from a reader
Will Gens jumps around quite a bit but he has the guts to make several points which need to be made. We have all these former world number ones coaching and running academies in the States. Our boys shouldn't be limping home in 12th place and our coach shouldn't be justifying anything.
Will Gen's latest piece of writing, which was posted on Daily Squash Report yesterday, is perhaps the biggest piece of drivel I have read this year. Despite the fact that I agree that US Squash could do better to professionalize their national team set up I do not think that the results in the recent World team Championships were an 'embarrassment'. They had a great win against Mexico despite Julian being injured and lost some close ties, which could have gone either way. Had they been at full strength throughout the tournament their results could have been very different.
ReplyDeleteGilly Lane put in some great performances to win at 2 against many world ranked players. To say that this is good for Gilly but not for the team is ridiculous. Gilly was playing for the team and winning for the team.
Fair enough, perhaps Dylan Murray is not a phenom but I don't think anyone who knows anything about junior squash around the world would call him that. The kid is 17/18 competing in his first World Championship, cut him some slack. Perhaps he didn't win big matches for the USA but he certainly put the effort in on the court (see his 5 dives against Scotland!) and is undoubtably going to be a good player for the USA for years to come.
I'd like to point out that the 4 guys who were selected were the top 4 finishers at the recent US Nationals (Todd Harrity was unavailable for selection, I believe due to injury.) Will Gens calls the selections 'political', I just can't see any basis for this comment. Are US Squash to pick players who don't compete on the PSA and or the US Championships and instead pick players with no rankings or results? From reading Will's article the only two things I learned were: He for whatever reason thinks US Squash don't pick the best players and he has a massive man crush on Hisham Ashour. Both of which I find bizarre.
As I said, I agree that the National team set up could do with some overhaul but criticizing the current players isn't going to help this. US squash need to make the decision to capitalize on the growing interest in squash and tap into the coaching/playing talent now based in the US. Use a successful national program from another country as a template, appoint an appropriate, well qualified and experienced full time national coach, set up a national training center with regular squad sessions and put together development squads and selection events for aspiring National team players. Have clearly outlined selection criteria so every player knows how he/she may represent their country and make the process as transparent as possible.
I'm sure if squash gets into the Olympics then the US will undoubtably set up a legitimate national program but I feel this is something they should be doing regardless of the outcome of the upcoming vote.
In the meantime, well done guys at the Worlds, let's see some more constructive criticism rather than just counterproductive ramblings.
Best,
Greg McArthur
Don't confuse effort with results...this is absolute drivel and the kind of talk that perpetuates the loser mentality. Man up, I want us to win, you want to pat the backs of losers and say good try.
DeleteThat was one of the multiple points he made, why don't you respond to those? How were the selections political? What players are better than the ones selected for the team?
DeleteI completely agree with Mr. McArthur!
ReplyDeleteMr Assaiante & Mr McArthur seem to be celebrating the win over Mexico. Mexico has ZERO players in the top 50! This is part of the problem, thinking that was a "great" win. The bar needs to be set higher.
ReplyDeleteNo point in setting the bar higher when you havent got the players.
ReplyDelete5 Mexican players in the top 100. 3 of whom were recently top 50. That's pretty strong. The US had one psa player who played. That was a good win
this was a down year for the americans
ReplyDeleteThere are two different arguments here and I think it is important to distinguish the two. I am in agreement that the US could do more to support and improve the National team set up. There is enough interest and enough talent that if nurtured could and should produce impressive results in World Championships and Pan Am games etc. The second argument, which i personally do not agree with, is that the players who went to the latest World Championship under performed. I don't want to seem like i'm the US teams biggest cheerleader because quite frankly i'm not. I'm Scottish, have no equity in the team, personal or professional, but I do love squash and I do like to call things as they are. Unfairly slandering the performances of a team of players unjustly doesn't sit well with me, especially when it is done anonymously...cough....cough.
