by Doug Steinberg
When Par11 was rolled out as the standard scoring system for
squash a few years ago, I was very concerned that the change would make a great
game less attractive. The Olympic Committee had instructed the World
Squash Federation that the general public would not accept squash as an Olympic
sport without a scoring system that was uniform across all abilities and ages.
WSF jumped on board and mandated this change for all players. So, for the good
of the Back the Bid Movement, I gave PAR11 a chance.
Well, it's late 2013, and I am proud to say that I am now
reaping benefits that have been raining down on the sport since
the scoring change. For those skeptics who believe that the change hasn't
helped the game, I submit the following advantages to PAR11:
· I don't
have to be fit anymore to win. Watching Duck Dynasty is now my between
match training regimen.
· When
planning and scheduling a junior tourney, 15 to 20 minute slots for matches
make the tournament so much easier to run.
· During
last year's Collegiate women's individual tournament, I no longer had to be
worried about being distracted and losing track of the match at hand, because
the matches were usually over within the time frame of a Spongebob Squarepants
episode -- the length of my attention span and apparently that of all squash
players. Under PAR11 we can now retain focus for an entire women's
collegiate match.
· I can now
play a match, not be tired or sore, and still devour a big meal like I used to,
because technically, a match was played and the USSRA site says 5 games is
worth 1000 calories...and the best part is that my friends and I get to shop
for new clothes because we are continually growing out of our old ones
now.
· We are
helping to save the environment due to the short matches resulting in not
having to wash clothes after a match.
· Since the
game is now standardized, it has opened the door to a great new trend of not
wearing eyewear anymore. Since we are all taking our cues from PSA pros
-- who uniformly disdain the use of eyewear -- we no longer need to wear
eyewear. Most people have an extra eye anyway so what's the big deal?
· I hit
many fewer balls on the tin. The pros use a 17" tin and not the 19"
tin that was standard for the amateur game. Again, since the game is now
uniform between pros and amateurs, us amateurs don't need to worry about the
top two inches of the 19" tin anymore. It would be so confusing if the
pros and amateurs used different heights of tins. Thank goodness for this
change as I have many fewer balls hitting the "real" 17" tin
that would be down on the old 19" tin.
· The
"extra" games that we are now encouraged to play after the extremely
short real match ends are so much more fun than the real match itself. The
natural reduction in intensity that occurs after a match ends allows me to
"play" and simultaneously contemplate what I am going to eat for
dinner while in games 7, 8, 9, 10, 11....
· The new,
exciting strategy of passing on the serve if you win the spin is now in play!
· We are
finally getting rid of those pesky less well off kids who enter junior
tournaments as the 15 minute matches just don't justify the expenses of
entering and traveling to a tournament. If you're not a "one
percenter", there's probably a local dodgeball tourney in your area
that'll help get your kid into a more than adequate state school.
· Epic
comebacks are no longer possible, thereby reducing my overall stress level.
· Turning
squash from a marathon into a sprint will allow future generations of players
to be fatter.
· The best
benefit is obvious...the standardized scoring helped with a fabulous million
dollar presentation to the Olympic Committee that almost got us into the
Olympics. Seriously, whenever I walk off the court now after my mini
PAR11 workout, I say to myself, "I am contributing to squash almost
becoming an Olympic Sport."
It has taken me some time, but I get it now. I am so pleased that
I jumped on the PAR11 bandwagon.
Wow. You had exactly one point. PAR-11 scoring has made matches (too much) shorter. I have to give you full marks for effort for the way you managed to stretch that into a full page of bitching and sarcasm, but if you can't make a strong argument, you should try to be clever - or funny, if that's not outside your reach. I happen to agree that we should look at returning amateur play to HIHO scoring, but definitely not as a result of your piece.
ReplyDeletePS - I think I saw those kids on your lawn again...
Hey Steve - glad you agree with my point and don't really care how you get there. With your biting wit, you should write your own piece and fight the fight. If you focus your impressively strong and thoughtful opinions on this issue, those in power might actually take some action...
ReplyDeleteI am going to assume that when PAR-11 was adopted that everyone did not suddenly start driving the ball into the nick like Shabana thereby making the points shorter. Given that, it is fair to say that PAR-11 is penalizing poor shot execution, in particular tins in a way that HIHO does not. Why not concentrate on keeping the ball in play longer with more deliberate shot selection and execution and thus extend the games as well?
DeleteAlternatively consider what is showing up on other squash forums and that is use the single dot ball. This is something that merits honest and serious consideration for club play no matter what scoring system is used.
Jim Coddington
Jim,
DeleteThe WSA quarterfinals in LA yesterday featured eight highly accomplished and ranked young pros playing on a warm court. The match times were 26, 29, 32 and 48 minutes. The short match times were not the result of poor shot execution or lack of deliberate shot selection by these fantastic women players. Rather, it was a result of a scoring system that consistently yields short match time by its very reason and nature. This problem becomes exponentially worse as the players become recreational or beginner levels. At most levels, the PAR11 system results in unsatisfying short matches for players and spectators. We should not blame the players, but rather go to a more appropriate scoring system to fit the level of the players.
Also, we agree that the single dot ball should be used much more widely than it is at present.
Rich Schafer