|
|
24-Oct-08:
WSF Moves To ‘PAR’
Scoring Worldwide
In one of the most radical changes in the sport in recent times, the
World Squash Federation has voted to change the scoring system in
Squash to ‘Point-A-Rally’ (PAR) to 11 points per game (often
referred to as "Pro Scoring"). The new scoring system will
take effect worldwide, across all areas of the sport, from 1st
April 2009.
The decision was taken by an overwhelming vote by Member National
Federations at the WSF AGM in Manchester last week.
Whilst PAR scoring has been used on the men’s professional circuit
for many years – and was more recently introduced by the women’s
tour - ‘hand-in-hand-out’ scoring to nine points a game has been
practiced globally by recreational players for many decades.
The subject led to the liveliest debate at the AGM and the earlier
Conference. After several decades of ‘HiHo’ scoring, PAR to 11 is a
change which impacts on every player worldwide.
Isle of Man delegate Ian McKenzie led the charge of the old brigade,
arguing passionately to retain traditional scoring whilst
introducing into the rules PAR to 11 for the professional game.
Amongst survey statistics quoted perhaps the most interesting came
from Belgium, which recently introduced PAR to 11 domestically for
some 2000 players – without a single complaint received!
It quickly became clear that most Member National Associations were
much in favour of PAR to 11 for all. However, some words of caution
advised that instead of making this the only available scoring
system - and forcing it on all at every level - there was merit in
allowing it be adopted by choice, especially at local levels in the
game.
The Management Committee of WSF worked on this and, on the eve of
the AGM, presented delegates with an amended motion allowing both
scoring systems to remain side by side in the rules, and this was
what was overwhelmingly voted through.
Thus from 1st April 2009, the principal scoring system for Squash
will change to PAR to 11 (going to two clear points if 10-all is
reached).
Already used in both PSA and WISPA Tour events – and, as such, seen
regularly on TV – PAR scoring will now extend to all WSF
championships, and all Major Games in which squash is featured, e.g.
Asian Games, Commonwealth Games, Pan-American Games, World
University Games, World Games, and others.
It was also agreed that next month’s Women’s World Team
Championships in Cairo will use PAR 11 for all matches in advance of
the official April 2009 start date as this is a high-profile event
which will feature a large number of WISPA players who are already
familiar with the scoring system.
The recent experiment of using it in the European Squash Federation
(ESF) Junior Circuit and Championships will now become the norm -
and it is certain that other WSF Regional Federations will also
introduce it, as will many MNA's for their domestic championships
and leagues.
In a further vote taken at the WSF AGM, PAR to 11 was also
introduced for international doubles (changing it from PAR to 9
which was introduced in 2007) – and will be used in the WSF
International Doubles Championships in Chennai in December. However,
the principle of sudden death at 10-all will be retained.
|
More on
the Forum
Have you tried it yet ?
Let us know your
experiences ...
|
PAR is here to stay
Malcolm Willstrop on the scoring debate
 I
find it very difficult to understand not just the opposition to par
scoring, but far more the strange desire to hang on to the defunct
traditional scoring system. The men's game had already adopted par
scoring to 15,but whoever decided to reduce 15 to11 was blessed with
a moment of genius.
11 scoring brought about more emphasis on the scoring system, which
is the key to making sport more attractive to watch ... tennis is
the best example ... and the players had to think and act more
positively, attacking whenever the occasion demanded or getting left
behind.
It meant also that we escaped from the days of endless rallies and
the obsession with hitting the ball to the back of the court …
remember I was there!
Suddenly the men's game was exciting, eminently watchable and it has
hardly looked back. I defy anyone to tell me they haven't been
entertained by quarter finals night at PSA events. I can remember
going to Wembley for the British Open quarter finals praying ...
perhaps an inappropriate word ... for a competitive match.
Nowadays, with the quality and depth of player and 11 scoring, four
competitive, quality matches are almost guaranteed. One of the
obvious effects of the success of the men's game has been that when
women's matches followed, using the traditional scoring...and I was
there many times...the spectators walked away.
That's a fact...not a reflection on the current women's game, but on
the scoring system. I find it strange that the women were not aware
of what was happening and that when offered an alternative which
will put matters right that they cannot see it.