ReplyDeleteThe US win over Mexico was impressive. The Mexican number 1 is a 50-60 in the world ranked player, Chris Gordon is ranked less than 10 spots above him and pulled out a solid 3-1 win. Gilly Lane pulls off another 3-1 win against a 70 in the world ranked player, who very recently was ranked in the mid 30's. I'm sorry but anyway you look at it that's a solid win. I don't think anyone was popping open the bubbly but it was a good win, especially when you are missing Julian.
The US weren't going to beat Malaysia when they weren't full strength, and would have probably beaten Germany had Julian not had to withdraw injured. I can't quite understand how these facts are being overlooked. If they had lost to Canada, Scotland and Germany while they were full strength then perhaps you can make comments on underachieving. In my humble opinion the 3 guys who were left after Julian's injury did a very solid job. I would like to point out that their final match was against a tough Canadian team who had done a good job of rotating who played which match and thus had, and I know it's relative, well rested players for the last match. USA on the other hand had lost their number 2, had Gilly playing up and playing tough competition every match, a junior playing in his first world champs playing at 3 and Chris Gordon playing his 7th match, 6 of those were guys in the top 100, and 4 of those 6 were top 50.
I don't think anyone is debating that the system could be improved. The questions we should be asking are: how is this achieved?, what is the correct system?, how is it funded?, what are the pathways to achieve selection? Who should be National coach?, how to subsidize support staff i.e. physios, strength and conditioning coaches etc, appropriate goal setting for the national teams and for the individual players themselves and so on.
Instead of asking these questions, and following through by emailing US Squash or the appropriate people to give suggests/seek answers it is far easier to write on here or on a blog taking a dump on the 3 very tired guys who have just killed themselves for the best part of a week playing for their country.
best,
Greg
How come the USA 'hasn't got the players' though? Something is radically wrong with your developmental system when you can only send 1 PSA player onto the court in the world championships.
ReplyDeletePSA player is a meaningless reference now. There were several retired players representing their countries from across the world, a bunch of college squash players competing, and there were actually several PST players competing for their countries.
DeleteIt is all about level of play. The US had a bad patch of luck with the boy from Princeton getting hurt and then Julian going down early in the tournament (maybe a lack of training was a contributing factor as the author said).
If the SL Green is indeed the audition for the US team, why didn't Faraz Khan get on the team or Chris Hanson, or David Ramsden-Wood who had the best quarter final result of all the losers?
Because for for the vast majority of them, college is their peak - they use squash to go to a good college, college to get a good job....very few (3 or 4) of them choose to play full-time. Can't expect world class results with only two competing pro players and can't really blame US squash for this, or the coaches for that matter. As i said, they dont have the players
DeleteThought they put in a good performance over there
There was a classic plate (5-8), Dylan won it.
ReplyDeletethank you. that make sense
DeleteWhile I fully understand the sentiments behind the frustration of Will Gens remarks and while I agree that we would all like to see the US do better, I believe the challenges are systemic and have little to do with the coaching or the selection systems that are currently in place.
ReplyDeleteIf anyone is serious about researching the root causes of our competitive limitations in the US I suggest you read both my article "Evolution" http://millmansquash.wordpress.com/2012/10/12/evolution/ and the comments thereafter. I don't agree with all the comments but I think they raise important issues.
I have had the pleasure of working with Paul Assaiante as both a manager of the US National team and as his assistant and I have also been the coach of the United States at the World Championships in Melbourne 2001 when we also finished 12th.
I also know and like Hisham Ashour and have spent a good deal of time talking to him about Squash.
I have known Chris Walker since I coached him as a 12 year old in the Essex county under 14 team more than thirty years ago - and I have spent a good deal of time with him in the last twenty years.
This I will say with confidence. I don't think anyone can do a better job of getting a group of players to perform at their best than Paul Assaiante - and that has nothing to do with technical coaching - he is a superb team coach and delivers players ready to play. You may not agree with the minutiae of what he does and you may not feel he understands the game as well as other coaches, but that is not the job he was hired for - he enables players to produce their best squash - period.
