The problem is mainly SQUASH! We have not met the special challenge of
Communicating the game at all! Although all the science, technology and
supercomputation that would allow us to do so exists and is available
from tax payer sources!. The Communication Problem is the single most
important barrier to developing Squash and bringing it into the IOC! It
is eminently solvable and can be brought into the Olympics - but we
have to learn distributive leadership, first! These comments and
threads from LinkedIn are a good start to the discussion which is
vigorously underway but confidential!
However the 3 articles (from (1) Ferez'nSquashDocs, (2)
LinkedIn-SquashEnthusiasts Group and (3) Squash Source) below represent
and attempt to address different aspects of the confusion pervading the
game that emerged in various conversations. There are many more but
they are not yet and are in the public domain! If we adapt to the
scientific, technical and computational recourse, that is in front of
our noses, all these problems will vanish and Squash will thrive as a
sport and in the Olympics! If not we will be fossilized! It is as
simple as that!
Best,
Ferez
Article-1:
Ushering Squash into the Olympics Is Dependent On Better Communication.
Question: What will it take to get Squash into the Olympics?
Answer: An exponential elevation in Communication, both visual images
and commentating, so small movements that are Hallmarks of Squash and
even missed by players can be caught on TV. They must be explained not
just to players but to non-players. How? With replays, highlights and
matching commentary – the stock tools of televised sports. This
requires harnessing the science, technology and computation already
available by convincing Scientists that there is a useful resource in
Squash. This resource includes understanding the Evolution of
Neurophysiological processes e.g. motor skills sensory and spatial
perceptions and those very human nebulous and contradictory traits
(e.g. persistence and grind versus improvisation, adaptability and
flexibility, etc…) that are rooted in Nurture/Nature. Additionally,
Squash could yield therapies for the loss of these capacities in
Neuropathological conditions e.g. Stroke and Alzheimer ’s disease. It
is this extra communication capacity that is critically required to
simplify the unique complexity of (televising) Squash. Contrary to
current opinion this capacity is not a luxury! Television in turn will
secure the revenues and thus the clout which alone will break the 60
year cyclical inability of Squash to enter the Olympics. And shift the
game from its current peripheral status to one that is consistent with
a sport that is played in 188 countries by 25 million players and that
is at the very Apex of Athleticism - Racquet or otherwise!
Question: What distinguishes Squash from the high audience ‘televisual’ sports? And how can it bridge the chasm?
Answer: Football, Soccer, Boxing Ice Hockey, Sprinting, Golf and Tennis
are televisual sports because Goals, Knockout Punches, the Simplicity
and the
Directness of taking off from the ‘Starting Gun and Blocks to hitting
the Finishing Tape’, the Drive over long Greens and delicate Putts and
the Serve/Rally are eminently communicable on network TV as visually
engaging images for the viewer! Squash works through the cumulative 1-
2 of small moves rather than ‘Knockouts’ with power being a punctuation
mark (sting) rather than the explosive club of other sports! And so it
is inherently less engaging visually. Leaving the image of Squash that
persists in the eyes of the non-player as that of a game full of
metronomic, repetitive rallies high on fitness but low on Racquet
skills (e.g. quote: Alfredo ‘Fredo’ Ramirez Editor of the Racquetball
blog Restrung Magazine)! But long rallies in Squash are similar to
those in Tennis e.g. Djokovic-Federer (5hrs 30 minutes, 2011 US Open
Final), Djokovic-Nadal (5 hours 57 minutes, 2012, Australian Open
final) again with metronomic repetition since the heavy Racquets and
Balls (high momentum i.e. mass x velocity) put early commitment to a
stroke at a premium. So why the difference in perception? Although
Tennis and Squash balls at their fastest velocities are about
equivalent (166 mph versus 175 mph) perhaps the former has the
advantage of a 4.5x greater size (volume), played on a court that’s
only 2.4x longer and so may be better televised. Furthermore the open
scenic, visual backdrops of Tennis Courts as settings also help. While
the walls/nicks of Squash Courts and the lighter Racquets/Balls
multiply the density and dynamic range of all the strokes and spins by
a minimum of 6x in Squash as opposed to 2x (of Racquets and Courts) in
Tennis, they are all lost in communication. This loss is further
increased by the complexity of communicating the effects of an array
of, small deft holds, flicks, reverse corners, boasts, change of
directions, cutoffs, small adjustments of stance and posture, spacing,
acceleration/deceleration. The analogy with the hovering Humming Bird
drawing Nectar repeats itself – you can see the bird but not its wings
that are beating too quickly for resolution by the unassisted Human eye
(at 20 – 80 beats per second)! It requires time lapse photography to
capture the whole image! Similarly it needs high resolution and high
speed imaging (down to single molecule resolution?), optics and
computation to capture and replay the defining moves in Squash and so
relieve the image of rails persisting in the eye of the uninitiated
viewer! Furthermore they would give Squash Commentators like Joey
Barrington the kinds of ‘TV tools’ that John Madden and John McEnroe
apply routinely and thus allow them to communicate Squash as well as
American Football and Tennis! Extending this logic, the Soccer Ball has
more than 5000x larger volume than the Squash Ball, with the soccer
field only about 11x longer than a Squash court, yet the Ball and the
communication of the image and the game are of far higher resolution!
