Current decision number = 15 (see bottom of post)
Link to previous round can be found here
Round 1, initial position
Stock = 40
Checksum: 6+7+7+8+5+4+2+11+7+7+40 = 104
Green: I’ll start with the obvious: “jc,fj,fd” yields three in-suit builds. We have two guaranteed turnovers, including the important column 6 if we can’t clear column 7.
Red: The good cards are 2,4,5,6,7,9,J,K (i.e. allow at least one more turnover). If we wish to turnover column 4 then column 6 must wait because the 2-A in column 4 is off-suit. Therefore “jc,fh,fd” costs a turnover if we get a Four. But “df,di” costs a turnover if we get a Seven. Oh well, so much for over-analysing the situation – “jc,fj,fd” it is.
Blue: Over-analysis FTW! I prefer “df,dc,jd,fj,fj”. This leaves column 4 atomic, which would not be possible if we went the Captain Obvious option. Admittedly this exposes an Ace – but if our next card were bad, we have to expose an Ace anyway.
Actual play (decision 13, 10 Oct): df,dc,jd,fj,fj → 8 of Hearts
Green: Not much to say here. Move “di”
Blue: “di” is correct. Taking a turnover in column 9 is horrible, exposing another Ace and destroying flexibility.
Red: “di” is obvious. The real decision probably comes later when we have no more turnovers and must improve as much as possible before dealing a new row.
Actual play (decision 14, 12 Oct): di → 2 of Spades
Actual play (decision 15, 13 Oct): dh → K of Diamonds (trivial)
Somebody (sotto vote): rot13(shpx)!
Blue: Who said that? Not me! I vote “gb,gd,fg”. Two (potential) empty columns are better than one!
Green: Me neither. “gb,gd,ag,ae” is a strong alternative – as is often the case we can “sell” an empty column for a turnover plus an in-suit build. It also makes future turnovers in column 1 easier. We could build in-suit with 3s-2s in column 9 but at the cost of exposing the Ace of Diamonds. I don’t like that at all.
Red: I didn’t say rot13(shpx). I vote “gj,gd,fg,ch” – may as well build in-suit in Spades before we forget to do it later! This wins an extra turnover if the next card is a Six. If it’s not a Six then we at least retain the option of “be” next turn, which may be useful once the Kings and Jacks which are very likely to appear soon.
Actual play (decision 16, 15 Oct): gb,gd,fg → 9 of Hearts (SA and Bart go with Blue)
Blue: Great card! But we still have to take maximum advantage of our strong position. I like the simple “gf,jg”
Red: “gf,jg” for me also. I don’t like “gf,dg” because shifting a King negates the advantage of digging in a column with two face-down cards.
Green: Groupthink wins this time. With two empty columns we are not forced into a last-minute decision re columns 1 or 9. I also vote “gf,jg”.
Actual play (decision 17, 17 Oct): fa,ga,ea,ef → 4 of Hearts (Bart’ choice. SA suggested fa,af,ae, but Random Number Generator likes Bart’s choice)
Green: I vote “eb”
Blue: Not much argument. “ib,ie” is horrible, exposing an Ace just for the sake of tidying up the 3-2 of Spades. “eb” it is.
Red: Not to mention that loses the option of “gd”. I also vote “eb”. Note that we don’t lose the option of “ba” since we still have a Six in column 10.
Actual play (decision 18, 19 Oct): eb → 10 of Spades (too easy)
Green: I vote “eg”. It’s tempting to tidy up with “hb”, but then we risk polluting a column that doesn’t contain a king. Better to play long-term instead of cashing in a few in-suit builds.
Red: “hb, he, hf, hg, fh, eh, ef” for me. If the next card rot13(fhpxf) then we must take the opportunity to tidy up Q-J-T of Hearts now or never. Also, we are more likely to draw a Seven than a Three. Obviously we must break T-9 of Spades in case the next card is a Jack.
Blue: I like “hb, he, hf, hg, fh, eh, ah, af, ah”. This tidies up 7-6-5 in Spades and prepares to turn over many cards in Column 1 in the near future. The Five of Spades is useful since we are more likely to draw a Four than a Six.
Actual play (decision 19, 21 Oct): hb, he, hf, hg, fh, eh, ef → 4 of Clubs.
Let’s see what the Kolorfull Kibitzers have to say:
Red: And it’s all over, bar the shouting and last-minute tidying up before dealing the next round. I vote “ie, cb, ah”
Blue: “ie, cb” is obvious and “ah” is good since we wanna increase our chances of getting that precious 5 of Spades. But what about adding “ec”? Probably not a good idea since if we get an off-suit Ace we would rather have junk on column 3 than column 5. “ie, cb, ah” it is.
Green: There may be some point in omitting “ah” on the theory that if we manage to shift the T-9-8-7 then we automatically get an in-suit build plus turnover in column 1. But that’s probably too clever by half if you pardon the terrible cliché. I’ll go with “ie, cb, ah” and leave the too-clever-by-half analysis to SA and Bart!
Actual play (decision 20, 23 Oct): ie, cb, ah → deal cards
And that completes the round. Round 1 summary and next round coming soon!