Like any change, the on-line court reservation system that was installed at the DAC just over 2 years ago (Game Time) was welcomed and embraced by many, and met with some frowns and skepticism from others. As all new systems, we had some initial teething problems but I now cannot recall the last time a member complained about it. While most of you are already well versed in booking your own court, it appears that a couple of the features offered are not being utilized which could help you find that extra competitive squash match you may be seeking.
On the front page of the squash reservation spreadsheet, you will find a tab titled ‘Game Seeker’. Game Seeker is a notice board that allows you to post a message advertising that you are looking for a game. You can list the day and time you would like to play, and the level of player you would like to play against. (If you are not sure what level you are, please come and ask me! Beginners generally start with a 2.0 rating, the top club level players are rated 5.5.) Next to the ‘Game Seeker’ tab is a number in parentheses. This indicates how many Game Seeker requests have been posted. To accept a request, simply click on the member’s name and a box will pop up with their contact information allowing you to send them an e-mail. The court must be booked separately.
Another way to announce that you are looking for a partner is to book a court at the time you wish to play, and in place of adding on a second player, click the option to ‘Request Extra Players For’. You will need to click the ‘Singles’ box to activate the request. You can also click the ‘Friends Only’ box, which means only members on your ‘friends list’ can accept the request. (You can make up your ‘friends list’ in your own personal profile under the ‘My Friends’ heading.) The court booking will appear on the spreadsheet in orange. If you did not click the ‘Friends Only’ box, any member can add themselves to the booking. This also works for the Doubles Squash. Please make sure that if you choose to seek a partner this way, that you cancel the court if you do not find a game!
Last but not least, do not forget about the ranking! Under the ‘Game Seeker’ tab, you will find the ‘Ladders’ link. This is actually the club ranking. All of your league, box ladder and Club Championship matches have been entered into the ladder since June 2008. The ranking works very simply—if you beat someone higher than yourself, you take their position and everybody in-between shuffles down one spot. Click on your name—you will see every match listed that you have played. You can also challenge players above you! Is your buddy ranked too high?
The system is programmed to follow the rules: You cannot reserve a court during peak time if you are playing guest and it will not allow you to reserve two time slots during any promise time period. It is extremely important that you reserve a court every single time you play – even if the all the courts are open. We follow court usage very closely and it only helps the squash program to grow. Additionally, it is also essential that you cancel your court if you do not wish to use it. The courts are becoming busier every season and everybody needs to respect their fellow members. Nothing is more frustrating than not being able to reserve a court because they are booked up but then finding them open when you then walk through the club.
Thursday, August 12, 2010
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Doubling Up in London
Every now and then, a weekend comes along that you end up talking and reminiscing about for a long time. For those of you that remember this year’s DAC Classic Tournament and the large contingent that ventured down from London, Ontario, you’ll recall that they, a) really love their squash, b) really love their socializing and c) are pretty handy at both. Since the summer is slow, it makes it the perfect time to visit our friends for a casual game of doubles and a couple of casual drinks… or two… or three… or four…
The morning drive to London swept through picturesque landscape, and included a tour through the “Town of the White Squirrel”. Stu explained to us that the squirrels are in fact as white as snow. We kept a keen eye out for this legendary (folkloric?) extraordinary creature, but alas they stayed hidden. I then wondered how much Stu really drank the night before…
---------Me, on the far left. I played with Andrew Mount (far right). We played against their club champions and lost.
Overall, doubles squash in London is of a very high standard. Considering it is stronger than even Windsor, it leaves us for dead. During the day John, Chris, Stu and Mike mixed it up with their members and they all received exactly what they were after: tough, competitive matches. The informal set-up of the squash was also appreciating. No set matches, no set teams, no set times. Play as much or as little as you like, and there was always someone at hand to jump on court and make a foursome. Kudos to their pro – Andrew Mount – who invited the ideal standard of player for us, all of whom had the personality to match. It was a brilliant day that left everybody satisfied. Not that we were keeping score, but at the end of the squash, Stu managed to point out that he was the only DAC member that won a match. Again, I wondered how much he really drank the night before…
---------John Dunwoody (second from the right)
What made the day special was how their members looked after us. Our glasses were bottomless and our stomachs were also taken care of. We capped the day off at the pub 100 yards away with burgers and beer before making our way back to Stu’s cottage.
London is a two hour drive from Detroit. This adventure will be repeated next summer.
.
.
… hic!
London’s annual event – the Nash Cup – only runs singles categories. (It is on the first week of October this year. I will definitely be notifying you when registrations open.) So I suggested to a couple of our doubles players that we should get together and head to London for a relaxed day of doubles against their members. The London Squash Racquets Club is a key club, and just has squash. Four international singles, one hardball singles, and one doubles court. It’s small, but it has an atmosphere of alluring friendliness. It’s almost as if a magical power overcomes you when you enter the building that entrances you to sit and drink. John Dunwoody, Chris Terry and Stu Boynton jumped at the idea. We invited our good comrade Mike Counsman to join us who many of you know and is as loveable as Fozzie Bear but nowhere near as cute.
The Friday night was spent at Stu Boynton’s house in Bayfield – about an hour away from London. A beautiful cottage close to the lake surrounded by nature, it was large enough to accommodate all of us marvelously comfortably. Spoiled beyond what we were worth, we ate his food and drank his liquor until somebody had a momentary lapse of clear thinking and suggested we better get some shut-eye for our big squash challenge the next day. It was already the next day.
London’s annual event – the Nash Cup – only runs singles categories. (It is on the first week of October this year. I will definitely be notifying you when registrations open.) So I suggested to a couple of our doubles players that we should get together and head to London for a relaxed day of doubles against their members. The London Squash Racquets Club is a key club, and just has squash. Four international singles, one hardball singles, and one doubles court. It’s small, but it has an atmosphere of alluring friendliness. It’s almost as if a magical power overcomes you when you enter the building that entrances you to sit and drink. John Dunwoody, Chris Terry and Stu Boynton jumped at the idea. We invited our good comrade Mike Counsman to join us who many of you know and is as loveable as Fozzie Bear but nowhere near as cute.
The Friday night was spent at Stu Boynton’s house in Bayfield – about an hour away from London. A beautiful cottage close to the lake surrounded by nature, it was large enough to accommodate all of us marvelously comfortably. Spoiled beyond what we were worth, we ate his food and drank his liquor until somebody had a momentary lapse of clear thinking and suggested we better get some shut-eye for our big squash challenge the next day. It was already the next day.
---------Stu Boynton (second from the right)
The morning drive to London swept through picturesque landscape, and included a tour through the “Town of the White Squirrel”. Stu explained to us that the squirrels are in fact as white as snow. We kept a keen eye out for this legendary (folkloric?) extraordinary creature, but alas they stayed hidden. I then wondered how much Stu really drank the night before…
---------Me, on the far left. I played with Andrew Mount (far right). We played against their club champions and lost.