However, image capture and communication for television seem to be more
than a matter of size (volume) of the Ball and the Field/Court. After
all the Golf Ball is about the size (1.2x) of the Squash ball, is
driven over long fairways and often lost against the backdrop of bright
sunny skies. However the Golf ball rests/moves slowly on the Putting
Green for substantial periods and this is where much of the action and
image capture for TV occur in this sport! Add the pastoral scenes and
you have the now familiar mix for a ‘televisual’ sport!
Summary: Very simply put for Squash to enter the Olympics, it will have
to go from the very good, but low revenue generating SquashTV
restricted to Squash playing viewers, to the excellent, high
resolution, high revenue generating network TV (ESPN, CBS, ABC, BBC and
NBC) and all viewers.
Appendix: some numbers for ball sizes (volumes): Formula for
calculating volumes = (4/3) p rpostings on Wikipedia). Ball Volumes:
Game: Calculation: Size (~volume): (1) Squash d = 40.5 mm or r = 20.25
mm and volume = 34.787 cc/ml 1x (2) Golf d = 40.68 mm or r = 20.34 mm
and volume = 35.06 cc/ml 1.2x (3) Tennis d = 67 mm or r = 33.5 mm and
volume = 157.5 cc/ml 4.5x (4) Soccer d = 700 mm or r = 350 mm and
volume = 179617.67 cc/ml 5161x
Article 2:
Comments from LinkedIn Thread in Squash Enthusiasts Group:
Main content starts below. Squash Enthusiasts - 2,929 members
Ushering Squash into the Olympics is dependent on better communication. Why?
Comment by:
Boyd Simon, at Steamship Insurance Management Services Ltd
Hi, an interesting question but to my mind the reason squash is not
favaoured by the Olympic committee is because it is perceived as
elitist (and I appreciate that other sports already established in the
olympic scene are more so) as well as not having a broad enough appeal.
Access to squash is something which requires money (or should I say
more money than many sports) and therefore the domain of the relatively
rich. The diminishing number of facilities doesn't help (or maybe
that's just in the UK). Of course, you could say Egypt bucks the trend
but, apart from the fertile squash scene there, squash appears to be on
the decline rather than the reverse. Again, maybe that's just the UK.
Unless kids at grass roots levels can be encouraged to actually play
it, it's unlikely to gain the momentum it needs. Kids will only want to
play it if it features in the media. The media will only show it when
there's a audience. A bit of a catch 22. PSASquash TV is one shining
light - but, then again, I know squash players who would rather watch
tennis!. (get a life!) Sorry if I sound negative.
Simon
Response by:
Ferez Soli Nallaseth, Ph.D. ,Principal Investigator & Consultant:
Life Sciences INJ; Squash Coach,Analyst: NeuSq,PJSP, RSC;
AAsProf:RCINJ; Memb:CBSA. Top Contributor
Hi Simon!