There are, of course, greater issues than any individual player's
preference: in the women's game ,as I have said, they need to stand
comparison with the men's when alongside it; we all need to make the
game as attractive as we can to interest television and the media
and even Olympic consideration. Traditional scoring certainly does
not do that.
Whether 11 scoring should be universally accepted is another matter:
it is a must for the men's and women's professional game and the
doubts about short matches were quickly dispelled by the men and are
equally quickly being dispelled by the women So if children and
Martin Pearse's veterans need more than 11, simply take it to 15,
only one basic system and please no return to traditional scoring.
The idea that par scoring hinders Olympic prospects, a view I saw
expressed, is ludicrous. One universal comprehensible system will
clearly help Olympic prospects, though personally if we couldn't
make Sydney and somehow haven't made London - 8 years of potential
negotiation and a sham vote - I am more than sceptical about 2016,
disappointing though that is.
In case my ramblings are unintelligible, squash needs one system.
PAR scoring, the men and women's professional game to 11. Veterans,
children and league players have the option of 15, though 11 works
fine in the Yorkshire Premier League and I guess that would apply to
most counties' top leagues and maybe lower divisions too. I suppose
I should represent traditional views and I am sure I do in some
instances, but as a coach I learnt early in my career that sport
moves on: look at the development and the changes in the two rugby
codes and unless the coach moves on as well, he or she will fail. My
concern, and I love the game enough to be concerned, is for the game
at large. Traditional has no future long term.
 |
I agree totally with Malcolm, I was at
the AGM at the North West Counties Squash League recently and having
being voted on as Vice-President I put my point across the
importance of changing the scoring to par 11, 95% of the people at
the meeting was against it as I expected.
I remember being at a similar meeting when they were deciding about
going down to one serve!!!
The same outcome everyone went mad but who thinks about that now!
Players have to take responsibility, it does not matter at what
level they play at!
If we want to take our great sport to the next level which means
inclusion in the Olympic games we all have to be singing from the
same hymn sheet.
|
10-Oct:
SCORING:
PART OF SQUASH’S EVOLUTION
The England Squash View
 Much
has been made recently of the World Squash Federation’s forthcoming
proposal to change squash’s scoring system to Point a Rally (PAR).
England Squash has been considering the implications of the
proposal, as well as the recent decision by the European Squash
Federation to introduce PAR for all its sanctioned tournament events
- and in particular its effect on both the competitive and
recreational game.
In order to avoid disadvantaging our senior and junior players in
international competition, England Squash has introduced PAR for
all ES sanctioned events from 1 September 2008.
However, the governing body has no intention of imposing a change in
scoring system elsewhere. Although many counties and clubs have
taken the decision independently to introduce PAR in various
competitions, traditional scoring is the norm at this level, and for
many adult players it will continue to be the most suitable way of
playing squash.
 Zena
Wooldridge, Chairman of England Squash, said “Squash evolves
like everything else. Racket and ball technology and the
introduction of glass back and all glass courts have moved the sport
on – reviewing the scoring system is just another stage in our
evolution. We recognise the need to strike a balance between
supporting the global pressures for adapting the top end of the
game, providing a lead for such changes within the competitive
structure in England, and being responsive to the needs of the core
of the game in counties and clubs.”
 Nick
Rider, Chief Executive, added “We’re not going to force anyone
to do anything. We believe PAR will develop organically, but of
course we’ll be sensitive to the needs of players at national,
county and club level – and our different age groups. Just as the
choice of ball will impact on the quality of the playing experience,
it is important to encourage the most appropriate scoring system at
different levels of the game.”
|
10-Oct:
Nicol David criticises
squash scoring system
From AFP
 MANCHESTER,
England (AFP) — World number one Nicol David has criticised
proposals made to the World Squash Federation which would impose a
professional scoring system upon the whole sport, and may be agreed
here on Sunday week.
The WSF is said to be considering making everyone play with the
point-a-rally 11-up scoring used by the two pro tours, believing it
would make squash easier to understand and establish unity for its
Olympic bid.
But David - now a Datuk, a rare and highly prestigious title
bestowed upon outstanding Malaysian citizens - believes it would be
a mistake to abandon the traditional hand in hand-out scoring used
for more than 80 years.