Overall, doubles squash in London is of a very high standard. Considering it is stronger than even Windsor, it leaves us for dead. During the day John, Chris, Stu and Mike mixed it up with their members and they all received exactly what they were after: tough, competitive matches. The informal set-up of the squash was also appreciating. No set matches, no set teams, no set times. Play as much or as little as you like, and there was always someone at hand to jump on court and make a foursome. Kudos to their pro – Andrew Mount – who invited the ideal standard of player for us, all of whom had the personality to match. It was a brilliant day that left everybody satisfied. Not that we were keeping score, but at the end of the squash, Stu managed to point out that he was the only DAC member that won a match. Again, I wondered how much he really drank the night before…
---------John Dunwoody (second from the right)What made the day special was how their members looked after us. Our glasses were bottomless and our stomachs were also taken care of. We capped the day off at the pub 100 yards away with burgers and beer before making our way back to Stu’s cottage.
London is a two hour drive from Detroit. This adventure will be repeated next summer.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Interfering with the Interference Rule
I recently posted an article discussing the etiquette required for players to help deal with the ‘let’ rule whilst playing
(See: http://thesquashjoint.blogspot.com/2010/07/let-it-be.html). Just imagine the carnage if the following rule was implemented at the DAC…
…Most of you are aware that squash has been desperately trying to get included into the Olympic Games. Whether or not it should be is a discussion for another day, but many believe that one of the reasons it did not get accepted on the 2016 schedule was (amongst other things) because of the ‘confusing’ issue of having to understand different scoring systems. Some tournaments used the hand-in-hand-out scoring to 9; some used the point-a-rally (PAR) to 15; some used the point-a-rally to 11. In order to keep it uniform, most national bodies adopted the point-a-rally to 11 as the sanctioned scoring hoping it would satisfy the Olympic committee. It did not. (All international men’s and women’s squash events now use PAR to 11.) Another issue blamed for the rejection was the ‘let’ - or interference – rule.
Criticism has been leveled towards players for excessive amounts of blocking, arguing, and interrupting the flow of the game with constant appeals for ‘lets’. These regular disruptions subtract from the enjoyment of the sport for the casual spectator – or so some of the experts say. The first question that springs to my mind is: Squash has a casual spectator? It’s not like baseball, or football, or even tennis. I have never heard anyone walking down the street or in a bar say, “Hey, I think I’ll pop down to the courts to catch that squash match” or “what channel is the Ashour / Matthew match on?” or “how much is that scalper asking for those Palmer – El Hindi tickets?” People who watch squash matches and actually go to pro events are generally squash players themselves and can appreciate the game for what it is. The casual spectator is normally that guy who has been sent from his company because they are sponsoring the event and someone needs to show their face and he wouldn’t be able to tell a great squash match from a bad one if it kicked him in the backside.
When you have two players covering the same area of floor, chasing a ball, constantly changing direction with racquets swinging, guess what? Interference is inevitable. At the pro level, players are fitter, faster, more skillful, and hit the ball harder than ever before. Rule changes have already been implemented over the past number of years to make the game more exciting including lowering the tin from 19 inches to 17, and changing the scoring system. I think both of those changes have worked wonders for the sport. It is more athletic, dynamic, and a lot more exciting to watch than what it used to be. But apparently, this isn’t enough.
Now, the ‘let’ rule itself is in the firing line. Trials have already taken place in exhibition events in the US that limited the amount of ‘let’ calls a player could make during a match. They got five. That’s it – five. The idea was to force the players to a) clear the ball better for their opponents to get to it, and b) play through minimal interference instead of stopping and asking for a ‘let’. In theory, a terrific idea. The changes gave each player 5 ‘lets’ per match. If a player requested a ‘let’ and received one, they then had 4 left. If they received a ‘stroke’ or a ‘no let’, they still had their 5 ‘lets’ to use. Once they used up their 5 ‘lets’, the only decision the referee could make if they asked for a future ‘let’ was either a ‘stroke’ or ‘no let’.
The 5-let rule received top grades from the exhibition tournaments – although I don’t know who graded it. The organizer? The players? The spectators? So successful was it that next season they will be experimenting with a no ‘let’ rule. That means all ‘let’ calls will be decided with either ‘stroke’ or ‘no let’! Replaying the rally will not be an option at all. The brains behind this radical idea suggests that the American spectator does not want ‘do-overs’ in sports. They want a point awarded to somebody after every rally. Really? Let’s agree that is true, but has squash become so riddled with ‘lets’ that the spectators are crying for change and eliminating them altogether will improve the quality of the spectacle? He goes on to compare squash to the NBA, NFL, and MLB that are constantly changing the rules to further enrich the audience’s experience. Comparing squash to these sports is like comparing apples to a bowl of cold soup. They could not be more different: team sports of such monumental following that do not comprise of individual rallies. (By the way, the MLB is littered with ‘do-overs’. How many 2-strike foul balls require the pitcher to re-pitch?)
Here are some issues I have with the no ‘let’ rule:
1. Aren’t there situations in squash where both players are equally to blame for the interference? Now the referee will have to penalize a player anyway.
2. It will encourage more arguments. A player will protest more vehemently for ‘strokes’ or ‘no lets’.
3. It will make the game rougher and more dangerous. If a player does not have a ‘lets’ to ask for, they are suddenly forced to push through ‘minimal’ interference that would normally be a ‘let’ situation in order to reach the ball. More pushing, more contact, more injuries.
4. This will not improve decision making. Referees still have to make a call. They will not suddenly become more ‘enlightened’ to the interpretation.
5. Referees will feel inclined to make ‘strong’ decisions for ordinary situations. ‘Lets’ will be turn into something else, the referee will be able to influence the outcome of matches more evidently. Referees should not be noticed during a match or determine outcomes.
6. There are already rules in place to deal with blocking, arguing, and all the issues this new rule wants to eliminate. It’s in the rule book.
So what is the answer? No matter what way you tinker with the rules, it still comes down to one common denominator: the referee. The problem, it seems, is just that. Referees have been too lenient on player dissent, too lenient on blocking, too lenient on minimal interference. If the referee did their job properly and consistently in the first place, they would minimize the disputes and keep the play flowing, and it wouldn’t even be a discussion. Squash bodies should get together to train better referees. Make them professional. Pay them. Maybe retired players would be willing to make it a career if the money is attractive enough. Plus, no one knows and can interpret the game better than the players themselves. But instead of addressing that problem – because that would cost money, time and effort – they are addressing the symptoms.
I have not seen the rule in action (or the original 5-let rule), so all of my concerns are based purely on speculation. Even though the rule changes were hailed as a screaming success, it’s coming off exhibition tournaments where nothing was really at stake. I’m not suggesting the players didn’t go flat out to win, but they would have played in flippers if paid to do so. I am unmistakably skeptical this would work at professional world ranking tournaments.