Thanks for the comment - but you have completely missed the point by
wrapping together a confused potpouri of facts which do have some merit
on their own! This unfortunately is on a par for the Squash community!
It is players from the villages of Pakistan, Egypt, the blue collar
populations of Australia & England that have won 97% of the 73
British Opens, Wimbledon of Squash upto 2009 (with the War Years
excepted). Add to that the 188 countries and 25 million players around
the world playing squash in villages & NO! it is not an elitist
sport!! Which is another misconception. In fact when subsidized, as eg
in the Urban Squash Program recruiting underprivileged kids from eg
Harlem, Squash is much cheaper than thriving Golf, Swimming & Ice
Hockey. I am afraid thats a part of your all encompassing bouquet of
arguments that may need a little more thought! Although, as you
point out, encouraging Squash at the grassroots level is important.
There is lots of evidence that efforts in that direction have been
paying off for decades in Junior tournaments around the world. Why?
Perhaps you should make the effort to visit the readily accessible
websites of USSquash, Squash Talk, Daily Squash Report, Squash Ezine,
PSA, WSA, Squash Player and the WSF!
But you absolutely hit the nail on the head with another catchall
cliche - catch 22. Except that it is only so because of the
administrative inertia & lack of vision leading to mystifying
resistance in the Squash community! Because of the very special
barriers of televising Squash, to break out of this 'catch 22' requires
COMMUNICATION - an exponential elevation of image capture, processing,
computation, analysis & commentary than that currently available.
It is absolutely the single most critical reason for the inability of
squash to be televised! The small accretions, high density, dynamic
range & rapidity of bursts of drives & strokes superimposed on
a low basal rate of touch & amble involving small muscle movements
& fully torqued posture all resulting from by the incredible
athleticism of squash pros is simply lost on network TV.The tragedy is
that all this readily solvable, but missed by our own administrators!
There are imaging systems (optics), supercomputers, scientists who
capture single molecules and atoms - technology which would make a
Squash Ball easy to televise. This in turn would bring the penciled/
focused outlines of objects (muscles, balls, etc...) to squash and
allow those who thrive on the high drama of 'robust manly' strokes to
understand the power, adaptability & dig in the game. The reasons
why it was proven in reciprocal matchups to be superior to 4 other
racquet sports - tennis, racquetball, table tennis and badminton (see
our website). All this remains in the Dark Ages with Squash
organizations and SquashTV, which is why we are cyclically rejected by
the IOC. Improve these by recruiting scientists, you breakout of the
nest and make a quantum jump to network TV with the exponential
increase in revenue and clout that will inevitably follow and bring it
into the Olympics. Ignore it and with the explosion of modern/X-treme
sports will send it the way of the Dinosaurs.
Finally given this inability to communicate no wonder some squash
players would rather watch tennis. But this does not explain why at the
very top of the tennis world (& elsewhere) and over the ages,Borg,
McEnroe, Lendl, Nadal, Federer, Laver, Hoad, Newcombe, Rosewall and
many others honed their racquet skills and conditioning on Squash
Courts - which is also an important reason why the Serve & Volley
game in Tennis has evolved into a Hallmark of Squash - the 5+ hour long
dig! It might help if you chanelled your indignation into something
that is better substantiated!
Although negativity with a basis in fact is welcomed, , you sound like
someone who can do better - i.e. those thoughts can transcend the
vacuous 'get a life'!
