Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by John Creek on September 3, 2009 at 1:35pm

That's not a discussion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Phill Crane on September 3, 2009 at 1:57pm

Oh, yes it is!



John Creek said:

That's not a discussion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Creek on September 3, 2009 at 5:59pm

See, I told you it wasn't!!

Phill Crane said:

Oh, yes it is!



John Creek said:

That's not a discussion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Phill Crane on September 3, 2009 at 7:05pm

Is

John Creek said:

See, I told you it wasn't!!

Phill Crane said:

Oh, yes it is!



John Creek said:

That's not a discussion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ian Armstrong on September 4, 2009 at 4:46pm

Well there has been a lot of discussion about PAR 11 being the scoring system that everyone should be playing according to the rules but when you look at the rules it provides 3 scoring systems and although it presents PAR 11 in the main body of the rules it also provides the other options as alternate scoring systems. Thus it seems to me that all 3 systems are legitimate and there is no stipulation that we should all be playing PAR 11.

John Creek said:

That's not a discussion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ken Cotton on September 4, 2009 at 5:55pm

Hi,

To have 2 scoring systems is bad enough, 3 is entering into the realms of disbelief. I assume when they are playing open tournaments everyone plays the same scoring system but to have all 3 in one division if that is what they are talking is complete and utter madness. Suggest we stick to normal scoring to 9 and let the other leagues try it out without interferring with ours. I believe it was Bill Shankly said "Football is a simple game made difficult by coaches, surely we have the same situation here at squash is a great game made more difficult by the authoriies.

Ken

Ian Armstrong said:

Well there has been a lot of discussion about PAR 11 being the scoring system that everyone should be playing according to the rules but when you look at the rules it provides 3 scoring systems and although it presents PAR 11 in the main body of the rules it also provides the other options as alternate scoring systems. Thus it seems to me that all 3 systems are legitimate and there is no stipulation that we should all be playing PAR 11.

John Creek said:

That's not a discussion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by John Creek on September 4, 2009 at 7:04pm

par to 11 is the 'principal' scoring system. others are 'alternatives'. what is it about that you don't understand? and who are the 'authorities?

Ken Cotton said:

Hi,

To have 2 scoring systems is bad enough, 3 is entering into the realms of disbelief. I assume when they are playing open tournaments everyone plays the same scoring system but to have all 3 in one division if that is what they are talking is complete and utter madness. Suggest we stick to normal scoring to 9 and let the other leagues try it out without interferring with ours. I believe it was Bill Shankly said "Football is a simple game made difficult by coaches, surely we have the same situation here at squash is a great game made more difficult by the authoriies.

Ken

Ian Armstrong said:

Well there has been a lot of discussion about PAR 11 being the scoring system that everyone should be playing according to the rules but when you look at the rules it provides 3 scoring systems and although it presents PAR 11 in the main body of the rules it also provides the other options as alternate scoring systems. Thus it seems to me that all 3 systems are legitimate and there is no stipulation that we should all be playing PAR 11.

John Creek said:

That's not a discussion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ken Cotton on September 4, 2009 at 9:41pm

I am reading Ian's post about 3 scoring sytems by the world it does not say anywhere in his posting about principal scoring system as I read it you can use any one of the three within the new rules and as far as the authorities are conerned they are the main SRA (in this squash)
Ken

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ian Armstrong on September 5, 2009 at 6:35am

If you think about it PAR is a simpler system that SOS - you win the rally and you win a point - that seems to me to be a very reasonable and logical outcome. I think the main arguments against PAR are that it shortens the game and it is harder to make a comeback which takes something away from the game of squash. I think you can circumvent the shortness by employing PAR 15 at the lower levels and this to some extent provides time for a comeback too although it will probably never provide the same type of tension that you get from SOS when a player starts to claw their way back into a game that they look dead and buried in. I think it is inevitable that SOS will fade as PAR takes over but things have to move forward. Hell maybe football will start to use technology soon too - it's about time - Edwardo did dive but he was convicted by TV replay - about time too I would say.

Ken Cotton said:

Hi,

To have 2 scoring systems is bad enough, 3 is entering into the realms of disbelief. I assume when they are playing open tournaments everyone plays the same scoring system but to have all 3 in one division if that is what they are talking is complete and utter madness. Suggest we stick to normal scoring to 9 and let the other leagues try it out without interferring with ours. I believe it was Bill Shankly said "Football is a simple game made difficult by coaches, surely we have the same situation here at squash is a great game made more difficult by the authoriies.

Ken

Ian Armstrong said:

Well there has been a lot of discussion about PAR 11 being the scoring system that everyone should be playing according to the rules but when you look at the rules it provides 3 scoring systems and although it presents PAR 11 in the main body of the rules it also provides the other options as alternate scoring systems. Thus it seems to me that all 3 systems are legitimate and there is no stipulation that we should all be playing PAR 11.

John Creek said:

That's not a discussion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ian Armstrong on September 5, 2009 at 6:41am

Here is what the WSF say about PAR 11 being the principle scoring system and the directive on when to adopt the alternate systems:

http://www.worldsquash.org.uk/par_11_apr_09.htm

Ken Cotton said:

I am reading Ian's post about 3 scoring sytems by the world it does not say anywhere in his posting about principal scoring system as I read it you can use any one of the three within the new rules and as far as the authorities are conerned they are the main SRA (in this squash)
Ken

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ken Cotton on September 5, 2009 at 8:56am

I think that PAR scoring takes the heart and soul out of squash, keeping that statement in mind no matter how many points you go to you can never keep in general the intensity of the game. Once you go down that road some other bright spark comes up with another idea and at the end of the road in squash terms it is a disaster. I don’t believe it is inevitable because there a lot of players around that really enjoy that part of the game. I could give you pages and pages of examples but the one that would interest you most would be last season when Will beat Gordon in both matches coming from well behind in the 5th. I think those two results greatly help Dulwich win the title and ironically I don’t think he would have won the matches had it been PAR scoring.