As a club player, I wouldn’t be worried. I doubt this will ever get past the experimental stage. Can you imagine the heated ‘disagreements’ on court if the no ‘let’ rule was in place here? We’d need a medic on constant stand-by. I am a little surprised that this is even a topic worthy of such drastic measures. Interference is part of the game and rules are in place to deal with them already. It’s a matter of enforcing those rules more effectively. In any case, I think spectators like controversy. Everyone loves to watch a car wreck during a race. Everyone loved to watch McEnroe blow a gasket. Jon Power was popular not just for his racquet skills, but for his quick mouth and wit as well. Spectators want characters on court; they need a hero to cheer for, and a villain to cheer against. Yes, the amount of blocking and arguing can get excessive during a match on the odd occasion, but isn’t that the same in all sports? And it isn’t as if it happens all the time, in fact I bet it’s a tiny minority of matches that are guilty of it. So improve the standard of referee, rather than change the rules to accommodate for the deficiency of it.
(See: http://thesquashjoint.blogspot.com/2010/07/let-it-be.html). Just imagine the carnage if the following rule was implemented at the DAC…
…Most of you are aware that squash has been desperately trying to get included into the Olympic Games. Whether or not it should be is a discussion for another day, but many believe that one of the reasons it did not get accepted on the 2016 schedule was (amongst other things) because of the ‘confusing’ issue of having to understand different scoring systems. Some tournaments used the hand-in-hand-out scoring to 9; some used the point-a-rally (PAR) to 15; some used the point-a-rally to 11. In order to keep it uniform, most national bodies adopted the point-a-rally to 11 as the sanctioned scoring hoping it would satisfy the Olympic committee. It did not. (All international men’s and women’s squash events now use PAR to 11.) Another issue blamed for the rejection was the ‘let’ - or interference – rule.
Criticism has been leveled towards players for excessive amounts of blocking, arguing, and interrupting the flow of the game with constant appeals for ‘lets’. These regular disruptions subtract from the enjoyment of the sport for the casual spectator – or so some of the experts say. The first question that springs to my mind is: Squash has a casual spectator? It’s not like baseball, or football, or even tennis. I have never heard anyone walking down the street or in a bar say, “Hey, I think I’ll pop down to the courts to catch that squash match” or “what channel is the Ashour / Matthew match on?” or “how much is that scalper asking for those Palmer – El Hindi tickets?” People who watch squash matches and actually go to pro events are generally squash players themselves and can appreciate the game for what it is. The casual spectator is normally that guy who has been sent from his company because they are sponsoring the event and someone needs to show their face and he wouldn’t be able to tell a great squash match from a bad one if it kicked him in the backside.
When you have two players covering the same area of floor, chasing a ball, constantly changing direction with racquets swinging, guess what? Interference is inevitable. At the pro level, players are fitter, faster, more skillful, and hit the ball harder than ever before. Rule changes have already been implemented over the past number of years to make the game more exciting including lowering the tin from 19 inches to 17, and changing the scoring system. I think both of those changes have worked wonders for the sport. It is more athletic, dynamic, and a lot more exciting to watch than what it used to be. But apparently, this isn’t enough.
Now, the ‘let’ rule itself is in the firing line. Trials have already taken place in exhibition events in the US that limited the amount of ‘let’ calls a player could make during a match. They got five. That’s it – five. The idea was to force the players to a) clear the ball better for their opponents to get to it, and b) play through minimal interference instead of stopping and asking for a ‘let’. In theory, a terrific idea. The changes gave each player 5 ‘lets’ per match. If a player requested a ‘let’ and received one, they then had 4 left. If they received a ‘stroke’ or a ‘no let’, they still had their 5 ‘lets’ to use. Once they used up their 5 ‘lets’, the only decision the referee could make if they asked for a future ‘let’ was either a ‘stroke’ or ‘no let’.
The 5-let rule received top grades from the exhibition tournaments – although I don’t know who graded it. The organizer? The players? The spectators? So successful was it that next season they will be experimenting with a no ‘let’ rule. That means all ‘let’ calls will be decided with either ‘stroke’ or ‘no let’! Replaying the rally will not be an option at all. The brains behind this radical idea suggests that the American spectator does not want ‘do-overs’ in sports. They want a point awarded to somebody after every rally. Really? Let’s agree that is true, but has squash become so riddled with ‘lets’ that the spectators are crying for change and eliminating them altogether will improve the quality of the spectacle? He goes on to compare squash to the NBA, NFL, and MLB that are constantly changing the rules to further enrich the audience’s experience. Comparing squash to these sports is like comparing apples to a bowl of cold soup. They could not be more different: team sports of such monumental following that do not comprise of individual rallies. (By the way, the MLB is littered with ‘do-overs’. How many 2-strike foul balls require the pitcher to re-pitch?)
Here are some issues I have with the no ‘let’ rule:
1. Aren’t there situations in squash where both players are equally to blame for the interference? Now the referee will have to penalize a player anyway.
2. It will encourage more arguments. A player will protest more vehemently for ‘strokes’ or ‘no lets’.
3. It will make the game rougher and more dangerous. If a player does not have a ‘lets’ to ask for, they are suddenly forced to push through ‘minimal’ interference that would normally be a ‘let’ situation in order to reach the ball. More pushing, more contact, more injuries.
4. This will not improve decision making. Referees still have to make a call. They will not suddenly become more ‘enlightened’ to the interpretation.
5. Referees will feel inclined to make ‘strong’ decisions for ordinary situations. ‘Lets’ will be turn into something else, the referee will be able to influence the outcome of matches more evidently. Referees should not be noticed during a match or determine outcomes.
6. There are already rules in place to deal with blocking, arguing, and all the issues this new rule wants to eliminate. It’s in the rule book.
So what is the answer? No matter what way you tinker with the rules, it still comes down to one common denominator: the referee. The problem, it seems, is just that. Referees have been too lenient on player dissent, too lenient on blocking, too lenient on minimal interference. If the referee did their job properly and consistently in the first place, they would minimize the disputes and keep the play flowing, and it wouldn’t even be a discussion. Squash bodies should get together to train better referees. Make them professional. Pay them. Maybe retired players would be willing to make it a career if the money is attractive enough. Plus, no one knows and can interpret the game better than the players themselves. But instead of addressing that problem – because that would cost money, time and effort – they are addressing the symptoms.
I have not seen the rule in action (or the original 5-let rule), so all of my concerns are based purely on speculation. Even though the rule changes were hailed as a screaming success, it’s coming off exhibition tournaments where nothing was really at stake. I’m not suggesting the players didn’t go flat out to win, but they would have played in flippers if paid to do so. I am unmistakably skeptical this would work at professional world ranking tournaments.
As a club player, I wouldn’t be worried. I doubt this will ever get past the experimental stage. Can you imagine the heated ‘disagreements’ on court if the no ‘let’ rule was in place here? We’d need a medic on constant stand-by. I am a little surprised that this is even a topic worthy of such drastic measures. Interference is part of the game and rules are in place to deal with them already. It’s a matter of enforcing those rules more effectively. In any case, I think spectators like controversy. Everyone loves to watch a car wreck during a race. Everyone loved to watch McEnroe blow a gasket. Jon Power was popular not just for his racquet skills, but for his quick mouth and wit as well. Spectators want characters on court; they need a hero to cheer for, and a villain to cheer against. Yes, the amount of blocking and arguing can get excessive during a match on the odd occasion, but isn’t that the same in all sports? And it isn’t as if it happens all the time, in fact I bet it’s a tiny minority of matches that are guilty of it. So improve the standard of referee, rather than change the rules to accommodate for the deficiency of it.