Best,
Ferez
Comment by:
David P Morgan, Owner, The Sports Academy,
The UK Sports Academy has been working with young squash players since
1962, both in the UK, Europe and N.America. In that time thousands of
youngsters have been introduced to squash - through programs we have
taken into the schools - and hundreds have gone on to make squash a
lifetime participation sport, whilst a considerable number have taken
up the game seriously enough to play tournaments, turn professional and
go on to become successful coaches. I still keep in contact with a
great number of now senior coaches who started their squash playing
lives through Sports Academy programs. Yet! How often do you hear about
what The Sports Academy has achieved? Very seldomely! Because? We have
operated without financial help from the National Bodies in the
countries where we have been successful and are therefore not part of
the establishment, which in turn means that in general the media are
not interested in promoting what they see as "private sports"
initiatives! Many other groups that are outside the National
Association/s suffer the same fate and despite running great programs
that introduce squash at all levels, seldom get recognised. In any
sport the grass routes activities are where the sport will succeed in
the future and squash is no different: if the local media (as a
starting point) would just take the trouble to see the numbers
participating week in and week out at squash - compared say to the
ACTUAL numbers playing so called high profile sports like football -
and reported on the success of those playing squash at different
levels, then maybe that would encourage national media to give more
cover and that in turn would attract more sponsors and so the profile
of the game would expand until such bodies as The Olympic Committee
would take the sport seriously! Having travelled round the World both
as a tennis player and then a squash player, and seen the participation
at so many levels in so many countries, I am actually quite shocked
that squash is not in The Olympics! As I hit 76 last week, I still
play, still help youngsters and still feel as passionate as ever - but
also feel sad that the sport does not get the recognition it deserves.
DPM
Response:
Ferez Soli Nallaseth, Ph.D., Principal Investigator & Consultant:
Life Sciences INJ; Squash Coach,Analyst: NeuSq,PJSP, RSC;
AAsProf:RCINJ; Memb:CBSA. Top Contributor David, let me begin by
congratulating you, the UK Sports Academy, USSquash, Nicole David, Ramy
Ashour, SquashTV, Squsah Canada, Squash Australia all the Asian Squash
Associations/Federations, the WSF, Squash Player magazine, Joey
Barrington, Jonah Barrington, Peter Nicol and all the other Coaches and
Squash Organizations for your yeoman services to the development of
junior squash - as proven by much improved and larger body of players.
As a referee I just saw the remarkable performances of {Junior US}
Nationals (U11-U19) from across North America at Princeton University's
Jadwin Gym last weekend!! But there is a very simple reason why the
media do not cover your efforts in squash and we as a sport have to
take responsibility for this consequence! This failure is underscored
by your quote "if the local media (as a starting point) would just take
the trouble to see the numbers participating week in and week out at
squash - compared say to the ACTUAL numbers playing so called high
profile sports like football - and reported on the success of those
playing squash at different levels, then maybe that would encourage
national media to give more cover and that in turn would attract more
sponsors and so the profile of the game". That reason media do not
cover squash is its inability to meet its very special challenges in
COMMUNICATING the nuances (90% of the game) as pointed out in several
articles posted here. ALL of this is easily solvable with modern
science, technology, super computation and gaming - available
resolution down to single molecules and atoms amke a squash ball and
subtle muscle movements trivial to communicate! It takes time lapsed
photography to resolve the beating wings of a hovering Humming Bird
which would be lost to the unassisted eye!! The defining punctuating
movements in squash that follow long up and down rallies are like those
beating wings - impossible to capture without time lapsed photography!
Think of this, if it is difficult even for players to grasp all these
subtle nuanced moves and visual dimensions of squash, e.g. as proven by
Peter Nicol and Ramy Ashour wrong footing top ranked Pros, the media
and the general non-playing audience do not have a prayer in grasping
the nuances of squash as it is currently communicated!! And if the
story/images are not exciting (as in goals, KO punches, serve/volley,
drives down the golf fairways, etc...) the press will not cover the
game e.g. squash because of its plain repetitive and boring rallies
without someone communicating the punctuating drives, trickle boasts,
switchups, reverse corners, etc.. through image capture, super
computation, pencilled outlines on the screen and instant replays i.e.
as it is currently communicated! Squash will continue preaching to the
choir with its current show courts, gigs and 'media blitz' until we
collapse of our own weight while such new comers to sport 'extreme
sports' will thrive! Why - their superior visual engagement!
The tragedy as I have mentioned is that the solution is well within our
grasp but not being understood by the likes of WSF's Secretay General
Ramachandran! He thinks that his experience with cement companies and
the patriarchy in India, schmoozing with President Putin and the other
powers will somehow magically overcome the resistance in the Executive
and General Committees of the IOC as proven by their negative votes
over the last 60 years!