Hisham Ashour is a mercurial and entertaining young man who has much to offer. He is as confused about Squash as most young men of his age who are brilliant players and that have never struggled to perform because it comes naturally to him. In a philosophical discussion about the game of Squash and how to get a player to deliver the goods I would back Assaiante every time. To help groom a young player to play advanced Squash and to get to a highly competitive level of play through training, practice and match play, I would back Hisham every time.
Chris Walker is perhaps one of the greatest deliverers of personal performance that I have ever met. He was an awesome Captain of England - perhaps consistently the greatest competing Squash team of the last generation. I don't subscribe to all of Chris's methods ( and nor he to mine) and I don't believe that he is the perfect person to deliver a team as a unit. But to be able to call on him and his experience is a boon that few players can call on. His experience of tough team situations is invaluable.
The US Squash association has a real problem born (in my opinion) of the issues that I discuss my article mentioned above.
We have good people.
We now need imagination in evolving our systems, while remaining cognizant of the unique challenges that our demographics present in America.
We need to change and we all need to help.
Richard Millman
Clearly the team overperformed if anything. Chris Gordon always plays better than he should. He is not especially quick or fluid and his racket skills are only adequate, but he plays a hard hitting up-tempo game that forces players to match him in his tremendous physical effort and this has produced some darn good wins and some remarkable near-wins against more talented players. Kudos to him. Gilly is in retirement and was playing a spot higher and more matches than he was meant to and produced an excellent record. Well done. How goofy for Gens to write "good for him but not for the team." What on earth can that mean?
ReplyDeleteDylan is clearly not ready yet for that level of play, but two older guys with more experience went out hurt. Nobody who could have won those matches could have replaced them so it makes sense to give the spot to someone you believe might have an impact in the future. I don't know if that was a judgement call, which Gens considers "political", but it's not insane or unfair.
What is unfair is to bash a coach for talking up his players. Should Assaiante have said, "Dylan's only a decent junior player but he's all we've got."? Would that have helped Dylan's performance? How silly can you get?
The issue of "great squash minds" is equally silly. At the top level coaching consists of imbuing players with confidence and determination, and helping them construct a game plan that highlights their strengths and their opponent's weaknesses as far as possible. That's just not that complicated. Many players even at that level can only change their games marginally anyway so the point is moot. Could a "great squash mind" have got Gordon to play like HIddy Jahan, or Lane like Barrington if the occasion required? C'est a rire.(On this site I just watched a video of Willstrop, often touted as a "great squash mind" smacking it with Ramy and getting spanked for it.)
Squash is an individual sport and the U.S. simply doesn't have great athletes going into squash. McEnroe says the same about tennis. The U.S. has more organized junior soccer than any country on the planet but is a long way from winning a World Cup for the same reason.
Can't you imagine Ramy gliding around a basketball court at the NCAA Div I level? It's easy to see Matthew or Gaultier playing some damn good soccer. Now try to picture the guys on the U.S. team in those sports at a really high level. I don't see it.
How many players even show up for the S.L. Green anyway, great athletes or not? Just whom does Gens think would have been chosen by a selection process of which he would approve?
The Gens piece is emotional and illogical, and sounds about as articulate as the guys I used to listen to on WFAN calling in to bitch because they'd lost money on the game the night before. I've read his blog, and he can write quite entertainingly at times (though often with ideas about the game I find as silly as these) so clearly he was carried away and should have slept on his piece before he posted it. I am one who more often than not says the first thing on his tiny mind, so I recognize the symptoms.
Cheers, Sasha
Agreed the players we sent tried hard and performed their best and should be commended. The trick for next time is to have better players to send. Gens piece was emotional and some emotion is necessary as the groundwork to evoking change. Not "if only we had this guy healthy we would have beaten these guys".
ReplyDeleteSasha, please, don't even think of equating my mind with your "tiny" mind (your reference). I would suggest you ask your wife, the anthropologist, for a tutorial on devolution.
DeleteNo equation, insult or even comparison was intended. I merely meant that I often speak without reflection and ought to have learned better by now.