Friday, July 30, 2010
“SOUR GRAPES” TAKE A SWEET VICTORY
So much for my prediction. Although, in my defense, the “Pickled Onions” dug their own grave handing their opponents two forfeits. Including those two results, they lost just as many matches in the final as they did all season long. But it’s all part of the deal – the “Sour Grapes” turned up, played hard, and ended up deserved winners.
It was a disappointing finish to the season when you consider the forfeits having such a large impact on the final result, but such circumstances can arise and unfortunately for the “Pickled Onions”, they came up at exactly the wrong time.
Paul Flan
agan (“Sour Grapes”) [pictured left] gave his team just the start they needed with a 2-1 win over Peter Fortune (“Pickled Onions”) – the reverse result from when they played in the regular season just 2 weeks earlier. Each team required one sub in the line-up, and both of the subs won their matches 2-1, cancelling each other out. Then both Jason Trombley and Brandon Dobbins (“Pickled Onions”) chalked up 3-0 triumphs to give their team a strong advantage. However, the two forfeits did them in. The lead wasn’t large enough and the “Sour Grapes” leapfrogged them to take the Summer League title 16-14.
Congratulations to: Taylor Burleson; Brian Schrage; Mike McCuish; Todd Baker; Paul Flanagan; Mark Allen; Andy Adamo; Paul Huth.
The Boasters League starts the first week in October so you have a couple of months to rest up and get ready... or come see me and work on your game! We can only take 99 players, so make sure you get registered early.
It was a disappointing finish to the season when you consider the forfeits having such a large impact on the final result, but such circumstances can arise and unfortunately for the “Pickled Onions”, they came up at exactly the wrong time.
Paul Flan
agan (“Sour Grapes”) [pictured left] gave his team just the start they needed with a 2-1 win over Peter Fortune (“Pickled Onions”) – the reverse result from when they played in the regular season just 2 weeks earlier. Each team required one sub in the line-up, and both of the subs won their matches 2-1, cancelling each other out. Then both Jason Trombley and Brandon Dobbins (“Pickled Onions”) chalked up 3-0 triumphs to give their team a strong advantage. However, the two forfeits did them in. The lead wasn’t large enough and the “Sour Grapes” leapfrogged them to take the Summer League title 16-14.Congratulations to: Taylor Burleson; Brian Schrage; Mike McCuish; Todd Baker; Paul Flanagan; Mark Allen; Andy Adamo; Paul Huth.
The Boasters League starts the first week in October so you have a couple of months to rest up and get ready... or come see me and work on your game! We can only take 99 players, so make sure you get registered early.
Monday, July 26, 2010
“Let” It Be
We all know it: Squash is a brutal sport. It’s vicious on the body, cruel on the lungs, challenging on the mind, yet somehow when all of these aspects are melded together, it’s emphatically euphoric and addicting. We suffer through the agony of oxygen deprivation, the misery of lactic acid build up, the torture of sore muscles and joints, and keep on coming back for more and more. However, as much as we all admit to being squash junkies, the one single theme that members grumble to me more about than anything else is… refereeing.
Never do I see our members get more incensed with each other than when arguing over a ‘let’ call. Since you play just about every single match at the DAC without a ref, I am often called in to make a decision over a situation I haven’t even witnessed, based on the ‘biased’ testimonies of both players pleading their cases and are unable to even agree where they were standing on the court at the time of the interference, let alone where the ball was. The “he-said-she-said” conflicts are literally impossible to resolve, especially when both players are as stubborn as my wife who insists on putting broccoli into every meal. And this happens during practice matches as much as it does in league.
Ultimately, the only solution to this ‘dilemma’ lies with you, the player. The ‘unwritten’ rules of squash have to apply here, etiquette needs to take over, honesty must come to the fore, and compromise is a requirement. Otherwise, the player who can shout louder for longer will win.
You all know when your opponent is in your way and prevents you from making a ‘normal’ shot. You hold back with your swing or you have to run around them or you have to change your aim; either way, some form of interference has occurred. Given that you would have retrieved the ball had your opponent not been standing there, you are at least entitled to a “let”. When the shoe is on the other foot - you are the one causing interference - arguing that you are not, is entirely futile. The “let” would not have been asked for in the first place if your opponent didn’t think you were in the way. So the ‘discussion’ is one of “let” or “stroke”.
I am not getting into the written rules of squash – to learn more about the ‘real’ rules, I will be conducting a refereeing clinic late September. This is about avoiding the heated debates that go on court all the time and cause nothing but bad sentiments and leave a nasty taste in the mouth afterwards.
Squash is ruthless enough without having the added burden of having to make a case after every other rally. Even if interference is slight, squash etiquette demands that the gentleman thing to do would be to offer your opponent the “let” or, if the obstruction was severe enough, a “stroke”. Your (hopefully honest) opponent would then either take one or the other, or decline a “let” altogether if they think they didn’t deserve one. Using this tactic – a ‘preemptive strike’ so to speak - should circumvent any squabbles that otherwise may arise. Generally, compromises are reached quickly and painlessly. You may think to yourself that you have been ‘robbed’, but always understand that how you see the circumstance from your angle is not the same as how your opponent sees it from theirs. What makes you think that your angle is the correct one?
From my own personal experience, practicing with fellow pros, this happens all the time. Almost to the point of being too nice about it, but it keeps the game flowing, the disputes non-existent, and the camaraderie alive. And I can always count on being asked to play again when the opportunity presents itself. Because no one wants to play you if continuously butt heads and carry-on like a four year old every time a “let” situation pops up.
The attached poster is a list of the DAC 20 Commandments of Squash Etiquette. Common sense stuff? Sure. But I am sure all of you have seen at one time or another at least one of these rules broken. How many are you guilty of?
Never do I see our members get more incensed with each other than when arguing over a ‘let’ call. Since you play just about every single match at the DAC without a ref, I am often called in to make a decision over a situation I haven’t even witnessed, based on the ‘biased’ testimonies of both players pleading their cases and are unable to even agree where they were standing on the court at the time of the interference, let alone where the ball was. The “he-said-she-said” conflicts are literally impossible to resolve, especially when both players are as stubborn as my wife who insists on putting broccoli into every meal. And this happens during practice matches as much as it does in league.
Ultimately, the only solution to this ‘dilemma’ lies with you, the player. The ‘unwritten’ rules of squash have to apply here, etiquette needs to take over, honesty must come to the fore, and compromise is a requirement. Otherwise, the player who can shout louder for longer will win.
You all know when your opponent is in your way and prevents you from making a ‘normal’ shot. You hold back with your swing or you have to run around them or you have to change your aim; either way, some form of interference has occurred. Given that you would have retrieved the ball had your opponent not been standing there, you are at least entitled to a “let”. When the shoe is on the other foot - you are the one causing interference - arguing that you are not, is entirely futile. The “let” would not have been asked for in the first place if your opponent didn’t think you were in the way. So the ‘discussion’ is one of “let” or “stroke”.
