated with it are updated (with their rank). This meant that whenever a daily challenge was completed, all of the previous day's games showed up under recent scores. To fix that I changed the sorting to game's creation time, which broke the "bump" of an opponent's tourney score.

krohn curshing the Advanced board right now.