I believe through years of experience that once you start any controversial change it is difficult to go back to status quo.

I have sent a letter to Graham saying what I think is the best way forward, perhaps if implemented it would solve some of the problems.

As far as Eduardo goes the answer surely is that the clubs coach their players within the rules and if they don’t the clubs should deal with them then you not need technologically.


Ian Armstrong said:

If you think about it PAR is a simpler system that SOS - you win the rally and you win a point - that seems to me to be a very reasonable and logical outcome. I think the main arguments against PAR are that it shortens the game and it is harder to make a comeback which takes something away from the game of squash. I think you can circumvent the shortness by employing PAR 15 at the lower levels and this to some extent provides time for a comeback too although it will probably never provide the same type of tension that you get from SOS when a player starts to claw their way back into a game that they look dead and buried in. I think it is inevitable that SOS will fade as PAR takes over but things have to move forward. Hell maybe football will start to use technology soon too - it's about time - Edwardo did dive but he was convicted by TV replay - about time too I would say.

Ken Cotton said:

Hi,

To have 2 scoring systems is bad enough, 3 is entering into the realms of disbelief. I assume when they are playing open tournaments everyone plays the same scoring system but to have all 3 in one division if that is what they are talking is complete and utter madness. Suggest we stick to normal scoring to 9 and let the other leagues try it out without interferring with ours. I believe it was Bill Shankly said "Football is a simple game made difficult by coaches, surely we have the same situation here at squash is a great game made more difficult by the authoriies.

Ken

Ian Armstrong said:

Well there has been a lot of discussion about PAR 11 being the scoring system that everyone should be playing according to the rules but when you look at the rules it provides 3 scoring systems and although it presents PAR 11 in the main body of the rules it also provides the other options as alternate scoring systems. Thus it seems to me that all 3 systems are legitimate and there is no stipulation that we should all be playing PAR 11.

John Creek said:

That's not a discussion.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Ian Armstrong on September 5, 2009 at 11:46am

I think you are right but I suspect PAR will be adopted by all in due course.

I understand what you say with regards to players like Will (and your own Mr London) as I beat Will in a PAR game a week or two after he won the Dulwich annual tournament so I can see that it makes it easier (for me at least) to compete against the players who employ attritional squash techniques rather than aggressive shot play so in that way I am happy to play PAR as opposed to SOS.

Technology has to come into football as all other sports are adopting it and that is the only way you will rid the game of blatent cheating and stop the ridulous situations such as no goal being awarded when the ball rebounds from stanchion at the back of the net.

Thnking along those lines it's about time squash courts were upgaded to have a movable tin that lit up when touched by the ball and also a series of webcams to enable you to purchase a recording of your game.

Ken Cotton said:

I think that PAR scoring takes the heart and soul out of squash, keeping that statement in mind no matter how many points you go to you can never keep in general the intensity of the game. Once you go down that road some other bright spark comes up with another idea and at the end of the road in squash terms it is a disaster. I don’t believe it is inevitable because there a lot of players around that really enjoy that part of the game. I could give you pages and pages of examples but the one that would interest you most would be last season when Will beat Gordon in both matches coming from well behind in the 5th. I think those two results greatly help Dulwich win the title and ironically I don’t think he would have won the matches had it been PAR scoring.

I believe through years of experience that once you start any controversial change it is difficult to go back to status quo.

I have sent a letter to Graham saying what I think is the best way forward, perhaps if implemented it would solve some of the problems.

As far as Eduardo goes the answer surely is that the clubs coach their players within the rules and if they don’t the clubs should deal with them then you not need technologically.


Ian Armstrong said:

If you think about it PAR is a simpler system that SOS - you win the rally and you win a point - that seems to me to be a very reasonable and logical outcome. I think the main arguments against PAR are that it shortens the game and it is harder to make a comeback which takes something away from the game of squash. I think you can circumvent the shortness by employing PAR 15 at the lower levels and this to some extent provides time for a comeback too although it will probably never provide the same type of tension that you get from SOS when a player starts to claw their way back into a game that they look dead and buried in. I think it is inevitable that SOS will fade as PAR takes over but things have to move forward. Hell maybe football will start to use technology soon too - it's about time - Edwardo did dive but he was convicted by TV replay - about time too I would say.

Ken Cotton said:

Hi,

To have 2 scoring systems is bad enough, 3 is entering into the realms of disbelief. I assume when they are playing open tournaments everyone plays the same scoring system but to have all 3 in one division if that is what they are talking is complete and utter madness. Suggest we stick to normal scoring to 9 and let the other leagues try it out without interferring with ours. I believe it was Bill Shankly said "Football is a simple game made difficult by coaches, surely we have the same situation here at squash is a great game made more difficult by the authoriies.

Ken

Ian Armstrong said:

Well there has been a lot of discussion about PAR 11 being the scoring system that everyone should be playing according to the rules but when you look at the rules it provides 3 scoring systems and although it presents PAR 11 in the main body of the rules it also provides the other options as alternate scoring systems. Thus it seems to me that all 3 systems are legitimate and there is no stipulation that we should all be playing PAR 11.

John Creek said:

That's not a discussion.

• ▶ Reply

▶ Reply to Discussion

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page