2003 Handicap
Tournament
Information
Rules
Groups
Matrix
Commentaries
Main Schedule
Plate Schedule
Sunday, 23rd November - Finals night
It was a relief for those of us who have been knocked out already to have a day off. Others weren't so lucky! The plate semi-finals were held in the morning, and Richard Chinn (-10) had his fifth match in three days when he played David Preedy (+9). He put in a tremendous effort, but David's dogged retrieving forced him to lower his margins for errors and he hit too many tinned backhand drops. In the other semi-final, Mark Williams (-13) must have found his large negative handicap unsettling and never really got going against Lisa Hobbs (+11).
There was a good turnout for the finals in the evening. Both matches were very entertaining, and it was good to see the ladies represented in both events. We had to invoke a rarely-used rule and alter Lisa's handicap group, as she has been playing twice as well as she was supposed to in her last three matches. The new handicap of Lisa (+9) and David (-10) proved to be spot on. Lisa didn't really settle in the first game - David played some good sensible squash and put her under pressure with his serves. In the second, however, Lisa really got going and hit some great winners to take it comfortably. You could see David turn up his concentration in the third and Lisa won only one of the first 20 rallies and only three points on the entire game. So, 2-1 in games to David.
The fourth game started well for David. His serving was still causing Lisa problems and he went from -10/9 to 9/10 in an impressive display of consistent, error-free squash. He looked to be in a cast-iron position from there, but... As many players in this tournament have discovered, for the back marker, there are two psychological barriers. The first one is getting out of negative numbers. The other (and in my opinion, far more significant one) is getting level with the opponent. The concentration just seems to disintegrate!
Having won 19 of the first 20 rallies, David then lost four of the next eight to let Lisa get to game ball. In the next rally, she saw a chance and went for a kill that just skimmed the top of the red. Lisa set three (a surprise to everyone!), David took the next two points, Lisa the next (just to keep the spectators at fever pitch) and then David clinched it with a backhand winner down the line.
If we had stuck to the original handicapping of -14/11, then the score would
have been heavily in Lisa's favour:
15/-5, 15/17, 15/3, 15/9, 15/-2, 14/-9 (unfinished).
The finals of the main event was another exciting match. Peter McFarlane (-10) against Karen Ferris (+9). Both players have been playing consistently well throughout the tournament, so it was interesting to see how Karen would cope with Peter's speed round the court and the speed of the ball. The first two games went Peter's way. Karen's returns of serve were straying out and when she did have an opportunity to put the ball away, Peter seemed to get to most of her winners. The only shots that were working for her were risky ultra-low drops and volley drops - often off the serve.
In the third game, Karen's excellent boasting and retrieving began to take their toll on Peter's concentration. He didn't put her under as much pressure with the serve, and when she hit a couple of winning drops, he responded with a couple of mistakes to let her get 14/-1 in front. Peter then moved up a gear and hurled himself around the court and clawed back point after point in an effort to salvage the game. Having done all the hard work to get back to a respectable 12/14, Karen then spoiled his chances of a 3-0 win by playing yet another winning drop.
Although Peter was now 2-1 in front, Karen had the psychological advantage of having won the last game. However, in the fourth game, Peter made absolutely no errors and Karen attempted lots of risky winning returns of serve which didn't pay off. Peter got from -10/9 to +8/9 before Karen got her first point. This unsettled Peter slightly and Karen got three of the next six points with some more winners and a mistake from Peter. At 12-all, Peter settled down again and although Karen had some chances, her attacking shots tinned, and Peter went through to 15/12.
Both matches were very good to watch and played in a very sporting way. In fact, both men owned up to double bounces at critical moments that were not spotted by the marker.
Steve did a great job of finishing off the evening with the speech/prize-giving. Peter got a pair of squash shoes, Karen got a squash top and balls, David got a T-shirt and balls, and Lisa got a T-shirt. I was presented with a T-shirt for my efforts.
I've already done my rant for this year, so all that remains is to thank all the participants, markers (especially Neil T, who marked many matches even though he hadn't actually entered the tournament) spectators and organisers and nibbles providers. I've already calculated the rankings and converted them into handicaps for next year. To those of you who got into the finals, expect no mercy! To those of you who went out in two matches, next year might be your year; you should get a more-favourable handicap.
I would just like to leave you with the quote of the championship. Lisa Hobbs was attempting to work her womanly wiles on David Preedy before their match in an attempt to upset his squash. I couldn't possibly reveal what she said as this is a family web site, but it involved intimate details of a saucy squash attire that she would wear (or not wear) for her match. David's response was a classic and we would all do well to learn from it: "When I go on court, I don't think about sex; I just think about squash". Damn it! That's where I've been going wrong all these years!!
See you next year.
Saturday, 22nd November
With one or two exceptions, the handicapping seems to be spot on this year. Out of 14 matches today, there were eight five-setters, 4 close matches (went to four, or had 15/14 in some games) and only two one-sided matches.
The star of the day was Richard Chinn, who played three matches - two in the tournament and one for the vets - and won them all. For a man almost in his dotage who's supposed to be taking it easy after a hernia operation that is deeply impressive! Or maybe he's just mad!!