Asked if there was a risk of such a change producing very short
matches, David replied: "Yes, definitely. Normal scoring would be so
much better for the juniors and grass roots.
"The game is all about how to come back when you are down. It's
never over till it's over: the essence of the normal scoring.
"But with American (point a rally) scoring you will get less
fightbacks. That would be such a shame and I really hope it doesn't
go that way."
David, who is a strong favourite to regain the title at next week's
World Open in Manchester after topping the rankings for 26
consecutive months, also has doubts about the effects of the
point-a-rally scoring upon the women's professional game.
The new system was only adopted by the WISPA Tour in July, copying
the PSA (men's) tour, and will be used for the first time in a world
championship here."It's a big
change," David said. "Having established women's squash at such a
good level with the normal scoring, and changing it to American
scoring, it's a bit difficult for most girls to have to adapt
straight away.
"But in the end you have to deal with what's going on. Hopefully the
quality of what we produced with nine-point scoring will transfer to
American scoring.
"But there are some variations in our matches now. Some top players
don't like it. Somehow we have to adapt. It could be disruptive."
Full story from AFP, with reaction from Rachael Grinham and Andrew
Shelley
|
From South America ...
We have held the S.A. Champs recently in our club. It was played
with standard score to 9, and it produced some great matches
including a comeback, at 0-6 in the 5th by the local champion (at
your service). So we do like the "old scoring" system.
Still, we needed some more excitement for the pro matches, including
players in better shape in the finals, so the 11 PAR scoring is
helping for sure. On the other hand, we, squash players, are really
proud of our sport especially about the fighting attitude we develop
by playing this amazing sport. So why to cut that by making the game
even shorter than American score? We are proud about squash because
it's tuff.
In our region most of the amateur competition has been played to 15,
and it really works well, you don't get those 20 mins 9/0 games,
that look so bad in the board and is not that short either.
So my suggestion is, keep the PAR 11 as the pro score and the
American to 15 as the amateur score, it is great to play watch and
read.
Asunción - Paraguay |
PAR 11 Scoring System:
Tried, Tested and Approved
By: Omar ElBorolossy and Salma Shabana
Owners and managers of ElBorolossy Squash Academy (Egypt)
PAR 11 scoring is the best thing that has happened to squash since
the invention of the all-glass court.
We totally agree that the benefits of the new scoring greatly
outweigh any concerns over the testing methods. We agree with the
WSF proposal that highlights the importance of players using the
same rules on all levels, making it easier to understand and giving
squash that extra element of fun and excitement that was previously
lacking!
We had a unique experience here at ElBorolossy Squash Academy; the
largest and most comprehensive squash academy in Egypt and the
Middle East, where the transition from the "old" to the "new" was
observed and scrutinized.
The Academy hosted its annual tournament in September for players at
all levels. The five events Beginners, Juniors, Open, Masters and
Doubles all played PAR 11 for the first time (ever for most). The
transition was very smooth- the new scoring did not need much
explanation. During the course of the tournament over 150 players
played more than 500 matches (all of them refereed by the
participants with no official referees). What made it easier for the
players, referees and spectators was that there was none of the
change of serve muddle, you win it you get it. And we can safely
report that there was not one single complaint from either players
or spectators. Not even from the die-hard veterans.
We did not notice a drastic difference in the match duration either
for longer or shorter. What was worth mentioning though was that the
matches were more competitive, there were less one-sided matches.
The spectators followed the matches, keenly awaiting a tiebreak to
add to the suspense, unlike the monotony that could sometimes arise
from repeated hand-in and hand-out scenario. The beginners, the
juniors and veterans enjoyed playing like the "top players". It gave
them a sense of what it is like on the pro tour.
The tournament was a success and the new scoring was a success. None
of the players have reverted back to the old scoring; on the
contrary they have willingly embraced it; since then, the majority
of our 500+ members use their newly found PAR 11 scoring.
So when the Egyptian squash federation decided to adopt the new
system as of this month, our players will be ready with their new
game plan.
So my suggestion to the WSF regarding the PAR 11 scoring? Bring it
on!!
 |
In
France, we (the guys) changed to PAR 11 scoring 2 years ago. At that
time, almost all the players were against it, with the same (good)
reasons as
we
can read in the forum.