DeleteI know it is slightly off point and someone has already touched on it but the main reason USA don't have the numbers of juniors coming through is the college culture. Getting to college is the 'endgame" for most top juniors who are using their squash to help get a place at the university of choice. The kids I have met are obsessed with getting into College whereas English juniors are obsessed with becoming great squash players. Generalisations obviously but it seems a massive cultural difference.
ReplyDeleteCulture is the whole thing. That's why top-down plans don't work.
ReplyDeleteI agree the whole overblown squash-for -admissions-boost thing produces players who are not passionate about playing the game for itself. When do you walk into a club and see two guys trying to beat hell out of each other for two hours at a time? I've walked in to many and seen empty courts with kids sitting chatting or playing phone games while waiting for a clinic or lesson to begin. I remember coaching a player who started as a sophomore in college, Jamie Pagliaro, who couldn't wait for practice to be over so he could just kick everyone's ass who was willing to stay afterwards for an hour. Senior year in his first match he beat the number 9 junior in the country 3-0. (Jamie had been recruited for wrestling.)
But it's also culture that determines what sports the best athletes choose in the first place. The kids playing squash at 11 are not often choosing between squash and playing point guard for their elementary team. I remember years ago coaching at a club where we rarely took the best players to tournaments because they were the ones who had made the travelling hockey squad. The thing is, that's U.S. culture, it's not a bad thing- it just means we won't see any stellar results at Worlds until a good sized group of fairly gifted athletes, preferably living near enough to eachother to compete often, fall in love with the game and stick at it for eight or ten years. That's, of course, the situation coaches try to create. Many years ago I had a kid who was amazing the first day. John Musto had been his babysitter and said the first time he took the kid out at 6 or 7 he could rally endlessly. He went to a big junior tournament and won it easily after a month of playing at 10 or 11. A year later he was simply more interested in other sports and in girls. Culture. So ist das leben.
Public courts in places kids congregate, with some indestructible rackets readily available might have some effect- it doesn't sound very feasible, though, does it? Just one more resume activity at expensive clubs, though, is a recipe that clearly won't produce many stars. Inner city programs sound great, but are the kids heading over there Saturday and Sunday to spend the whole day and grab every minute of court-time they can get? Perhaps, I don't know. Are the kids who are making teams in other sports coming, or the kids whose mothers see these programs as an academic leg up? Again, I don't know.
I'm a left winger. I believe we need a top-down health care system (just not the one we're building now.) In sports though, if the goal is to produce a few champions, you need a massive grass-roots upswell that produces a market, red in tooth and claw.
That sort of cultural shift is not easy to create.
The grain of culture runs pretty darn deep, as any anthropologist will tell you. (I'm married to one.)
Cheers, Sasha
This debate is very interesting. In response to Sasha's comments re getting a good sized group of fairly gifted athletes who live near each other to compete often throughout their development years is exactly the situation that a group of avid squash players in New York is trying to create. check out www.thesquashcenter.com
ReplyDeleteFirst, kudos to the US Team (especially Gilly) for a noble effort. They have lead Squash in the US to new levels, which we must ever strive to carry forward.
ReplyDeleteSecond, Sasha makes some great points. What Squash needs is a new model of talent hotbeds in several US Cities, like those described in The Talent Code by Daniel Coyle. We hope this is what The T Squash Center (recently built) becomes in CIncinnati, Ohio. See www.thet.us. We opened in January, 2013 and are trying to bring the game to a broad swath of grade school and high schools in our city, as well as to field a select national level tournament team.
Early signs are good, but the road is definitely long --the economical model is difficult and the challenge to create a vibrant competitive model to attract the city's best athletes is steep. But stay tuned and watch how we do. And check us out at www.thet.us. and www.facebook.com/TSquash. Neal Tew.
Even if we managed to get a group of gifted athletes together - until the players we do have understand that learning to play the sport once you have good technical skills and athleticism ( not always the situation as Sacha points out) you have to serve your time learning how to play competitively.