I am not getting into the written rules of squash – to learn more about the ‘real’ rules, I will be conducting a refereeing clinic late September. This is about avoiding the heated debates that go on court all the time and cause nothing but bad sentiments and leave a nasty taste in the mouth afterwards.
Squash is ruthless enough without having the added burden of having to make a case after every other rally. Even if interference is slight, squash etiquette demands that the gentleman thing to do would be to offer your opponent the “let” or, if the obstruction was severe enough, a “stroke”. Your (hopefully honest) opponent would then either take one or the other, or decline a “let” altogether if they think they didn’t deserve one. Using this tactic – a ‘preemptive strike’ so to speak - should circumvent any squabbles that otherwise may arise. Generally, compromises are reached quickly and painlessly. You may think to yourself that you have been ‘robbed’, but always understand that how you see the circumstance from your angle is not the same as how your opponent sees it from theirs. What makes you think that your angle is the correct one?
From my own personal experience, practicing with fellow pros, this happens all the time. Almost to the point of being too nice about it, but it keeps the game flowing, the disputes non-existent, and the camaraderie alive. And I can always count on being asked to play again when the opportunity presents itself. Because no one wants to play you if continuously butt heads and carry-on like a four year old every time a “let” situation pops up.
The attached poster is a list of the DAC 20 Commandments of Squash Etiquette. Common sense stuff? Sure. But I am sure all of you have seen at one time or another at least one of these rules broken. How many are you guilty of?
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
THEN THERE WERE TWO…
“Bitter Lemons” left feeling sourJust as I predicted it would be, the semi finals were close. Very close. The “Bitter Lemons” and “Sour Grapes” swapped results all the way. Each team won two matches 3-0, and each team won two matches 2-1. The difference? You guessed it: bonus points. One bonus point to be exact. “Sour Grapes” had 6; the “Bitter Lemons”, 5. The one result that sticks out as the ‘difference maker’ was the first result to come in. Todd Baker (“Sour Grapes”) and Tom Fabbri (“Bitter Lemons”) exhausted themselves in the three games they played, leaving it until the last rally to decide the winner. At 14-all in the 3rd, the sudden death point fell Todd’s way. Had it bounced in Tom’s favor, the 18-17 final score line would be reversed. But before Tom starts crying into his golf clubs that it’s his entire fault, I am sure his 7 team mates are also wondering where they could have picked up that extra point! A special mention goes to Mike Rock (“Bitter Lemons”) who is in his first league season. His initiation into the league was met with a resounding 3-0 loss in round 1 to Mike McCuish (“Sour Grapes”). Mike R. can be rather pleased with his improvement and progress and the proof in the pudding showed as he gave Mike M. back all the medicine he dished out by beating him 3-0 this time around.
“Pickled Onions” true to form
The “Pickled Onions” picked up right where they left of at the regular season: refusing to lose any (or very few) matches. Only one loss to speak of in the semi-final and that was Matt Jarboe going down in a rare “Pickled Onions” 3-0 loss (just the second of the season) against Jim Stroh (“Going Bananas”). A surprise result really, considering Matt beat Jim 2-1 in round 5. With 2-1 victories for Rich Stimson, Sean Moran, Peter Fortune and Brian Rosman, that the close results are all landing in the “Pickled Onions” favor are the saving grace for this team. Without these wins – or even if just three of them were reversed – relying on bonus points to get them through would be a failing tactic. Only four of their eight players showed up – something they better be careful of next week for the final.
Prediction
Even if the “Sour Grapes” get all 8 of their members to turn up, I still think the “Pickled Onions” will take the title. If you look back at the regular season result between theses 2 teams, the “Pickled Onions” won 6 of the 8 matches played. In fact they won with an overall score line of 19-9 – more than convincing. Given, four of those results were 2-1, but even reversing all of those wouldn’t make up the difference. I am more than happy to be proved wrong – in either case; I hope it’s closer than the first time around. Also, the finals are a funny beast. Winning when it really counts can have mysterious influences on people.
Monday, July 19, 2010
TEST YOUR BALL CONTROL
Think you can keep your balls down the wall? Can you keep your balls out of the gutter as well? This event is designed to test your athleticism with your ball control! Combining squash and 10-pin bowling, we will assess your ability to manage balls of different sizes, weight and density; your knack of smacking a black rubbery ball and your aptitude of rolling a huge shiny smooth one.
Together with our good friend that lives in the bowels of the DAC - Tom Reaume (Bowling Manager) – on Thursday, August 19 we will be running the “Racquets, Balls & Pins” Tournament. As always, the event is designed for players of all levels. Being placed on one of two teams, you will be matched up with one opponent to play a full best-of-five squash match, and then matched up with another opponent to play 2 games of bowling. Tom and I will do our best to match you up in both events with someone of equal playing level. (Handicaps may be applied if we cannot find an equal challenger.) Don’t fret if you don’t know how to bowl – the concept couldn’t be simpler. Roll (do NOT hit it with your racquet) the big shiny ball down the wooden aisle and knock over as many pins as you can. Easy-peasy.
Every squash game and bowling game won will count towards a point for your team. The team with the most points at the end of the night wins! A keg will be provided. Squash matches will start first at 5pm and then the keg will be bought downstairs for the bowling afterwards. Registration deadline is Monday, August 16. We will need a minimum 14 registrations to run the event. (Depending on the amount of entries, the event may run until 9pm.)
Together with our good friend that lives in the bowels of the DAC - Tom Reaume (Bowling Manager) – on Thursday, August 19 we will be running the “Racquets, Balls & Pins” Tournament. As always, the event is designed for players of all levels. Being placed on one of two teams, you will be matched up with one opponent to play a full best-of-five squash match, and then matched up with another opponent to play 2 games of bowling. Tom and I will do our best to match you up in both events with someone of equal playing level. (Handicaps may be applied if we cannot find an equal challenger.) Don’t fret if you don’t know how to bowl – the concept couldn’t be simpler. Roll (do NOT hit it with your racquet) the big shiny ball down the wooden aisle and knock over as many pins as you can. Easy-peasy.
Every squash game and bowling game won will count towards a point for your team. The team with the most points at the end of the night wins! A keg will be provided. Squash matches will start first at 5pm and then the keg will be bought downstairs for the bowling afterwards. Registration deadline is Monday, August 16. We will need a minimum 14 registrations to run the event. (Depending on the amount of entries, the event may run until 9pm.)
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
SUMMER LEAGUE FINALS SET
Even though a decent amount of matches were played in the final week, it wasn’t exactly a nail biting, stomach fluttering finish to the finals. The only real question to answer was which of two teams were going to end up 4th. The “Fruit Loops” had been threatening “Going Bananas” for that coveted last play-off position for the past 3 rounds, but after making up 10 points alone in round 5, could not make up the remaining 3 points over the last 2 weeks of play. They ended up 6 points out.“Pickled Onions” ended up were they began: on top. They are the first Summer League team in 6 years to score over 100 points. Looking at their regular season record, they must go into the finals as the favorites. The statistics are rather alarming. They only lost 4 matches all season – and only one of those was 3-0. Of the matches they won, 56% of them were 2-1. So they were not wiping the court, but somehow were just refusing to lose. They also rank only 5th in bonus points. This must be the first time that a top team ranks outside the top 4 in that category. Two of their players played every match. Brandon Dobbins won all 7 – one of only two players in the league to do so. (The other was Jeff Gembis from the “Fruit Loops”). Two of their players played 6 of the 7 matches. Those four players made up 81% of the team’s season total. Can they continue to carry the team through? They are matched up against “Going Bananas” in the semi final and on paper a lot of those matches could go either way. Hopefully the rest of “Pickled Onions” turn up to play!