Neil Healey (-10) and Karen Ferris (+9) had a tremendous semi-final match - worthy of a final. As always, Neil gave 110% and gave the spectator's coronaries with the audacity of some of his drops. Karen played out of her socks and took the first game fairly convincingly and never allowed Neil to get out of negative points in the second. Neil then rallied and with some superb retrieving, drops, lobs and lengths took the third and fourth, allowing Karen four and two points respectively. Neil was looking good in the beginning of the fifth, but it all started to get away from him when Karen won two points in a row with some superb drops to go 13/1 in front. Karen just needed two more winners - which she got.
To round off the evening, many of us went to Christina's gorilla evening. This was a talk and slide show about the plight of gorillas in Rwanda and Congo. Followed of course by some really good food - even sausages for the children!
Tomorrow, we have a couple of plate semi-finals in the morning at 10:30. The evening entertainment starts at 18:30 with the two finals followed by prize-giving and nibbles in the bar.
Please bring some nibbles!
Friday, 21st November
No five-setters tonight, but some good matches nonetheless. Steve Porter (-19) squeezed through against Danielle (+11) in four games. Duncan's winning streak came to an abrupt end against Karen Ferris when she won in four despite a handicap of -13/+11. She now gets the dubious pleasure of meeting her husband Errol in the next round.
It looks like I managed to fiddle my handicap as I haven't dropped a game yet, but it came close today when I nearly disintegrated in my third game against Graham. I meet Anne Tomkins tomorrow with a handicap of -8/+7; it should be interesting!
That's all!
Thursday, 20th November
We got off to a good start tonight. Lots of memorable matches including a superb one between Errol v Lisa Hobbs. Errol was off -23 and Lisa was off +12. Unbelievably, Errol took the first two games allowing Lisa only one point in each. Lisa then got the hang of his serve and helped by a couple of errors from Errol, took the next two games with ease (15/2 in each). Errol got off to a tremendous start in the fifth and took the first 17 points, but then Lisa got her first point and a little later with the help of a tinned drop from Errol got her second point to get to match ball with Errol still needing 10 points. Errol got those 10 points! A very enjoyable and good-humoured match.
Another marathon was fought between Jimmy (-9) and Brian (+8). To cut a (very) long story short, Brian got to 14/8 in the fifth, Jimmy pulled it back to 14-all, Brian called '1' and got it! Three of the games went to 14-all. What handicapping!
The other five-setter was between Steve Porter (-2) and Tom Richardson (+2). The first two games were close, but both went to Steve. Tom then started floating the ball around and had a very convincing 15/1 and 15/10 victory in the third and fourth games. The fifth went to 14-all and Steve eventually pulled through 17/15.
Duncan (+10) produced the most dazzling display of frame shots I have ever seen in the first game. The ball was spinning, sliding, ricocheting and defying the laws of physics. Chas (-12) had a really good first game, and despite easing off a bit took it 15/14. However, Duncan eventually decided to start using his racket strings and Chas found himself in real pressure. Duncan took the next three games fairly convincingly.
The Chinns had a good evening. Danielle (+12) dispatched Ben (-20) in four games. Alison, Richard and Graham all got a mixture of byes, walkovers and opponents suffering from viruses.
<rant mode on>
The only blot on the evening was an amazing display (not of a squash kind
though) from one member who had not entered the tournament. Not knowing
what the entry for the tournament would be, we had only booked courts from 19:30
on, to try to disrupt players as little as possible. When it became
apparent that we were under pressure for courts, we pulled Court 1 and Court 3 back off players. This particular member had
booked Court 2 at 18:45, and we went to quite some trouble to keep a court free
for him at this time. We thought it would be reasonable to request that he
use Court 3 so we could have Court 2 for the tournament as a lot of people were
watching the Jimmy/Brian match. However, he turned up in the balcony and
was very upset (and quite vocal) about his court being unavailable - despite his
opponent not having turned up yet. I offered to move the tournament match
instantly to Court 3 (which of course was empty at the time) so that he could
have the court he had booked, but he rejected this offer and then disappeared,
muttering about how we had taken his court! Oh, the joys of running a
tournament!!
By the way, less complaints about handicaps please! They are
calculated on a computer based on previous year's results and modified by how
you are currently doing against your peers. They are NOT designed to allow
the better player to win, or to give an easy victory to the lesser player.
They are designed to allow you a good chance of winning if you play at your
best. Some players' style means that they do well in a positive handicap
position (the shot makers), and some players have a style that allows them to do
well when playing with a negative handicap (the retrievers). I will admit
that I don't always get the handicaps right, particular if it's the first time
you have entered the tournament (remember Ed last year), but I try
my best. After a couple of years, your handicap gets adjusted to the
correct level. So, one consolation that you can take away, is that if you lose all
your games, you will be in a lower group next year, and therefore will have a
much better chance.
<rant mode off>
Tuesday, 18th November
I've got 29 names. Not a bad entry considering the compressed four-day format.
Sunday, 19th October
Just waiting for the names to come in.