ReplyDeleteEnglish and Egyptian 16-year-olds who show reasonable promise join adult and ideally PSA/WSA competitions - the real university of Squash.
US College Squash simply holds players back (as Squash players). Part-timers playing against other part-timers will never achieve what full-timers can.
Most American talent completely misses the boat by failing to engage in the full time game early enough.
One or two complete college and then have a couple of years playing at it, and very rarely one or two like Julian Illingworth and Gilly Lane work at it.
Chris Gordon absolutely got it right. He worked at it full time from his youth. Since the nuance involved in Squash is as complex as any field of human study - Medicine - Philosophy - The Law - there is no possible way an individual can reach their maximum ability level in less than ( in my opinion) around 9 years of full time study.
Mark Talbott - who in my opinion is still the greatest American Squash player of all time - fully understood this and quit college to fully engage in his apprenticeship in his chosen life's work.
If you don't know about Talbott's amazing ability to move between the Hardball code and the International game and to challenge and beat players in the top ten in the world - then you need to do some research.
Meanwhile players who have the passion, the athleticism, the skill and the support structure ( and we have plenty of those in my opinion in the US - more perhaps than Sacha feels) simply need to embrace the concept as Chris Gordon has and Mark Talbott did - full immersion in the PSA/WSA world for as long as it takes and for as long as you have the passion for it.
It isn't for everyone. In fact very few.
But if we had 20 players who desired that unusual but rewarding life who committed - then Assaiante or whomsoever was chosen and Walker or whomsoever was chosen - would have a fighting chance with soldiers who were battle hardened - not raw recruits or part-time veterans - plus one or two real players.
If 20 or so 15 year old boys and a similar number of girls accessed this discussion now - and wanted it badly enough - and were prepared to fit their studies around playing full-time instead of studying full time and fitting part-time play around the academic work - then the US would undoubtedly have a world class group of players by about 2022 - possibly before. BUT that is the only way it's going to happen.
Other than that I thing 12th in the world is pretty respectable for part-timers.
If you look at the FIFA soccer ranking what is the highest ranking of a part-time team?
All very true, Richard. But in the midwest you have to start somewhere. In Cincinnati, it used to be the case that squash was never an option except for country club children. The T has changed that. Perhaps some of the children who pick up the game here will follow the path you have suggested. After all, Mark and Dave Talbott were born just up the highway in Dayton and learned to play on a court in their house. That's an Ohio legacy we would love to continue.
ReplyDeleteCome visit us someday! Meantime, here's a video from our grand opening that aims at introducing the sport to local children and families: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_F_hWRa7gcY
Check the background of most top players: they barely attend school after 14. They have the correct environment to excel and make a living. The US have a team full of ivy leaguers!!
ReplyDeleteWe need to give them an opportunity similar to top Commonwealth countries.
I agree with a lot of comments about Paul and believe he is still the top motivator and prepared these guys for a top ten result.
Stephen
To those of you who commented directly on my blog posting concerning the recent performance of the US Squash Team at the World Open, please post your comments here on DSR's reader's forum. I don't want to be responsible for deciding which comments to post and not post since some of them are very inflammatory and of a personal nature, that I can only say, if you have the integrity and courage to stand by your opinion, then post them on DSR. And please, don't hide behind anonymity, but sign your real name.
ReplyDeleteThe purpose of my blog was not to flex my spell checker or editing muscles, it was meant to stir debate about moving forward and being successful on the world squash stage. I believe this country is the greatest country in the world; I want to see us have the greatest squash players and team in the world as well. How we accomplish that will take more than what we are doing. Because squash is bursting at the seams at the junior level and college squash is the showcase of squash in this country, it isn't working to produce top level world class players.
The only way to beat teams like the UK and the Egyptians is to learn from them. And you don't learn from them except from players and coaches who have been significant in creating their formidable teams. Hisham is not only a great player, but in my opinion, and this is my OPINION, a remarkable coach. As he moves towards full time coaching, he will be one of the great coaches out there. And he is here, right in our own backyard. Use him; he knows what it takes to reach the top echelon.
