Kent Squash & Racketball
Leagues . News . Forums
PAR scoring = less squash
I've read the other topics ion this and I've accepted that we're 'giving it a go' for the summer season. After all, what harm can it do to try?
Well I've just come back from a game that could have lasted an hour but in fact lasted 26 minutes. I can honestly say (with no disrespect to my opponent) that I considered dropping a game so we could get a bit more time on court. How does that sound, right or wrong?
This game of squash is my one match per week and one that I’m prepared to travel to - BUT if my time on court is significantly reduced I'm going to veto any moves to continue PAR and will campaign for others to do so too.
I know this might seem like old news but now that we've tried it (albeit for two weeks) I challenge anyone to come forward and give a sensible reason why you want to shorten down your precious time on court? If you're a little overweight and always found it a struggle to last the distance then sure I can take that. But why were people like Mark Steedon, Matt Badger and others wanting to go for this when I know first hand that they enjoy a good hard match as much as the next.
There are many silent viewers of this forum but if you agree or disagree, please speak up because your opinion counts
I'll wrap up by saying PAR is great for pros and televised sport but not for us guys in Div 1, we're not pros (exclude about 4 players from a total of circa 50).
Thoughts?
Views: 58
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Simon Crowther on -
There is a huge difference between div 1 and the pro game. anyone who watched some of the matches at the kent open where top div 1 players were matched against full time pros will appreciate that. PAR 11 was only introduced because the rallies in PAR 15 were deemed still too long for viewing of the pro game. the point was to make the sport more palatable and exciting for viewers, including non players of the sport. as such, PAR 11 isn't really applicable in any sense to league squash - the rallies are significantly shorter and most of the spectators are players who want to see a bit of squash.
Mark Lennox said:Sorry Jack, I couldn't disagree more.
1) That extra 5 or 10 minutes is the time at the end of the game that does the most for your fitness - cutting it shorter means you never reach that high anabolic rate (or whatever it's called). Also, how many times have you heard people say, i was just starting to get into that when... well this would be happening a heck of a lot more
2) There are always going to be slight miss-matches such as when the top team plays the bottom or indeed when any stronger team players a weaker team - and that doesn't include the occasional nomination that might be slightly out of sync. Would you be happy trekking down to Rodmersham and getting a 15 minute bashing - I'd rather get a 20 or 25 minute game thanks!
Whilst I appreciate that quite a few teams in Div 1 have pro at no.1, you cannot compare Div 1 to the professional game where tins are lower, players are full time pros and lets face it these guys know how to make a rally last forever. I would concede that it's more so the guys at position 2,3,4 and 5 that miss out the most.
The pros at No.1 are the only ones who don't miss out. Think about it. They get to play what they are used to on the professional tour. Playing a shorter game means they stand less chance of getting an injury or being knackered for another paid match the next day. It also means they get back home earlier meaning again more rest for the next day’s matches, coaching or whatever. The last time I checked pros get paid per match not per time on court - it's therefore no surprise the clubs that 'tend' to champion this ruling have retained pros (Dulwich, Bexley etc). I don’t blame them but I do think we should all be aware and make sure it doesn’t affect those of us who were perfectly happy before.
Just my observations...
Jack Breen said:Afternoon all.
I am in favour of PAR to 11 scoring. I see it like this; If proffesional squash is played using PAR - 11 then surley ""division 1"" should follow it. I can understand frustrations with people and games being over to quickly but surley if your getting beat in a stupid time limit then some questions need to be asked. Are you in the right division? Is your nomination correct? Do you need to be on the court more than once a week? Of course there is going to be the odd game where someone is too strong for someone.
If someone beats you in 20-25 mins using PAR to 11 using IMHO is only going to give you another 5-10mins on court at most?
All 3 of my matches have been close to the hour mark. Not sure whether the warm courts have anything to do with that but i think we should def take this scoring method into Winter League. When i am playing friendlys i always now use PAR to 11.
-
Permalink Reply by Joe Magor on -
Seems to be that PAR 15 seems to be a good alternative.