Now for the other end of the spectrum. Believe it or not, the “Blowing Raspberries” played more matches than the “Pickled Onions”. One more. However, compared to the 88% win rate of the league leaders, the “Blowing Raspberries” won only 29%. They also ranked 2nd last in bonus points. Only one player scored more than 10 points, and that player also scored the team’s only 3-0 win.
The team with the least amount of matches played was the “Cold Turkeys”. They managed a meager 51%. The 6, 7, and 8 players accumulated 75% of the team’s season total. Not surprisingly, the “Cold Turkeys” were dead last in bonus points, averaging less than 3 players turning up per week.
Looking at individual efforts, Brandon Dobbins (“Pickled Onions”) picked up the most points overall with 23 and his undefeated effort will definitely earn him a promotion up the ranks next season. Brian Rosman (“Pickled Onions”) and Jeff Gembis (“Fruit Loops”) picked up 22, and Tom Bergh (“Going Bananas”) ended up with 21.
Overall, the participation level of the Summer League this year has been reasonably good compared to previous seasons. Overall we had 67% of matches completed, compared to 59% in 2009 and 63% in 2008. The trend is positive, and although I would never expect a 100% participation rate, there is definitely still room for improvement.
The finals should be interesting. The four teams they got the through are the ones that deserve to be there, and all four have a decent chance of winning – if they play well.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
SPUTTERING TO THE FINALS
There is an obvious lack of urgency from all the teams as the season winds down. Only four – yes, four – matches were played on Monday (plus 2 matches that were played ahead of time), and only 15 players (out of 64) turned up. Much of that had to do with: a) the perfect weather and b) the golf scramble at Forest Lake. Still, I think four matches is a record low and maybe the bottom three teams have already resigned themselves to the fact that they aren’t going to reach the finals (or don’t want to try…)
Of the 6 results handed in, four of them came from the same two teams. The “Cold Turkeys” and the “Fruit Loops” didn’t play any matches at all, but the “Fruit Loops” are still well within striking distance of 4th placed “Going Bananas”, just 3 points back. Next week is the Independence Day weekend, so the final round is not until July 12. Two weeks to get as many matches done as possible – with last’s night attendance, I now wonder (but am ever hopeful!) if players will take advantage.
Brandon Dobbins (“Pickled Onions”) has taken over as the league’s top point getter with 19. He is currently the only player in the league that has played all six rounds and remained undefeated. Brandon also has 5 out of a possible 6 bonus points as well – a true team player! Only Robert Welch (“Rotten Tomatoes”) and Mike McCuish (“Sour Grapes”) have collected all 6 bonus points.
The deadline to complete all the matches is July 13. Let’s make a worthy effort over the next 2 weeks.
Of the 6 results handed in, four of them came from the same two teams. The “Cold Turkeys” and the “Fruit Loops” didn’t play any matches at all, but the “Fruit Loops” are still well within striking distance of 4th placed “Going Bananas”, just 3 points back. Next week is the Independence Day weekend, so the final round is not until July 12. Two weeks to get as many matches done as possible – with last’s night attendance, I now wonder (but am ever hopeful!) if players will take advantage.
Brandon Dobbins (“Pickled Onions”) has taken over as the league’s top point getter with 19. He is currently the only player in the league that has played all six rounds and remained undefeated. Brandon also has 5 out of a possible 6 bonus points as well – a true team player! Only Robert Welch (“Rotten Tomatoes”) and Mike McCuish (“Sour Grapes”) have collected all 6 bonus points.
The deadline to complete all the matches is July 13. Let’s make a worthy effort over the next 2 weeks.
Tuesday, June 22, 2010
FRUIT LOOPS CLOSING THE GAP
At the end of week 4, the “Fruit Loops” were sitting 13 points back from the last play-off spot with little reason to suggest that was going to change over the final 3 rounds. However, they have now put themselves in serious contention for the finals, hanging just 3 points back of 4th placed “Going Bananas”. The same cannot be said for the last 3 teams although they also inched closer overall to the ladder leaders, but nowhere near enough to be considered a threat (yet?).
The “Pickled Onions” continue to impress with their string of victories. They are miles away from being the team with the most matches played – in fact they have the second lowest percentage with 52% – but they have only lost 3 matches all season. The teams with the highest playing percentage (70%) are 1st and 2nd on the standings, plus they have the most bonus points.
In the battle of the league point leaders after round 4, Tom Bergh (“Going Bananas”) went down to Brian Rosman (“Pickled Onions”) 2-1. Brian is still the league’s top point getter, but he now shares that honor with his team mate Peter Fortune, and “Cold Turkey” Chato Hill. The closest match of the evening came down to the final rally. Taylor Burleson (“Sour Grapes”) beat Maureen D’Avanzo (“Rotten Tomatoes”) 15-14 in the 3rd game to claim the 2-1 victory. This is Taylor’s first win for the season! Well done!
Two rounds to play. Many matches to make up. You better start scrambling…!
The “Pickled Onions” continue to impress with their string of victories. They are miles away from being the team with the most matches played – in fact they have the second lowest percentage with 52% – but they have only lost 3 matches all season. The teams with the highest playing percentage (70%) are 1st and 2nd on the standings, plus they have the most bonus points.
In the battle of the league point leaders after round 4, Tom Bergh (“Going Bananas”) went down to Brian Rosman (“Pickled Onions”) 2-1. Brian is still the league’s top point getter, but he now shares that honor with his team mate Peter Fortune, and “Cold Turkey” Chato Hill. The closest match of the evening came down to the final rally. Taylor Burleson (“Sour Grapes”) beat Maureen D’Avanzo (“Rotten Tomatoes”) 15-14 in the 3rd game to claim the 2-1 victory. This is Taylor’s first win for the season! Well done!
Two rounds to play. Many matches to make up. You better start scrambling…!
Monday, June 21, 2010
“Win-Some-&#%$-Timed-Handicap-Quiz” Team Squash Tournament
Wednesday, July 14
Play starts at 5.30pm.
It is said that physical activity helps and inspires the mind to be more active. It facilitates clearer thinking, which in my mind is saying it makes your smarter (nothing like making an absurd conclusion without the support of any facts what-so-ever). Based on the (incredible, but impressive) running I see on court from our members, I am deducing that you are all utter geniuses and have hyperactive grey matters which push the boundaries of known science. Let’s put my perfectly unflawed theory to the test.