Will
Have to admit, the star power and draw of having the World Champion's brother as US national team coach is worth something.
ReplyDeleteWhen Bela Karolyi came over from Hungary and was made head coach of the US women's gymnastics team, a lot of good old boy feathers were ruffled. But the results speak for themselves.
What's there to lose by giving Ashour a shot?
You have it exactly right. I wish I could do the research but the US has experienced similar success in gymnastics and fencing. You got exactly what I was saying.
DeleteThough I take nothing away from Karolyi, you might note that the rise of U.S. gymnastic success has largely come during a period of decline in the Eastern Bloc's massive focus on sporting achievement. We are a hugely rich country and they are poor countries who are no longer using state funding in unjustifiable amounts and coercive athlete selection methods to prove the superiority of their political system.
DeleteAlso Mary Lou Retton not only drew attention to the sport but brilliantly parleyed her success into the wealth that comes with celebrity in America. That brought in more athletes and parental investment.
To be fair, Karolyi was her coach, and she succeeded when those countries still had their systems in place. Nonetheless I'd argue that it was at least as much the success of an enormously talented athlete,Retton, as it was the brilliance of her coach that led to the subsequent successes of the U.S. team. Note also that much of her celebrity (to which I attribute the expanded interest in the sport)came from his defection and from the miracle of defeating a political enemy who had dominated.
In any case Karolyi worked with Retton from a young age. In squash the National coach gets formed near-adult players with their games intact and has a few weeks a year to have an effect. Even more crucial, a twelve year old gymnast doesn't need a bunch of other great twelve-year-olds to push her- she and her coach can measure her moves against a standard of perfection, while a squash player only knows if his or her shots are truly sharp enough, taken early enough, disguised enough, if there's another skilled player there to retrieve them. Remember that Bruce Lee line? "Boards don't hit back."
As always, Sasha
Richard is absolutely correct that college is not the best route to pro squash. He is also correct that Mark remains the greatest American player with any ball. I'll also agree with you, Richard, that if twenty kids made squash their full time focus we'd do better in 8-10 years. I said the same above. Even the time frame you cite is identical to mine above!!! It's also true that some current U.S. players are pretty good athletes, Richard, (perhaps I'm unfairly overstating my argument, as one does) but without a good number of genuine athletes for them to compete against, they will not be toughened. In the heyday of hardball, Mark, Ned, Desaulniers and a few others were outstanding athletes, but they breezed through the first few rounds of their tournaments, while on the softball tour, with its vastly broader base, players were more constantly challenged. (When I think of the absurdity of Mark occasionally practicing with ME, lame as I was, it's easy to remember how shallow the pool was.) People who believed then that softball was somehow a "better" game because top softballers did better at hardball than hardballers did at softball never appreciated the vastly greater numbers playing softball and the consequently more severe competition to reach the top. Also the the more varied social classes from which softballers were drawn meant that there were more people among them making squash their primary focus at a young age (as Richard wants more Americans to do). In spite of the ball change in the U.S., both these conditions prevail, and it was a false diagnosis two decades ago to imagine that switching balls would change U.S. prospects on the international stage.
ReplyDelete(I used to recommend this thought experiment to the tiny number of people who would listen to me blather. Imagine that the whole world was running the 10,000 meters, and that in most countries it was a very popular sport, taken quite seriously by people as a profession. Imagine that in the U.S. we prefered the mile, but only a few people from a very white collar background ((a group who produce few pro athletes in any sport)) ran. Would you be surprised if foreign athletes did better at the mile than U.S. runners at the 10,000, or even outdid them at the mile? Would that mean that the 10,000 is a "better" or more difficult race? As a runner I can assure you that it is neither.)
The important point to remember though, is that the kids introduced to squash by the current structure in the U.S. are going to remain focused, with very few exceptions, on college and a broader range of activities. I know I would certainly prefer my own children to pursue higher education than squash, or any other sport for that matter. (My son is certainly far more coordinated than I ever was, and my daughter has a fierce cussedness that will make her a force to be reckoned with in any competitive field.)