If Pro's play PAR 11 with 17 inch tin then perhaps we should play PAR 15 with 19 inch tin?
that would address the length of game issue, surely whilst still maintaining PAR scoring? no?
-
Permalink Reply by Mark Lennox on -
I think that's what lots of people are starting to think Joe. If you look at the poll that's running; of the 64 people that have participated, only 23 have voted to keep PAR11.
I'd be happy with PAR 15
-
Permalink Reply by Clive London on -
Don't soften your position Mark. PAR 15 is definitely the lesser of the two evils but I agree 100% with Simon's point.
The comebacks aspect is one of the major points in favour of HiHo. This issue has been laboured before but giving away the game is often the response to going several points down in PAR, particularly at the end of a game.
Having served out 3 times on Tuesday and lost a point each time I'm even more convinced! Now many would no doubt say that this is an incentive to learn to serve properly, but cheap mistakes by your opponent on his serve hardly reflect well on your own skill. On the other hand if you've knackered him out and he makes a mistake, then fair do-s.
I can understand why the likes of Mr Crane are so keen, but old man's squash is often over quickly enough already! How short a game do you want?
Thus far it's probably been a worthwhile experiment (mainly due to the fact that being summer the rallies are much longer), but in cold conditions it's likely to become a joke.
Mark Lennox said:I think that's what lots of people are starting to think Joe. If you look at the poll that's running; of the 64 people that have participated, only 23 have voted to keep PAR11.
I'd be happy with PAR 15
-
Permalink Reply by Phill Crane on -
Currently 21 people (or 31%) want to keep HiHO, double that amount want to go forward with some form of PAR and 7 people aren't bothered one way or the other.
You must recognise that currently the vast majority of active members on the site want to change.
P.S. Cilve - would it help if we re-introduced the two serve rule? ;>)
Mark Lennox said:I think that's what lots of people are starting to think Joe. If you look at the poll that's running; of the 64 people that have participated, only 23 have voted to keep PAR11.
I'd be happy with PAR 15
-
Permalink Reply by Ian Armstrong on -
Would it be possible to trial PAR 15 from Div 2 down during the second half of the summer to see how that compares with HiHo?
-
Permalink Reply by John Creek on -
Down here in Div 5 we are wondering what all the fuss is about;) - especially as we understood that the only people with decision making power after the Summer trial would be the same Div 1 Captains who are currently playing it (not quite the 64 active voters mentioned earlier).
In spite of Mr Lennox saying that there would be a riot if PAR 11 were introduced lower down, I think he would find a peaceful and lethargic bunch of players in the lower reaches, who might be ambivalent or mildly apathetic about being asked to trial, play or even vote on the idea.
-
Permalink Reply by Phill Crane on
-
Hi Dave,
good to hear that you're back and involved with team squash again.
Just out of interest I looked at your scores for your last match and noticed that you won 11/2 11/2 11/5. At best that means your opponent got to serve twice in the first game, once in the second and possibly 3 times in the third.
Was it PAR that was the problem or simply an opponent who you were far too good for on the night?
If you'd have played HiHo the chances are he would have been beaten to love in the same amount of time. I doubt that it would have made for a better match.
I've heard a few people say that 'it's not squash' and 'the rallies are too short' - the answer has always been even when playing HiHo - if you get the ball back then you'll make the rallies longer.
Whose problem is it? - the person winning the points or the one who can't make a return? Makes no difference PAR or HiHo.
When I was younger I was always encouraged to think that long rallies are for friendlies and in matches you should just keep winning the next point. Why make yourself tired hitting a ball back to an opponent, surely the idea is to put it somewhere it can't be returned from.
Whichever version you play you need the players to be well matched to get a good run.
ps might come down and watch some of the action at the Mote this evening.
David Rannard said:I had my first experience of the PAR 11 scoring in a priory match last night. I'm with the majority and am not keen. It was all over far too quickly for my liking and as I heard the opposition say at one point during a match... "I've travelled all this way for this to be over so quickly!" It has to be PAR 15 or the good old scoring system to 9 IMHO.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
© 2012 Created by Mark Lennox.
