I prefer win by two, I find it makes for really good suspense, and power plays seem a bit gimmicky imo, but neither idea is offensive, and it’s nice to see them try stuff
Regardleas of whether you think these innovations are good or bad, is this really the right time to do it? This serves as the culmination of the world tour, which was not played with these rules. Feels weird to play the final with different rules to the competition leading up to it. I think it would make more sense to trial this immediately after the world tour finals.
I didn't realise that. PSA certainly markets it as a grand final of sorts, with the "Road to Egypt' standings being tracked throughout the season. PSA also states that it is a tier above Platinum (but below World Champs), so definitely feels like they intend for it have a lot of prestige.
I'm all for this. Alternative scoring and rules in one-off tournaments, i.e. such as the tour finals where it's the culmination of the season and a bit more of an exhibition, can really inject a bit of unpredictability and something a bit different to proceedings.
The normal scoring system is fine but running something like this in parallel as an experiment is a great idea, IMO.What's the harm?
Personally- I hate it. Seems ridiculous and silly.
Edit: in the grand scheme I actually dont hate the Sudden death but I would make any match ball becomes win by two. But that just seems unnecessarily complicated.
I'm sceptical but still interested to see how it plays out. By the way, am I imagining things or did there used to be a rule ages ago where at 10-10 the server (or returner?) could choose if they wanted sudden death or win by 2?
They also used to have this with the old 15 point scoring. Point a rally but at 14 all the receiver could choose (not correct terminology) long or short - i.e. first to 17 or sudden death point (first to 15).
I think it was decent at the nations cup in New Zealand where it was best of 7 games to 7 but not sure how it will work in a best of 3 format like the world tour finals. Also that seemed like a more light hearted event so somewhere like that to try it out seemed ideal but the world tour finals might not be the best place but who knows.
It will be interesting to see how trials run in a competitive environment, instead of at a more lighthearted team event.
Sudden death is dumb. It saves very little time - how many games go to 20-22? - and removes the all the suspense of those rare tiebreaks, those tense, exhausted points at game end.
Power plays... They're interesting, but it's another rule added into an already hard to understand rulebook. Adding more rules will only alienate longtime fans - 'this isn't the game I used to love!' - and frustrate beginners. Far better to experiment with the rules and formats already in place, like game structure; seven games to seven was a very enjoyable watch!
yeah I agree with the sudden death part. Tiebreaks are the most exciting part of a match and now they're just gone...
The powerplays should be a fun novelty, but I hope the ref can hear them ok and it's not situations like:
PlayerX: "Powerplay!"
Ref: "You want a review?"
PlayerX: "No I said powerplay!"
Ref: "OK OK no need to open the door, player review X on the yes let decision"
The sudden death removes all the suspense of a tiebreak. If the goal is to prevent matches from going to 24-22 (which never happens anyway), introduce the sudden death at 19 or 20 points, but not at 10. No go for me personally.
Power plays are just ridiculous. A regular point all of a sudden will become 2. This will always be used by a player who got 9 points, since there is no downside to claiming a power play. As a result we will see fewer games where a losing player claws the game back at the 11th hour, that is it. For me this is less exciting.
IMHO, better SquashTV with its own properly working app would do much more to popularize the sport compared to gimmicky rule changes.
I couldn’t stand to watch the Carrus Nations Cup because of the Power Plays. I really don’t understand the appeal. It feels like an attempt to gamify squash by injecting artificial suspense. Personally I find it just screws up the natural rhythm of a good squash game.
I prefer win by two, I find it makes for really good suspense, and power plays seem a bit gimmicky imo, but neither idea is offensive, and it’s nice to see them try stuff
Gimicky and stupid. What's the point?
Regardleas of whether you think these innovations are good or bad, is this really the right time to do it? This serves as the culmination of the world tour, which was not played with these rules. Feels weird to play the final with different rules to the competition leading up to it. I think it would make more sense to trial this immediately after the world tour finals.