I love squash, with any ball. I'd like more people to try it. If many more Americans, from many different backgrounds play the game, which will come about only with easier access to cheaper courts, some of them will love the game enough to make it their life. Some of those will be both gifted and tough, like Mark. (Few, if any, will have Mark's, or Dave's, extraordinary character, unless that's just an Ohio thing, Neal.)
I know I write some strong attacks on others' ideas on this and other sites. I do appreciate, however, that Richard, Will Gens and others love the game too, even if they see the issues very differently. I believe though, that at the same time as we all have high hopes for U.S. squash, we have to make a realistic assessment of the obvious reasons we don't have a great U.S. team, not look for scapegoats or quick fixes - coaching, selection processes, playing more in adult leagues or whatever. Those sorts of ideas are fine in their place, but they don't address the root of the issue.
Cheers, Sasha (That's Sasha S-A-SSSSS-H-A, Richard!)
Will, My real name is Alexander Cooke, but I don't think anybody outside my family knows that. (I once had a garage mechanic who called me Alex, and 30 years ago a Latin teacher.) My point about your spelling and grammar was really meant to emphasize that you had gone off half-cocked, and in that in light of your insistence that blogs are important journalism that was perhaps unfortunate. I meant no ill.
ReplyDeleteAll the best, Sasha (Alexander Ambrose Cooke)
Blogs are important! I am a product of grass roots journalism which has brought a president to his knees and has uncovered many scandals in this country. People who speak out are often dismissed as half cocked, but in reality those who never question anything and who regurgitate the absolute nonsense that perpetuates the status quo are the fools. I didn't go off half cocked as you say, to me you are a pompous fool who hasn't had an original thought or idea in over a decade. Sorry for this but when you attack someone call them dumb, silly, half cocked expect a fight. Any time on any court would love to mix it up. I don't really care what you call yourself, Sasha or Ambrose or whatever, you are who you are. There are birds who ride the rhinos and pick the vermin off of them for nourishment. You are like those birds, you nourish yourself off other's thoughts and ideas. If you pick a fight expect a fight. I don't like you and you are exactly what is wrong with squash.
Delete...and I might add I studied Greek and Latin at a graduate advanced level and I would challenge you to any grammar contest if you can't find it in yourself to meet a challenge on a squash court.
DeleteAre you really challenging me to play squash? I'm not sure what you think that would settle, but I am damn sure who would win. It's cute, anyway.
DeleteWill, I found the tone of your piece decidedly nasty. What did you mean when you wrote that Gilly's five wins were "good for him but not for the team"? Why would you attack Paul for praising his player? How did you think your remarks would make Dylan, who is after all still in high school, feel? Do you really believe that hundreds of club players could beat the finalist in the British Junior Open "easily", or was that just written in anger? What did you mean when you wrote that the selection process was "political", were you suggesting that preference was given to certain players without regard to their competitiveness? Why would you call the team an "embarrassment"? Are there far stronger U.S. players out there who were bypassed by a conspiratorial selection process? Can you make sense out of this?
You wrote an inflammatory piece. To your credit it's provoked a discussion. It would have been great if you could have avoided the nastiness and achieved the same effect. Perhaps that wouldn't have been possible- I don't know.
Are you better versed in the classics and in grammar than I am? I'd be very surprised if you weren't. More intelligent than I am- most probably. For the record I didn't call you dumb- you're clearly not- but some of your ideas are silly.
When I see a guy with ordinarily flawless grammar and a love for Pound (who is impenetrable to me) write, "Who is the alternates?" I figure he's typing a mile a minute in a fury. I've actually suggested that that is mitigation for the nasty and illogical bits in your piece.
I have always spoken my mind and have never been shy about being stupid, wrong, crazy or sometimes even smart. None of these writings are meant intentionally to offend anyone if you see some wisdaom great, if you see the ramblings of a crazy person, that's great too. It's all true, well, sort of. (Will Gens)
I'm not shy either, nor afraid of a fight. I don't dislike you, however, and I'm guessing I've touched a nerve in some way that you have not revealed since your reaction is so strong. I'm afraid I can't apologize, though, since I stand by what I've written. I'm sure if we ever do get together for a hit we'll find we like each other.