Since you are all masterminds, this will be easy to follow. Firstly, you will be placed on to one of two teams. Then, I will match you up with someone of equal squash ability. If no one of equal squash ability is available, you will be matched up against someone of non-equal squash ability. But then I’ll throw in a handicap. Not make you wear a flippers or anything like that, just a point handicap. Then you will play a match of 20 minutes straight. With no rest. Or time-outs. I’ll keep time for you. Even though you are all super intelligent, I won’t make you count the seconds as you play. (The member who asked me a couple of years ago “how long is 20 minutes” is not allowed to enter. You know who you are. Clearly, you are destructive to my infallible theory.) You will however, need to keep your own score. Then, once all the matches have been played, each team will go off in their groups to complete a quiz. The quiz will be based on your familiarity of the DAC, international squash, and general knowledge. Each question on the quiz will be worth a certain amount of points. So far, so good? Keep in mind that a keg will be available and it is of course encouraged that you do your utmost to empty it. Now, rumors have it that drinking alcohol makes you dumber, but I have yet to prove that theory. (Personally, alcohol makes me stronger, more attractive, braver, which of course would positively influence my intelligence.)
Okay. Then, to calculate the scores, I will discard the highest squash point score on each team, add up the rest, which I will then add to the score of the team quiz. The members of the winning team will then be able to choose their prize from the &#%$ table. I have no idea as of yet what &#%$ will be on that table, I will be making a collection of &#%$ over the next couple of weeks to see what type of &#%$ departments want to get rid of. Never know, it might be nice &#%$.
Registration deadline is Monday, July 12. We need a minimum of 14 players to run this event, so please enter early. There is no entry fee. Another brilliant decision.
Play starts at 5.30pm.
It is said that physical activity helps and inspires the mind to be more active. It facilitates clearer thinking, which in my mind is saying it makes your smarter (nothing like making an absurd conclusion without the support of any facts what-so-ever). Based on the (incredible, but impressive) running I see on court from our members, I am deducing that you are all utter geniuses and have hyperactive grey matters which push the boundaries of known science. Let’s put my perfectly unflawed theory to the test.
Since you are all masterminds, this will be easy to follow. Firstly, you will be placed on to one of two teams. Then, I will match you up with someone of equal squash ability. If no one of equal squash ability is available, you will be matched up against someone of non-equal squash ability. But then I’ll throw in a handicap. Not make you wear a flippers or anything like that, just a point handicap. Then you will play a match of 20 minutes straight. With no rest. Or time-outs. I’ll keep time for you. Even though you are all super intelligent, I won’t make you count the seconds as you play. (The member who asked me a couple of years ago “how long is 20 minutes” is not allowed to enter. You know who you are. Clearly, you are destructive to my infallible theory.) You will however, need to keep your own score. Then, once all the matches have been played, each team will go off in their groups to complete a quiz. The quiz will be based on your familiarity of the DAC, international squash, and general knowledge. Each question on the quiz will be worth a certain amount of points. So far, so good? Keep in mind that a keg will be available and it is of course encouraged that you do your utmost to empty it. Now, rumors have it that drinking alcohol makes you dumber, but I have yet to prove that theory. (Personally, alcohol makes me stronger, more attractive, braver, which of course would positively influence my intelligence.)
Okay. Then, to calculate the scores, I will discard the highest squash point score on each team, add up the rest, which I will then add to the score of the team quiz. The members of the winning team will then be able to choose their prize from the &#%$ table. I have no idea as of yet what &#%$ will be on that table, I will be making a collection of &#%$ over the next couple of weeks to see what type of &#%$ departments want to get rid of. Never know, it might be nice &#%$.
Registration deadline is Monday, July 12. We need a minimum of 14 players to run this event, so please enter early. There is no entry fee. Another brilliant decision.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
THE SQUASH POET
Let me introduce you to “The Squash Poet”. I have been sworn to secrecy, (under threat of a painful and uncomfortable ravaging) as not to reveal The Squash Poet’s identity, so please don’t ask me. For some reason that is still a mystery to me, The Squash Poet would like to post some of his work every now and then to “The Squash Joint” (was the similarity of the titles that attracted?) so I thought why not? I’m good for a laugh. Hope you enjoy!
Squash is the one sport we all love to play
Poetry in motion when done the right way
A swift intense dance chasing a ball
Testing body and mind the challenge enthralls
An addiction to squash; I just have to show it
So I come to you incognito as ‘The Squash Poet”.
From years of my struggles and attempting in vain
To hit a good squash ball again and again
My endeavor to master is a fruitless quest
So I pen from experience and watching the best
With permission from Mick, I hope not to disappoint
When he posts my verses to “The Squash Joint”
If some poems sound familiar don’t be impolite
They’ve been posted on the forum of ‘Squash Site’
Feel free to comment your views will be heard
Remember it’s in fun; it’s not meant to anger
My poems will not win any literature prizes
But they’re ten times better than what my squash game comprises!
The Squash Poet
If I Only Had A Brain
(Sung to the tune of “If I only had a Brain” from the Wizard of Oz)
All these matches that I’m losin’
Because of shots I’m choosin’
There’s no one else to blame
I’d be a better fighter
If I only hit it tighter
But I don’t have any brains!
There’s no mystery in the riddle
Why my crosscourts find the middle
My language is profane
The squash ball I can crack it
But it’s straight on to your racquet
Cause I don’t have any brains!
Oh! I’d play like a pro!
The main draws I’d be in
I could swing at balls and pull off a big win
Instead I’d swing… and hit the tin
For my squash pro keeps on messin’
With my footwork in the lesson
But it is all in vain
With technique reconstruction
I also need liposuction
For my great big fat-head brain!
And my fitness is so shocking
So I resort to blocking
To try to win the game
To the ref I am wishin’
He calls strokes because I’m fishin’
Since I don’t have any brains!
Oh! I just want to win!
Get rid of my issues
But God is cruel ‘cause to have fun and amuse
I’ll smell success… and then I’d lose!
All my shots just keep on landin’
At your feet where you’re standin’
I simply can’t explain
How I can play so shoddy
Uncoordinated body
If I only had a brain!
The Squash Poet
Squash is the one sport we all love to play
Poetry in motion when done the right way
A swift intense dance chasing a ball
Testing body and mind the challenge enthralls
An addiction to squash; I just have to show it
So I come to you incognito as ‘The Squash Poet”.
From years of my struggles and attempting in vain
To hit a good squash ball again and again
My endeavor to master is a fruitless quest
So I pen from experience and watching the best
With permission from Mick, I hope not to disappoint
When he posts my verses to “The Squash Joint”
If some poems sound familiar don’t be impolite
They’ve been posted on the forum of ‘Squash Site’
Feel free to comment your views will be heard
Remember it’s in fun; it’s not meant to anger
My poems will not win any literature prizes
But they’re ten times better than what my squash game comprises!
The Squash Poet
If I Only Had A Brain
(Sung to the tune of “If I only had a Brain” from the Wizard of Oz)
All these matches that I’m losin’
Because of shots I’m choosin’
There’s no one else to blame
I’d be a better fighter
If I only hit it tighter
But I don’t have any brains!
There’s no mystery in the riddle
Why my crosscourts find the middle
My language is profane
The squash ball I can crack it
But it’s straight on to your racquet
Cause I don’t have any brains!