Only 2 things will do that! The science , technology and commentating
mproving COMMUNICATION of squash so it arrives on network TV and
acquires the economic and political clout. So simple and yet so hard
for a socially savvy group like Squash Players to grasp!!!
Unfortunately we have lost the one person who understood that - Dr.
George Mieras!
Kind regards,
Ferez
Comment:
John Michael Major likes this
Response:
Ferez Soli Nallaseth, Ph.D.,Principal Investigator & Consultant:
Life Sciences INJ; Squash Coach,Analyst: NeuSq,PJSP, RSC;
AAsProf:RCINJ; Memb:CBSA. Top Contributor
Thanks John.
Ferez
See all members, Your group contribution level, Congrats! Regularly add
great discussions and comments to stay a Top Contributor.Top
Contributor
Latest Activity
John Michael Major, Caroline Heal, and Meixue (Michelle) Xu joined a group:
Squash Enthusiasts
Group for people interested in the game of Squash. This is open to everyone at all skill
levels, from professional to beginners. Let's link and encourage people to play this great
sport!
Comment:
Join my network on LinkedIn
Frank van Loon
March 19, 2014 8:12 AM
Frank van Loon has indicated you are a fellow group member of Squash Enthusiasts:
Great article Ferez,compliments.
- Frank van Loon
Response:
Thank you!
To:Frank van Loon
March 19, 2014 2:42 PM
Dear Frank,
Thank you for your kind words and for having given me the opportunity to join your
Professional Network on LinkedIn. It would be great for us to partner with as many and as early
as possible so we can break this 60 year cycle of rejections that the IOC has put squash through.
There are other relevant posts/responses on that same article, and there are other more detailed
articles, so should you be interested I am glad to send them! The former Secretary General of the
WSF Dr. George Mieras was very inclusive had communicated with us about including stake
holders in a pre-Sochi exchange. However the current SG/President was less than forthcoming,
to put it mildly, and the next thing we saw was his photo-op with Putin on the WSF website. Not
the best way to overcome 60 years of resistance to squash by the IOC's Executive and General
Committees. I hope that we can bring the much needed sea change.
Best regards,
Ferez
Article 3: Pierre Bastien of the Squash Source:
Comment:
Squash Source:
Thanks Ferez. I read the first attachment so far and I think you're right that squash could do a
better job with replays. Have you seen the super-slow-motion highlights from the World Series
last year? I thought those were great. I guess the problem is there isn't much time between points
to show a replay and analyze it. I wonder if squash would be a better TV experience if it were
show on tape delay, though that might take some of the excitement out too. I will ready the
LinkedIn article soon.
Best,
Pierre
Ferez Nallaseth ferez.nallaseth@gmail.com
Hi Pierre,
First of all thanks for your time and for having read it. Should it interest you, these are 2 more
complete and relevant articles copied from our website (by the way we would welcome any
contributions to it - including dissent!)
(1) How can Baseball, Squash and Wrestling return to, enter or remain in the Olympic
movement?
By bringing structural changes in the Olympic movement and the I.O.C. as well as in each of
these three Sports!!
(1B) (1a) Are Scientists missing a rich resource in the 'Closed Loops of Clutch Games' and do
such things exist?
You are absolutely correct about replays - i.e. during a rally! But there can be more time
between rallies i.e. points when they are walking to collect the ball, even more time between
games, even more time between matches, even more time between
tournaments and even more times between seasons. During a match if the
images from multiple cameras at multiple angles (for conversation sake
say a 1000 cameras) were stored in a supercomputer, specific programs
would allow instant recall as wella s selecting the best image for
transmission in either closeups or distance shots. This will resolve
high density and hdynamic range of small movements that are lost in a
blur for the uninitiated viewer. Even top players are wrong footed by
the top 5, we who have played the game miss aspects (some for simple
reasons like obstruction of fields of view, but others due to the
simple rapidity of a move or a stroke) so how can we expect the non
playing viewer to grasp and digest all this?
But this is all standard stuff already applied in Hollywood, network TV
etc... Pierre, what Squash desperately needs (and it does not seem to
dawn on us!) is the extremelyhigh speed and high resolution imaging
that would easily communicate the small flicks, turns, holds that must
precede the most deceptive drops, drives, straight volleys into cross
court volleys, trickle boasts, etc...and comprehensible to NON PLAYERS!