We thought that the game will not be the same. Now, I think, almost
all club players appreciate it.
In fact, the difference is not that much to traditional 9 scoring.
The duration of games are shorter in average (true) but not much.
This year, girls are switching to PAR 11. We are hearing the same
story about the duration of matches and so on. And today, most of
the female players are complaining.
For me, that is not a matter : whatever scoring we are using, the
squash remains the same game, with the same interest and the same
fitness required.
The rest is purely in your mind !
 |
|
THE CASE AGAINST,
by Chris Hadden
AN OPEN LETTER TO
Emeritus President,
World Squash Federation,
Susie Simcock
Dear
Susie
I use the form of an open letter here due to the lack of time on
this pressing matter.
The WSF motion, to be put at the federation’s AGM (18 th October) to
compel a completely unsuspecting sport to move to universal PAR 11
scoring will do nothing to enhance the sport or help it to take its
rightful place in the Olympics as the most athletic of racket
sports. In my opinion, it will strip the game of a vital dimension.
It seems like a small group of officials have lost contact with
their base in the sport and instead of defending the fundamental
principles of the game are in the process of dumbing it down.
If we look at the evidence put before us to justify this move, it
looks embarrassing. The motion states: ‘This motion is based on the
main recommendation of the Working Group, this is, that the entire
sport merges to Point-a-Rally scoring to 11 points.
I have looked into the research of the Working Group, discussed the
methodology with the group's leader and looked at the results. I’d
like to make these observations:
1. The leader was very disappointed with the take-up.
2. Of the 2,000 or so responses they had no idea, I quote, ‘whether
this was 200 (self selected people) doing this 10 times each or
not’.
3. The group does not think this is in any way a representative
sample of the sport as a whole.
4. The group wanted to present what they had done and let it stand
by itself. They were pushed to make a recommendation and stated: ‘we
should not have been asked for it.’
5. A recommendation was made that in no way is based on the
research.
6. When asked if there was a desire from those tested to abolish
traditional scoring, the answer was “No, not at all”.
The research was very limited and in no way appropriate to the task
of providing evidence for such and important decision that will
affect the very nature of squash. The results do not say what is
claimed for them. In essence, it is a sham.
The Working Group seems to have come under political pressure to
make a recommendation that they know the evidence does not support.
This is a scandal!
There is no need whatsoever to abolish traditional scoring and there
is no ground-swell from the base of our sport. On the contrary, many
highly experienced people at the base are, rightly, shocked at the
move. But many are not even aware of the move. Even the working
group found that 47% would choose traditional if forced to opt for
unified scoring. This is not playing with a scoring system, this is
playing with the fundamental nature of our game.
This needs immediate attention. The motion is based on a house of
cards and should be withdrawn before it falls down pulling our
Olympic dreams down with it.
Yours most sincerely
Chris Hadden
Squash
Academy Switzerland,
Creator ASB Rainbow Court
squash.academy@hispeed.ch
|
Certainly there
has not been enough time for the grassroots, rank and file players
that make up the majority of players around the world to trail or
test the par 11 scoring.
In Sydney Australia we have been trialling the par 15 scoring system
for some time and most of our competition players are now used to
this.
There does need to be more time and consultation about this major
move
Carin Clonda
CEO, NSW squash
You've been
PARS-ED
Martin Pearse's
Masters experience
To the Squash. Some very, very high quality matches and PARS. I have
to state here, we did an analysis. Virtually every match scorecard
was “PARS-ED” afterwards. Horrible reading for squash lovers.
ALL matches except for a couple of 9/0 9/2 9/0 jobs were AT LEAST
33% shorter, eg. one match - 79 rallies to finish the match on PARS
instead of 126 for the actual. In one case and completely
coincidentally, it involved yours truly, the match on PARS to 11
would have been over in just 20 minutes, in actual fact the real
match took 67 minutes!
My opponent, one Geoffrey Howes Esq, is one of the best exponents of
comebacks, so at 2/9 0/9 5/8 he no doubt would have been very p….d
off at that exact moment as he would have already been in the
dressing room if PARS had been the scoring method. 40 odd minutes
later, the score was 8-8 in the fifth and the gallery really had
their monies worth, 10 match balls before the victor emerged. Not
that, in the grand scheme of things, it did me much good.
