Back to Consensus Games

From: MBaron1949@aol.com
Date: Mon, 2 Feb 1998 23:52:54 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: Re: Consensus Game #1, Turn #5
Message-id: <980202235252_1457516009@mrin54>

Marlon,

Pardon me for piggybacking onto your piggyback:

MB>1. CU(L)LIONS (3f, 72 pts): Does not allow a fairly easy 30+ 
MB>   point comeback at h1. No S end-hook.
MB>2. COUSINL(Y) (3f, 72): 8s off L or (Y) less likely than N or S 
MB>   of CUL(L)IONS. Do not like the prospects of AQUA (42) or a 
MB>   simple DRUM (30) at h1.
MH>Sorry, Mike for piggybacking your post.  COUSINLy gets my vote.
MH>Mike is being stingy.  Allow your opp to burn three or four tiles
MH>in column H if he/she will.  Maybe they won't.  The Ly to play thru
MH>is better than the NS (as noted above).
I would suggest that the, pardon the expression, odds...of the opponent half-burning you (30+ points) at h1 after COUSINLY are more than twice as great as the opponent full-burning you (60+ points) thru the N or S of CULLIONS.

no sims me,
Mike

PS: Condidential to MH: In a separate post, you offered: >I meant no personal insult to anyone who is 'pro spread bonus'. >But, whenever you (plural) look at things and do not see a problem >where one exists (and it is pointed out to you in 'harsh terms'), >your hurt little feelings are your problem. Help 'em cope, Mike. Just how much pro bono work can I guy do!? ;) BTW, Marlon, your next appointment is scheduled for...Oops! Did I cc CGP? I was kidding! Marlon uses my services on a drop-in, not scheduled, basis. :)