Inside the Mind of a Scrabble Grandmaster: My Epic Battle for Word Dominance! 

It's definitely growing. I remember when I first watched there were fewer than 500 people and now he is past 2k and will likely be at 3k before long.

You love to see it 😅

Interesting you mention missing the sound effect. For the first part of that game, I did have the sound level down at 12% (my headphone settings) rather than >70% without them. That is partly to blame for the faux pas, also, I am not used to commentating while I play, so that also contributed.

I just watched this by spiliting screen and pausing for each turn. Could have put one on tablet and other on phone, will do next viewing. Time delay by forgetting your turn did you.

Yeah I figured the missed bingos was due to time pressure

@@Firefly256 A lot of the bonuses were incredibly tough bingos, especially for the rating level he is at. Not sure I can excuse INTROLD or TRINDLE/TENDRIL though as they are insanely high probability. However, the others were definitely not intuitive.

Correction: 5 missed bingos. Yeah, I did have a good chance in that game, Some decent racks. I have no-one to blame but myself for the time issues. Regardless, David played a great game, and made the most of some iffy racks.

@@EoinJackson Wish most Scrabblers were as pragmatic about it as you. They normally just blame the other player for being 'lucky' 😂

@@AllThisOverASliceOfGabagool I am under no illusions, Barry! 😉 I have uploaded my own video (in the style of Dweebo) showing the same game from my perspective. It is the latest upload on my channel, for anyone interested in watching the same game again!)

isc.ro

if his crossword videos are any indication, sometimes he doesn't know what the rare words mean. "a KIST is... well, it's certainly a valid word. does it mean ARK? I think it must do." - Dweeb, trying to guess [ark from the north]

It's already a difficult enough task playing and ensuring what he plays is valid etc without definitions lol. And a lot of Scrabblers don't learn by definition, they just know whether the root word may be an adjective, noun, verb or other. However, if you cross reference the words played with a study tool like Collins Zyzzyva (version 5.2.0), it will give you the definition plus any hooks that the words may take in front or behind 🙂 I'm not saying definitions aren't useful. Some definitely help. Little example - BLOATED has an anagram - LOBATED. However, in the same block of 100 word based on probability there is OBLATES. So how do you make sure you play LOBATED and not OBLATED*, and OBLATES but not LOBATES*? By knowing that an OBLATE is a person who is dedicated to religious work. Although it can be confusing because OBLATELY and LOBATELY are both good. Dictionaries have all sorts of inconsistencies and one just has to store the peculiarities in the deepest depths of their filing cabinets in their mind 🙂 What Dweeb *could* do if he wanted to act on your feedback, is perhaps do popups on the screen when doing the analysis, to show what the definition is if it is a non-standard word. Apologies for the War and Peace. Just trying to give a perspective on why it isn't as simple as one may think to just define words on the fly. 🙂