There was a long discussion afterwards and unless I am mistaken, the
vast majority of Masters want to keep the normal scoring. Has Tennis
changed? No!! It’s a political decision and it has not been trialled
properly yet for amateur enthusiasts. I spoke at length to a friend
of mine who used to train with the person who actually introduced
PARS, one Gawain Briars, and he categorically stated it was only
introduced for Professionals, to lengthen their playing careers,
shorten their matches for their health and TV and a bit more
besides.
It was not introduced for Masters, who need all the exercise they
can get.
Martin Pearse |
|
|
|
|
The WSF Proposal
from the 2008 AGM Agenda
10. MOTIONS TO AMEND THE RULES OF SQUASH
a) Motion: Submitted by WSF Management Committee
That PAR 11 scoring be adopted as the official scoring system for
the game of singles and international doubles squash and that the
Rules be amended accordingly; the change will be effective 1st April
2009 to allow time for MNFs to plan upcoming events.
Explanatory Statement/Rationale:
The vision of a unified scoring system for Squash was agreed at the
2005 AGM following a motion proposed by Egypt. During 2007/08, WSF
set up a Working Group (WG) to study the feasibility of a “global
unified scoring system”. This motion is based on the main
recommendation of the WG, this is, that the entire sport merges to
Point-a-Rally scoring to 11 points (PAR-11) with three of five games
needed to win a match.
The WG’s key hypothesis was that a unified scoring system was
feasible and that it should be based on PAR rather than traditional
Hand-in-Hand-out (HiHo). This was based on three factors: (i) other
sports had successfully switched from HiHo to PAR (e.g. volleyball),
(ii) PAR is inherently easier to understand/follow for the
uninitiated or beginner – whether playing or watching and (iii) PSA
had successfully implemented PAR in the 90s and moved from PAR-15 to
PAR-11 in 2005 to deliver an even more TV-friendly package.
Given that the PSA Tour was already using PAR-11, the WG’s main task
was to prove that PAR-11 worked well for recreational players and
liase with WISPA to evaluate if the system worked for professional
women’s tour.
An online survey revealed that 74% of the 1,200 respondents agreed
that the sport should move to a uniform scoring system and 48%
agreed it should be PAR (vs. 45% in favour of HiHo). In addition, a
survey among 2,000 recreational players was conducted in Australia,
Brazil, England, Estonia, Finland, Peru and South Africa; those
surveyed played matches using PAR-11 and recorded their experience
relative to their usual matches using HiHo. Respondents felt that
PAR-11 would be more entertaining to watch, was no more difficult to
keep the score, the tactics stayed essentially the same (except in
Brazil/Estonia where the game included more attacking play) and
shortened the matches by about 20%.
Shortly the WG announced its recommendation, WISPA informed the
world of its adoption of PAR-11 for the women’s Tour. This wrapped
up the work of the WG and allowed WSF to proceed with this motion
for Singles.
The rationale for International Doubles is straightforward. The
discipline is played using HiHo-9 to best of three games (elite
events) and HiHo-15 to best of five games (recreational players). In
order to achieve uniformity, all International Doubles matches will
be played using PAR-11 to best of three (elite) and best of five
(recreational players). It is important to recall that elite matches
are played to best of three because experience shows that using best
of five renders them too long – some matches from Melbourne 2006
lasted well over two hours and this was using PAR-9.
In summary, the benefits of merging the sport’s scoring to PAR-11
are:
* Create the image that recreational players are playing the same
game as
professionals –“I can do that” effect
* Easier to understand for beginners
* Easier to follow for spectators and viewers (TV/Internet)
* A unique marketing opportunity to demonstrate the sport’s openness
to change
and innovation – an undoubted benefit, if exploited
correctly, for our Olympic
bid for 2016
An element of caution is the shortening of matches observed in the
trials among recreational players. We are mindful that changes in
the length of matches will affect players. Our main concern is that
recreational players still feel that they have obtained a good
workout at the end of the match, thereby maintaining Squash’s image
as an intensely athletic sport. We will monitor this closely for the
long-term health of our equity. In addition, we will be seeking
feedback from club owners to ensure that the change does not
negatively affect their business.
|
|
|
|