On one thing you're dead right. I haven't had an original thought in half a century, and I'm not holding my breath even now.
Cheers, Sasha
Actually 40 years, how time flies. One foot...
ReplyDeleteThere is no money in squash relative to other sports in the U.S. In other countries governments support players with travel and training expenses to supplement their PSA and WSA playing. In essence, those are appearance fees so that players can represent their country. Squash also attracts countries from across the world who are not elite in other sports. So, the money they can earn in squash is better by their standard. And if college is not an option for you, squash may be a ticket to a middle class lifestyle. In America, squash is not that ticket. Until it is, top athletes will choose other sports.
ReplyDeleteHow do we change that? How do we make a professional squash career a career blessed by god? Go get an MBA and then try and make a living, just about the same result, except if you play squash I think you might enjoy that better than being an under or unemployed MBA.
DeleteIt ain't gonna get better in the near future. The Pan-American Games for juniors just completed without a representative from the United States.
ReplyDeletewhat are you doing to me!? thanks for this this kind of info is really important for all those who are deluded into thinking we are making progress.
DeleteOf course we are making progress. Many more signs point to rapid advancement in US Squash than to the alternative.
Delete- The Number of players in the rankings have grown many times over
- The top level junior tournaments are usually filled with maxed out draws (32)
- The depth of the junior rankings is deeper than ever before
- More and more junior players are becoming year-round players and traveling overseas for international tournament
- World class coaches and the top players are all moving to the US
(Mike Way, PEter Nicol, Lincou, Chris Walker, Paul Johnson, Hesham el Attar, David Palmer, Rodney Martin)
- according to US Squash, squash participation in the US rose 82% from 2007 to 2011
- participation in junior events up 186% from 2007-2011
- source: http://www.ussquash.com/2013/03/14/u-s-squash-reflects-on-flourishing-five-year-growth-and-future-enhancements-for-members/
How can you honestly say that America is not making progress in squash? While we are still far away from our goal, do you really believe we are not better off now than 10, or 5 years ago?
Paul Assaiante is an excellent coach technically, motivationally, organizationally, and psychologically.
ReplyDeleteThe US # 1 player picked up an injury. That skewed all US results because all the others had to play one spot higher.
Many commenters have expressed consternation that junior players see collegiate squash as the apogee of their careers.
In fact, for 99% of the players, they are right. The collegians will be training two hours a day with qualified coaches in good facilities and competing weekly.
Most juniors don’t have what it takes to be professionals.
Once they are graduated from college the alumni will initiate a career, and the continuation of that commitment to training is impractical.
Why should any gifted American squash player run the risk of missing out on an elite education at one of the best colleges in the world to play professional squash? These kids have won the lottery of life if they are recruited to one of the top schools for squash. They are each handed a virtual sure thing career-wise. Rolling the dice on a pro squash career is insane if they look at precedent, probability, and their own financial well being long-term.
I have already made my points about collegiate players turning to doubles after they’re graduated, so there’s no need to rehash that.
I have also already made my points about the USSRA ( now US Squash) blowing up the hardball game for softball twenty years ago. They can’t say they weren’t warned loudly, clearly and repeatedly. Oh well. Life will go on.
Final observation- this weekend in Philadelphia there were two triathlons held- Saturday’s sprint event with 3500 participants, and today’s Olympic distance with over 5000. That keeps things in perspective. Regards, GUY
Guy, we need to reinvent the US squash wheel, it isn't working. You are a bit out of touch, Harvard grads are being recruited to Target's management programs. I work at 120 Broadway I watched the 99% last summer march down Broadway, we need to address their concerns. To be honest, I'd forgo the Harvard education and play professional squash. They can take away your mortgages, your jobs, your prestige, but they can never take away what they cannot control, squash is like that.
ReplyDelete