No Quarter Given

At some point in one's playing experience, no... I should say, often enough in one's competitive life we come up against an opponent who, everyone around the court, expects to win, the opponent expects to win, and maybe within ourselves, we expect it too.


When we are playing this kind of match, there are basically two scenarios, one is that the opponent is far enough ahead of us in level of play that the outcome really is a foregone conclusion, the opponent doesn't really have to sweat, and will still win comfortably. 


The second scenario is when the opponent should by all rights win, but they will have to work for it. It's not a cakewalk, they will have to run and sweat. But if the opponent plays to their potential, then a win is very very good bet. 


And this is where we step in today, considering our mental tenacity, when we're expected to lose.


So let's go look in on a match that Billy had last week. Billy was at the club, he had finished one hour of cardio exercise in the fitness centre, and had been on the court alone, practicing strokes for about 20 minutes when Wilson came in.


Now Wilson is the new top gun in town, having recently arrived. And except for the very best two or three players in the club, Wilson has been pretty much tearing through the rest of the players the local area has to offer. Nobody has been able to cope effectively with his speed around the court, his youthful fitness, and his power game, hitting low drives from all over the court, straight and crosscourt.


As it turns out Wilson was meeting up with another player named Marshall, but since Marshall wasn't expected to arrive for awhile, Wilson and Billy started to knock the ball around together.


Up to now, Billy and Wilson haven't been on the same court together. Billy has seen Wilson play, and watched Wilson win against a number of mates, and he's seen Wilson lose to the Club's top player. So Billy while not having played Wilson, does have some ideas. Specifically, Billy wanted to keep the rallies from becoming a fest of power drives, low drives, and more kill drives.


In the first game, it can be said, that Billy having had a significantly longer warmup, was the more accurate, and that told the difference, as he took the first game. But Wilson wasn't really far off the mark, the score was close. And Wilson was, near the end of the game, showing why he was the expected winner.


In the second game, Wilson really stepped up, was more accurate, and was pretty much dominating the rallies, Billy was pretty much reactive the whole time. The only thing that helped Billy get into the rallies was his return of serve. He was pretty steady in getting the ball straight and deep, which at least got the rally started well. 


Once the rally got started though, Wilson's low driving game was pushing Billy all over, side to side, and towards the back a lot. The speed was pretty much overwhelming Billy at this point, and his trajectory was pretty much the same as Wilson's, staying below the service line. 


Billy's accuracy down the sides was still pretty good, and thus he was staying in the rallies for awhile, but except for Wilson's occasional errors, Billy was hard pressed to actually get ahead in the rallies and put any pressure on Wilson. So the second game went to Wilson, and it was pretty clear that Wilson had the edge.


Over the interval, Billy recognized that he had fallen in to the trap of playing along in Wilson's driving game, and that he had not done much to take the ball out of Wilson's comfort zone. So going into the third game Billy set his mind to working the ball higher, keeping the rallies moving around, and not allowing the ball to stay low.


This shift in Billy's approach, one could say, took Wilson by surprise, and allowed Billy to get a decent lead in the scoreline. Early in the game Billy was keeping the ball higher, this resulted in Wilson's error rate going up, as he tried to hit winners or high pressure drives from a higher contact point. Additionally, with hitting power drives from a higher contact point meant that his shots actually became a bit more playable for Billy, slightly less pressuring. 


Wilson did adjust and started getting the better of the rallies, but the initial lead that Billy had built up, was just enough to sneak home in extra points.


The fourth game started out much like the second, Wilson creating decent pressure with drive serves, Billy getting into the rallies with good length service returns. But Wilson gradually built up a lead, as Billy couldn't keep the ball up in the rallies, allowing Wilson to keep the ball low and fast.  


And this is where the learning takes place. At this moment, down 2-7 in the fourth game, starting to feel the tiredness, the muscles are getting sore, the shots losing their accuracy, and the opponent becoming more confident, more assured, this is when a player has to decide: 'Am I going to give this away, or am I going to Give No Quarter, and make the opponent win this game the hard way?'


Billy chose at that moment, that he was not going to let the game just 'slip away'. Billy reminded himself of his strategy for countering Wilson's power game. Which was to keep the ball up, taking every one of Wilson's power drives and hitting it up on the front wall. 


In the end, the game still went to Wilson, 11-9. But he had sweated, he had run, and his muscles were probably burning a bit with the effort. But most importantly, Wilson had felt Billy's resolve. He encountered Billy's mental strength. Billy sticking with his game, keeping the ball up, kept Wilson out of his comfort zone, had elicited weak shots that he was able to put away, and really had won the second half of that fourth game.