Oh! I’d play like a pro!
The main draws I’d be in
I could swing at balls and pull off a big win
Instead I’d swing… and hit the tin
For my squash pro keeps on messin’
With my footwork in the lesson
But it is all in vain
With technique reconstruction
I also need liposuction
For my great big fat-head brain!
And my fitness is so shocking
So I resort to blocking
To try to win the game
To the ref I am wishin’
He calls strokes because I’m fishin’
Since I don’t have any brains!
Oh! I just want to win!
Get rid of my issues
But God is cruel ‘cause to have fun and amuse
I’ll smell success… and then I’d lose!
All my shots just keep on landin’
At your feet where you’re standin’
I simply can’t explain
How I can play so shoddy
Uncoordinated body
If I only had a brain!
The Squash Poet
'SOUR GRAPES' LOOKING SWEET
Over half way through the season (yes, already!) and the standings are turning out pretty ominous for the bottom four teams. With 13 points separating 4th from 5th and that margin increasing every week, it could be that the final four is already determined. “Sour Grapes” jumped from 4th to 1st, knocking “Pickled Onions” out of that spot for the first time all season, with a strong showing against “Blowing Raspberries” winning 4 of 5 matches and picking up 6 bonus points as well. As revealed on the standings, the top 4 teams also have the most bonus points – a trend that continues to prove itself.
Looking at personal performances, the top 2 point getters are both in the number 8 position. Tom Bergh (“Going Bananas”) and Brian Rosman (“Pickled Onions”) each have 13 points, and the two just happen to playing each other next week. Close on their heels with 12 points is Peter Fortune (“Pickled Onions”) and Anil Kathuria (“Cold Turkeys”) who had his first loss this week against Jason Trombley (“Pickled Onions”).
The bottom four teams need to make a real effort starting yesterday to get back in the hunt for the play-offs. There are 3 rounds left, with a week off due to Independence Day on July 5 so the time is there. It’s just a matter making the most of it.
Looking at personal performances, the top 2 point getters are both in the number 8 position. Tom Bergh (“Going Bananas”) and Brian Rosman (“Pickled Onions”) each have 13 points, and the two just happen to playing each other next week. Close on their heels with 12 points is Peter Fortune (“Pickled Onions”) and Anil Kathuria (“Cold Turkeys”) who had his first loss this week against Jason Trombley (“Pickled Onions”).
The bottom four teams need to make a real effort starting yesterday to get back in the hunt for the play-offs. There are 3 rounds left, with a week off due to Independence Day on July 5 so the time is there. It’s just a matter making the most of it.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
ROUND 3 GOES TO THE GOLFERS
What better way to spend a perfect weather Monday than on the squash courts… NOT! Unfortunately, every year, one week of the Summer League clashes with the 3B’s golf outing and every year squash loses out. I for one do not understand the attraction. I mean, spending all day in ideal sunny weather, drinking a few brewskis, playing a casual round of golf, enjoying the camaraderie with buddies… it doesn’t make sense! But, each to their own I suppose.
So I commend the 5 matches that actually took place, and the handful of other players who were missing opponents but decided to come down and pick up a game anyway. At least I’m not the only one without friends (just kidding!). The “Sour Grapes” took the hardest hit this week dropping from 2nd to 4th, as they only picked up 5 points since round 2 two weeks ago. “Blowing Raspberries” went one step better (or worse, depending on how you look at it) collecting only three points for the round and dropping to last on the standings; equal on points with the “Rotten Tomatoes”, but with less bonus points.
The “Pickled Onions” maintain their top spot (albeit by the bonus point tie-break) but may have a tough time getting their opponents to turn up next week. The “Cold Turkeys” have the least amount of bonus points in the league and three of their players haven’t played a match yet… time to get going lads!
Believe it or not, time is already running out to get matches in. With only 4 rounds to go, players have until July 13 (inclusive) to complete them.
So I commend the 5 matches that actually took place, and the handful of other players who were missing opponents but decided to come down and pick up a game anyway. At least I’m not the only one without friends (just kidding!). The “Sour Grapes” took the hardest hit this week dropping from 2nd to 4th, as they only picked up 5 points since round 2 two weeks ago. “Blowing Raspberries” went one step better (or worse, depending on how you look at it) collecting only three points for the round and dropping to last on the standings; equal on points with the “Rotten Tomatoes”, but with less bonus points.
The “Pickled Onions” maintain their top spot (albeit by the bonus point tie-break) but may have a tough time getting their opponents to turn up next week. The “Cold Turkeys” have the least amount of bonus points in the league and three of their players haven’t played a match yet… time to get going lads!
Believe it or not, time is already running out to get matches in. With only 4 rounds to go, players have until July 13 (inclusive) to complete them.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
SQUASH SHOTS V
I am a solid believer that if you cannot laugh at yourself, then you have no right poking fun at others. In this article of “Squash Shots”, I have decided to take this opportunity and place myself in the position of being the punching bag. Nick Matthew became the first Brit since Peter Nicol six years ago to gain the world number one ranking this month, June 2010. In light of his remarkable achievement (given the recent dominance of the Egyptian players), I immediately thought of this photo when Nick was ranked only 6 in the world. Clearly this match inspired him to greater heights (cough, cough).
Look at the photo and answer the following question:
This is…?
A) Me, just about to give Nick Matthew a lesson
B) One of the best players in the world… and Nick Matthew
C) Nick Matthew, 10 minutes before he hits the showers
D) Me, 10 minutes before I hit the defibrillator
E) Me, photo-shopped in the picture to make it look like I’m playing Nick Matthew
F) A lamb to the slaughter
G) The one match Nick Matthew will never forget
H) The one match Nick Matthew will never remember
Answer: C) and D) and F) and H). Motor City Open 2005. With the wild card into the main draw, I had the pleasure of playing Nick Matthew first round. For the record, I did stretch him to 3 games, lost a lung, and can now claim that I have been on court with another world number 1. One year later, I played John White – who also reached world number 1 in his career. I stretched him to 3 games as well, and lost my other lung.
To view the full current world rankings (as of June 2010), you go to : http://www.psa-squash.com/ and click on 'rankings' halfway down the left column.
Look at the photo and answer the following question:
This is…?
A) Me, just about to give Nick Matthew a lesson
B) One of the best players in the world… and Nick Matthew
C) Nick Matthew, 10 minutes before he hits the showers
D) Me, 10 minutes before I hit the defibrillator
E) Me, photo-shopped in the picture to make it look like I’m playing Nick Matthew
F) A lamb to the slaughter
G) The one match Nick Matthew will never forget
H) The one match Nick Matthew will never remember
Answer: C) and D) and F) and H). Motor City Open 2005. With the wild card into the main draw, I had the pleasure of playing Nick Matthew first round. For the record, I did stretch him to 3 games, lost a lung, and can now claim that I have been on court with another world number 1. One year later, I played John White – who also reached world number 1 in his career. I stretched him to 3 games as well, and lost my other lung.
To view the full current world rankings (as of June 2010), you go to : http://www.psa-squash.com/ and click on 'rankings' halfway down the left column.