This is the image that is lost on the non playing viewer who
consequently dismisses the game as a series of repetitive rallies where
conditioning is high but racquet and motor skills are low! Which is
what turns off network TV and the IOC! It is the very special challenge
of communicating Squash that we are not meeting.
However, it is more than possible to capture the defining high density,
high dynamic range of movements of Squash players, their strokes,
'gets' and balls and resolve them from the necessary rails and
crosscourts that are so tight and deep that the players have no room to
do anything but make these defining strokes and moves until they get an
opening. The same baseline rallies characterize Tennis in even greater
spans (5.5-6 hours in Fedrerer-Djokovic-Nadal matches see article) -
but in Tennis the challenge of communicating a ball that is 4.5x larger
volume is lower!
Developments in modern Biology have produced Optics and Imaging
processes, capable not just of resolving (1) the beating wings of
hovering Humming Birds but also (2) single cells, and single molecules
in living animals, (3) Optogenetics to look at a functioning Neuron or
Clusters of Neurons in the Brain of a living animal, and (4) protein
molecules changing shape when they execute their functions as caught by
laser pulses of 50 - 120 fsec {(1 fsec = 1,000,000,000,000,000 x 10e-1
second and is the time taken for a single electron to orbit an atom)}!!
Along with the super computers and gaming programs that are already
available in banks and in the Cloud, this imaging technology would
easily raise the communication of Squash to the necessary and
indispensable levels needed for it to be broadcast on network TV.
Network TV is where the money and the clout required to bring Squash
into the Olympics, would emerge from! Without it, as a game we will
remain a foot note. Having Show Courts without having the technical
capacity to show (communicate) the players moves and the balls, the
game perpetuates the problem. Add that communication capacity and now
you break the vicious cycle that Squash has been trapped in for over a
100 years - and 60 years in its attempts to be accepted by the IOC!
You may ask then ask the obvious question - where are the billions of
dollars to buy all this imaging and computing power to come from? The
advantage is that they have already been developed with public monies
eg NIH/NSF and all we have to do is convince the right combination of
scientists, eg neuroscientists that Squash is one perfect place to
apply their experimental power to address specific questions. In fact
it would fit in well into the $10 billion dollar fund that President
Obama has committed to 'Mapping the Brain'! Squash is one of the
perfect vehicles for this enterprise! For example the Squash Court is a
Darwinian crucible for understanding and recreating the controlled
Evolutionary acquisition of fundamental Cognitive, Motor Skills,
Spatial and Sensory perceptions, etc...under even less than a fraction
of a second (0.14 second), at the interface of the Subconscious and the
Conscious and upto the limits of Neurophysiological and Neuromuscular
extremes! What is the flip side? In strokes andneurodegenerative
diseases e.g. Alzheimer's diseases and Parkinsons disease these very
Cognitive, Motor and Sensory skills are destroyed. Understanding their
development on the Squash Court could yield therapies. Finally there
are many Nurtue/Nature questions that deeply interest Neuroscientists!
These are the thoughts in the resting (seeing things that you are
unaware of, images corresponding to soundscapes, stimulation of the
will to persevere, the courage that comes from anxiety) Brain, the
ability of one's to read another's Brain/Facial
expressionsSubconsciously which can be compromised in
Neurodegeneration! All of these questions could be could be analyzed
from the completely unique perspective of the Squash Court.
This extra technical, imaging and computational capacity is desperately
needed for addressing the particular challenges of Communicating Squash
- it is not the luxury that some in thecommunity imagine and even
insist it is! If we capitalize on all these avenues Squash grows to
take its rightful place in the Family of Sports! if not, and we persist
in the negative self destructive ways of the past 60 years, given {the
emergence of} such visually engaging easily communicated sports as X
treme sports, Squash collapses Pierre I guess what I am trying to say
is that an eminently solvable problem, perhaps through a few
meetings/Skype calls is being allowed to grow into an insoluble
problem! I am glad to contribute in any way