Going into the fifth game, Billy's legs were really feeling it now. The hour of cardio in the fitness centre, and the first four games had taken their toll. Wilson once again got a lead, 6-2. And once again, Billy had to make a choice, let the match slip away, or not. Giving way, would have been fair enough, Wilson seemed to be moving well, he was focused, and Billy's legs were feeling sore whichever way they moved, and that meant getting to the ball every so slightly late, and thus Billy's shots didn't have the accuracy or lift that he needed.


But rather than let it slip away, Billy committed to leaving everything on the court, if he loses, he loses, but he'll know that he gave his all, on the night. Billy focused on his shots. He didn't think about running, didn't think about how to hit the ball higher, he just thought about where he wanted the ball to go. 


Billy did well, running, chasing, keeping the ball in play, keeping it up, attacking when the weak shot presented, Billy had the momentum, he got back to 8-9. But then, an errant shot, gave Wilson the easy kill, and now it was 8-10. And once again Billy had a choice, tired and sore, it's no disgrace now to lose. He's shown the mettle from which his competitive fire is forged. It would be easy to accept that now the game belongs to Wilson. 


But Billy, having come this far, twice already having made the conscious decision to make every shot force Wilson one more further. Yes, an error off Billy's racket will give the game away, but Billy practices regularly, he trusts his shots. So he's going to make sure that Wilson wins the game with good play, nothing less. With each serve, and serve return, Billy reminds himself of his objectives, what does he want to do with the serve, and what he wants to do in the rally.


The fifth game went to extra points, and in the end Billy went to the showers with another win in the books. 


The take away here:


Often things are not equal between opponents, but when one player decides that no quarter will be given, that can often make up the difference, and then some.


Focus on the one or two things that you can do, to counter the opponent's shots that pressure you. Many times, just dulling the opponent's attack, is enough to disrupt their game, so that they begin to doubt themselves. When you have your opponent questioning their own game, you've created an advantage for yourself. Now the difference between you and the opponent, is likely negligible, and the match now winnable. 

When all things are equal ......

Stick with your strategy!


Shall I say it? Squash is probably the most complex of all the racket games. In fact some would probably argue that squash is one of the most, if not the most, complicated of all one on one athletic competitions.


There are simply so many different strokes that can be played from every position within the court, all thanks to the four walls, that confine, or maybe better said, 'define the game.'


Thinking about it, realizing that it would be easy to come up with eight different shots that could be hit from anywhere on the court, it's clear that we're dealing with a complexity that you would need a computer in order to calculate the permutations of how a rally might be played out.


Fortunately, it is rare to meet a player who under the pressure of a fast moving rally, can actually effectively produce all eight options from every spot on the court. Those kinds of players are usually identified by one of a several two word descriptors: Top Twenty, Top Ten, World Champion.


For most players, even the professionals, in a rally that they are trying to win, there is some pressure being exerted, there is a certain predictability to their positioning on the court, and their choice of shots. And yes, most if not all players have their favorite situations where they are sniffing for a winner. This too has it's predictability.  


Thus, with this understanding let's continue on to a match in progress:


A player, let's call him Billy, is playing a match, with someone he's played with before, and this player (Ricky) is particularly fast around the court, he gets to everything. And when Billy does go to hit an attacking shot, Ricky always gets to the attacking shot, no matter where it is.


In the past, when Billy and Ricky have played, Billy would win a majority of times. But, the matches were hard, the rallies and scores were close. It was always a close call. 


The most recent time that Billy and Ricky played, Billy changed his approach a little bit. He changed his approach to the rallies, by NOT changing his strategy. 


Previously Billy would get stressed by the closeness of the game score, and the seemingly inability to shake Ricky off. Billy is obviously the better player, in particular his positioning, and the accuracy of his shots, but rallies with Ricky always seemed to be a 50/50 bet. 


Being unable to get some distance between them on the scoreline would cause Billy to push harder, going for shots he'd not normally go for. This had not been a winning change of strategy, the games were still close, with Ricky even taking one of the most recent matches.


What Billy did this time, was stay with his normal style, picking and attacking when he normally would, but he was expecting Ricky to always get the ball. And what Billy did was just continue his strategic placement of shot after shot. 


Billy realized that he wasn't losing rallies with his strategy, he just wasn't playing the strategy long enough for it to work. He was changing his strategy, and thus giving up the slowly building advantage that he had been getting.


See there actually wasn't anything really wrong with Billy's shot selection, it was just that Ricky is so surprisingly quick around the court. But what happened in the past is that Billy would hit his attacking shot, and then being surprised with Ricky's speed, Billy was not ready to take advantage of Ricky's next shot. 


