Speaking of PAR
In addition to the many competitive tournament players who read and contribute to Squash Magazine, there are a vast number of recreational players such as myself who play squash because it is a fantastic way to get a great workout, and it is far more fun than an hour on the StairMaster. We’re not concerned about TV appeal (it’s never on), Olympic potential (not going to happen and shouldn’t, if you ask me), or recouping tournament entry fees. We book a court over our lunch break or after work and play for an hour or until we’re exhausted, whichever comes first (usually the latter). Whether we play five games in an hour using traditional 9-point scoring or 10 games in an hour using 11-point PAR scoring shouldn’t really matter to us.
Having said that, my colleagues and I, B-level recreational players ranging in age from 35-52 years, have switched to the 11-point PAR scoring system since reading about the rule change in your January issue. Our experience has paralleled yours. Our rallies were initially the same length as before, but the games ended more quickly, and we would play eight or nine games in an hour rather than four or five. We all soon modified our strategy, however, realizing both the potential to lose points while serving and to win points while not. We could no longer afford to attempt low-percentage winners while serving. Our rallies have become longer as both players play more conservatively on each point. The risk is too great for the server and the potential is too great for the receiver to “take a rally off.” Previously, after winning a long, tiring rally to gain back the serve, one was too easily tempted to rest and try to win a quick point with a risky drop or lucky nick, at worst losing the serve and being no worse off than before. Can’t do that anymore, as there is too much down-side. Now there is always incentive to try to dig one more out of the back corner or cover one more drop, as there is greater potential reward for success and greater penalty for failure. Every rally counts.
Our games now last nearly as long as with the old scoring system, and back-and-forth games ending 16-14 are not uncommon and are far more exciting than 10-9 games under the old system. It took each of us only one or two sessions to get used to the new scoring system, and now, after only a month, none of us would revert back to the old way.
Jeff Baka
Sioux Falls, SD
Superior fitness is a significant advantage in squash under any scoring system. Competitive focus plus shot control and imagination—and knowledge of the rules—are probably of increased significance with PAR-11 than with 9-point. Is this a bad thing? I don’t think so. PAR-11 would seem to help players with higher capabilities in those areas, regardless of level of fitness. As for it being more difficult to comeback in a game, why should lost rallies be part of a comeback? Win rallies and you win games; lose them and you’ll lose. Seems completely fair to me.
For league play, my observation is that most of our players are playing a few games after the formal match ends to better use the full court hour anyway. In tournament play I agree that the amount of squash played is less per match than under the 9-point scoring. My informal study of our league results suggests that every point added to PAR could add about 1.7 scored rallies per game. I would encourage the squash bodies to keep PAR scoring and think about varying the PAR winning total if they feel matches are getting too short. PAR-14, for example, might be expected to produce an average of five more scoring rallies than PAR-11.
It never made sense to me that you would win a rally and not get a point simply because your opponent hit the ball first. I’m happy that’s done with.
Eric Kaumheimer
by email
Research “Up to PAR”?
I found Will Carlin’s column, Not Up to PAR, somewhat contradictory. He finds himself agreeing with the idea that “We need a unified scoring system,” but then goes on to suggest a system involving different scoring for major tournaments, hence doing away with unification! The notion that a 9-point system in, say, the British Open, will require a different level of toughness doesn’t hold—a high degree of mental and physical toughness is required in squash no matter what the scoring system. And PAR demands full concentration on every single point by both players, perhaps more so than under 9-point.
Plus, the British Open and World Open in squash need no boost from a scoring tweak. Tennis’s grand slams stand above the rest because of what winning them represents, not because of a different scoring system.
Is there another sport that allows one to score only when serving? Certainly no other racquet sports besides racquetball do. Even volleyball, which had used side-out scoring for decades (equivalent to the 9-point system in squash) has done away with it in favor of “rally scoring.”
Unification is, indeed, a good thing. Amateurs in all sports like to play on the same terms as the pros, even if their actual level of play is a far cry from the best! Players will adjust, especially by paying closer attention on their own serve, and matches will gradually lengthen. As one who plays matches that are confined to a 45 minute court time, I for one am happy about PAR: matches actually reach a conclusion!
Joe Pratt
by email
Will Carlin always has a fun take on things. His “Not Up to PAR” column last month makes some interesting points that are worth exploring. I just want to correct some information that was erroneous in the column. World Squash and U.S. SQUASH both continue to sanction the HiHo to 9, as well as PAR 15 scoring as alternative scoring options under the official rules. PAR 15 is being experimented with for very young, and older age division play. Except for our National Championships and some other elite competitions, the marketplace will indeed decide, and we’re all for it.
Kevin Klipstein
CEO, U.S. SQUASH
On Sportsmanship
There is a postscript to Kevin Klipstein’s article in the latest issue of your magazine: A few years after the incident he describes, he won the first Rich Perlman trophy for sportsmanship in Rochester, NY, and made both his father and mother very proud, especially since he has grown up to be both a competitor and a gentleman.
Rose-Marie Klipstein (aka, Mom)
by email