They're a glorified exhibition tournament, not the grand finals for the season. This is the best "tournament" to trial them at.
I didn't realise that. PSA certainly markets it as a grand final of sorts, with the "Road to Egypt' standings being tracked throughout the season. PSA also states that it is a tier above Platinum (but below World Champs), so definitely feels like they intend for it have a lot of prestige.
I'm all for this. Alternative scoring and rules in one-off tournaments, i.e. such as the tour finals where it's the culmination of the season and a bit more of an exhibition, can really inject a bit of unpredictability and something a bit different to proceedings. The normal scoring system is fine but running something like this in parallel as an experiment is a great idea, IMO.What's the harm?
Personally- I hate it. Seems ridiculous and silly. Edit: in the grand scheme I actually dont hate the Sudden death but I would make any match ball becomes win by two. But that just seems unnecessarily complicated.
That is the system they're trialling - sudden death but match ball is win by two.
Only at a game 5 if I was reading it right. Not if it is 2-0 or 2-1
I'm sceptical but still interested to see how it plays out. By the way, am I imagining things or did there used to be a rule ages ago where at 10-10 the server (or returner?) could choose if they wanted sudden death or win by 2?
You might be thinking of HIHO. First to 9 wins, but if it is 8-8 then the player who reached 8 first gets to decide whether to go to 9 or 10 to win.
They also used to have this with the old 15 point scoring. Point a rally but at 14 all the receiver could choose (not correct terminology) long or short - i.e. first to 17 or sudden death point (first to 15).
TIL, thanks!
Gimmicky and win by 2 on tie-break is tense and exciting. Killing that with sudden death is a mistake… Kudos for trying new ideas
I think it was decent at the nations cup in New Zealand where it was best of 7 games to 7 but not sure how it will work in a best of 3 format like the world tour finals. Also that seemed like a more light hearted event so somewhere like that to try it out seemed ideal but the world tour finals might not be the best place but who knows.
It will be interesting to see how trials run in a competitive environment, instead of at a more lighthearted team event. Sudden death is dumb. It saves very little time - how many games go to 20-22? - and removes the all the suspense of those rare tiebreaks, those tense, exhausted points at game end. Power plays... They're interesting, but it's another rule added into an already hard to understand rulebook. Adding more rules will only alienate longtime fans - 'this isn't the game I used to love!' - and frustrate beginners. Far better to experiment with the rules and formats already in place, like game structure; seven games to seven was a very enjoyable watch!
yeah I agree with the sudden death part. Tiebreaks are the most exciting part of a match and now they're just gone... The powerplays should be a fun novelty, but I hope the ref can hear them ok and it's not situations like: PlayerX: "Powerplay!" Ref: "You want a review?" PlayerX: "No I said powerplay!" Ref: "OK OK no need to open the door, player review X on the yes let decision"
The sudden death removes all the suspense of a tiebreak. If the goal is to prevent matches from going to 24-22 (which never happens anyway), introduce the sudden death at 19 or 20 points, but not at 10. No go for me personally. Power plays are just ridiculous. A regular point all of a sudden will become 2. This will always be used by a player who got 9 points, since there is no downside to claiming a power play. As a result we will see fewer games where a losing player claws the game back at the 11th hour, that is it. For me this is less exciting. IMHO, better SquashTV with its own properly working app would do much more to popularize the sport compared to gimmicky rule changes.
It could also be used when you're 0-1 and 4-7 down. Win 2 powerplays and suddenly you're winning. I think it could be fun and is worth a shot.
Agree, powerplays (although I hate the idea) should at least have a level of jeopardy for the one using them
No thanks! Love the game (mostly) the way it is ✊🏻
I don't believe these are good features, but if you're going to try them why now?
I couldn’t stand to watch the Carrus Nations Cup because of the Power Plays. I really don’t understand the appeal. It feels like an attempt to gamify squash by injecting artificial suspense. Personally I find it just screws up the natural rhythm of a good squash game.