This most recent time when they played, Billy played his normal game, hit attacking shots when he usually would, to the normal places, BUT, Billy was expecting and ready for Ricky to get there. In being ready, Billy was then able to not only get Ricky's next shot, but he was able to continue the attack by continuing to build the pressure. 


This time the match ended up with a dominant performance on the part of Billy, leaving Ricky wondering what hit him.


In the past, Billy, chagrined that Ricky was getting to every at attacking shot, would start trying new and different shots in attempting to gain control of the rallies and win the points. In leaving his normal strategy, you could say that Billy was entering an uncharted shallow bay. 


This then actually favored Ricky who could run anything down. The thing was, while Ricky could run everything down, in particular anything hit short in the front corners, his shots were predictable, and not very tight. Thus, once Billy started expecting Ricky to get to those shots, and he knew where to position for Ricky's  likely replies, he was often finishing off the rally with the next one or two placements.


So while the game score was very close in the beginning, Billy in staying with his strategy, just tweaking a little bit, expecting the rally wouldn't end, was ready to continue his normal attack.


Billy shifted gears, but with the same strategy and style he knows well, and thus methodically and simply pulled away from Ricky, and the end score revealed a dominant performance.  


There is another example from Billy that bears sharing, as it illustrates in another way how sticking with one's strategy pays dividends.


Billy soon after playing Ricky, had an opportunity to play a match with Sydney. Now Sydney was from Northern Europe, was very slim, very tall, with an excellent length of reach. In addition Sydney was an efficient mover from the centre court area. 


Sydney is very adept at moving efficiently and quietly from the back court and mid court, to the front court, in particular when he has sent his opponent into the the front court with a drop. And Sydney would use his long reach to intercept and smartly place for winners, many shots that would usually get past the majority of opponents. 


Billy had only played Sydney once before, and while winning the match, it had been very hard, and very close. Only Billy's determination and fighting spirit had gotten him through that one. Most certainly not a strategic success. 


This time, as the first time, the rallies were developing similarly, Billy was finding that Sydney was often in great position cutting off shots and knocking them away for winners.


The first time Billy had played against Sydney, it was the same story, Billy's shots in the front corners were easily handled by Sydney, and Billy was finding himself under huge pressure, it didn't matter whether he hit short, or tried to hit long. Sydney handled it all.


From outside the court, what one could see, was that Sydney liked to hit short, sending his opponent into the front court, then he would very very quietly follow up the opponent, and be only one nice long step from retrieving any front court shot that his opponent might hit. Sydney is able to do this, hovering further forward than most players could, because his long reach enabled him to still cover (intercept) the majority of shots that might be hit long.


On this day, Billy having recently learned about sticking with his normal strategy even when the game is tightly contested, knew that he'd be better off not changing his game. But then something had to change, otherwise this would be another long and tough match.


This time, pretty well into the first game, the scoreline is very even, it was 4-4 I believe, and Billy noticed something. Hitting out from the front left corner with a crosscourt lob, Billy noticed two things. One, he noticed that Sydney had followed up behind him, and was very near the front of the court, and two, he noticed that Sydney easily reached up and blocked the lob, and hit if for a winner down the opposite side.


Billy had already noticed earlier that Sydney was coming forward, when Billy had been sent to the front corner, but when Billy realized that this gave Sydney the opportunity, with his wide reach, to take advantage, to take control, Billy knew something had to give, but on this day, he was not going to change his normal strategy.


In considering, how to respond to Sydney's ability to intercept and thus control the rallies once they got into the front court, Billy didn't want to start going for shots that were out of his normal range.


So Billy made some adjustments, not changes. He made two adjustments in particular.  He hit the lobs higher, and he hit his crosscourt drives wider.  


Now against normal opponents, these two adjustments would not have been very effective. The higher lob, is dropping in shorter, not going as deep in the court, so normally doesn't pressure the opponent as much unless he was out of position. The wider crosscourt also, is not so effective because it rebounds out  somewhere in the midcourt area.


In this case however, because these two adjusted shots, were able to get past Sydney, and in doing so, the shots took advantage of Sydney's difficulty in turning and moving into the backcourt area.


After Billy had hit a couple of higher lobs, and wider cross court shots (that went for winners), Sydney changed his positioning. Sydney stopped following Billy into the forecourt area, and he stayed back around the T, so that he could cope with the high lobs and wide cross courts.


When Sydney did this, it immediately opened up the front court for Billy, which then opened up the rest of the court too. 


By two small adjustments, Billy had been able to negate Sydney's strengths. Strengths coming from his height and reach, which he used specifically to advantage by quietly invading the forecourt (behind his opponent who had just been sent into a front corner). And thus Billy was able to force Sydney back to a more traditional positioning on the court. Once that happened, Billy was controlling the rallies, and went on to a very comfortable win.


--------------------


So what is the take away?


1) When you're in a hard match, close rallies, tight scoreline, changing your strategy is not the first answer.


If the rallies are tight, and the scoreline is close, you can take that to mean that at the moment all things are equal. That means you're not losing..... You're just not comfortably winning. So you only need something small, to make a difference, and sway the balance in your favour.


2) Following on the policy of staying with your strategy when the match is close, we do want to recognize that 'adjustments' need to be found, and implemented.


Somewhere in these tight rallies, there is something, there is some clue near the 'edge.' A little tidbit of information, maybe a little habit of the opponent, or a particular strength, or specific weakness. And it's this information, coupled with making one or two small adjustments, that can make a significant difference in the scoreline.


When you're in close matches, it's better to stick with your strategy, and make small tactical adjustments within your strategic framework.


If the scoreline is not close, and you're the one behind, that means you're losing. This is different, and can indicate a needed change of strategy. But that's a story for another time :-)

Length is Relative

Often it is the only thing that players and coaches talk about, in particular coaches. And every instructional book out there talks about it. Every list of top squash tips mentions it. If one scanned all the material out there it would be pretty clear that great length on the drives is the single most important contributor to winning matches.

So if great length on straight drives is the most common piece of coaching out there, what else could be said about it? Well, maybe let's start with why 'length' is important, by identifying what great length achieves.

The other most common coaching tip out there, is to control the T, meaning always strive to get back to the T after every shot. So this is where 'length' comes in. If you hit the ball to the back corner then you are forcing your opponent to leave the T and go chase the ball, while you simultaneously move to  take up position on the T.

The basic premise is, that the player who spends more time on the T, will dominant the rallies, and likely win the games and match. Much like a football team that keeps the ball in the opponent's half of the field, controlling possession, increasing scoring opportunities, while denying the opponents their opportunities. 

So assuming that your opponent has heard this advice, we know that he or she will be laying claim to the T area, just as you surely wish to do. And thus, this is where 'length' comes onto the scene. It is the long shots going towards the back corners that forces your opponent away from the T, and gives you the opportunity to step into the position of control.

What's important for new and intermediate players to understand is that length is relative. Meaning the shot into the back court does not have to be like those hard flat long drives that we see the professionals hitting (sometimes monotonously). 

Really, what a shot to the back court needs to do is achieve three things: 

1) The shot needs to take the opponent away from the T. 
2) The shot needs to force the opponent to turn and move away from the central area, towards the back. 
3) The shot needs to give us the time and space, to move into the T area. Or at a minimum, allow us to move to a position that is further up in the court, with our opponent behind us, as they are hitting the ball. 

If our shot accomplishes these three objectives, then we've given ourselves a dominant position on the court, and the pressure is now on the opponent.

To be honest if we hit any shot that achieves these three objectives, then we've succeeded in putting pressure on our opponent. It could be the hard flat drive to the corner (this is the shot everyone talks about), it could be a high slow lob, it could be a cross court drive that hits the side wall and gets behind the opponent, it could be a slow but slightly high drive, it could be a medium high but slightly faster lob. 

At beginner and intermediate levels of play we can often achieve these objectives without ever having to hit the flat deep drive to the corner. And that's the key point here. As competitors, we don't need to be thinking 'hit long and hard to the corner', what we need to be thinking is: "Make the opponent turn, and move towards the back of the court, and let me get in front."

As players get better (meaning probably about high C grade and up), the hard deep fast drive to the corners becomes the predominant shot hit for length. But up to that high intermediate level, the hard drive is not the only effective means to achieve our objectives. In fact there are world class players who continue to use a wider variety of shots to push their opponents to the back.

I want my students to be aware and thinking about what they want to accomplish with a shot. They need to know the 'why.' If you know that the 'why' is that we want the opponent turning and moving to the rear, and we want the T for ourselves, then it's easier to focus on the 'what' (what shots will achieve this).

The takeaway here?

Any shot that makes your opponent turn and move towards the back, while you're able to step to a central spot near the T, has put heaps of pressure on your opponent, and given you a favorable position on the court.

Whatever level you play, the shot you hit, if it makes the opponent turn and move away from the T moving back, giving you control of the central area, then you've hit a great length ;-)

Length is Relative: relative to the abilities of your opponent, relative to your position and that of your opponent, relative to the pressure you can exert on the opponent.