Bellevue Squash Classic Finals: Gaultier vs. Farag Analytics

When watching the finals of the Bellevue Squash Classic I did some charting. In the semis I charted one of Farag's games because I was surprised how rarely he plays straight drives. He does move unbelievable so clearly he doesn't want to get stuck into a controlled/patient style of play. I was curious if his lack of straight drives is why his technique on his drives is a little suspect. But this post isn't about technique, it's about shot selection and notation.

In the semis where Farag played Marwan Elshorbagy I only charted the first game. There were 115 shots in the first game and 42.6% of Farag's shots were straight drives. Also 10.4% of his shots were boasts, which seems very high for the first game at this level. 25.2% of his total shots were short so he was certainly trying to move his opponent around. In the finals I decided to chart Gauliter because I thought he played more structured and we would see this in the numbers. I think we know Gaultier crosscourts a lot from the forehand, but is generally quite patient. Here's how the numbers looked.

Game 1 - total number of shots = 244
47.9% straight drives
31.5% crosscourt length
14.3% drops/kills
1.6% boasts

Game 2 - total number of shots = 142
45.7% straight drives
26% crosscourt length
26.8% drops/kills
1.4% boasts

Game 3 - total number of shots = 136
52% straight drives
20.6% crosscourt length
24.3% drops/kills
2.9% boasts

Match Totals
Number of shots = 511 + serves
Straight drives = 253/ 49.5%
Crosscourt length = 142/ 27.8%
Drops/kills = 106 (10 errors)/ 20.7%
Boasts = 10/ 1.9%
Long = 395/ 77.3%
Short = 116/ 22.7%

It would be interesting to see more stats like this against other players and be able to compare them from match to match and event to event. Would Gaultier play more or less short or more or less straight against a more traditional player? It would also be interesting to know how many shots per rally or game his best suit his game or give his opponents their best chance. The French General was pretty fortunate to win that 2nd game and it looked like he lost his focus and started going short at the wrong time. He also popped up a lot of his drops, which I can only assume has something to do with his ridiculously low string tension. It as nice to see him stay calm out there and both guys seemed to be really enjoying the match.

Do you think the shorter or longer rallies favour Gauliter? He did well slowing the pace down and lifting the ball and his movement really is outrageous. Still I think Farag was close and had a chance to win all 3 games. Do you think Gaultier should go short more or less? Should he play straighter on the forehand and cross or boast more from the backhand? He certainly gets stuck into patterns, but because he's such a great mover he can get away with this predictability. I'd really like to see a healthy and fit Ramy have at least 1 or 2 more good battle with Greg before they retire.

Have you ever charted your own match? What you think is happening may be quite a bit different from what actually is going on out there? Sometimes just a few more shots to 1 area of the court can change the game around. Maybe being slightly more patient, or just a little more aggressive is all you need to turn things around. When a pro plays 100-200 shots in a game a difference in 5-10% of shot selection is huge. This could have to do with settling into the match, gaining confidence, the players getting tired or the ball softening up.

Have you hear about The Secrets of Solo Hitting? It's a 64 minute instructional video which contains 30 solo drills which will help you improve your squash game. Pick up a copy at SeriousSquashShop.com/collections/coaching-videos and if you don't enjoy it I will give you a full refund. So far there are over 100 copies sold to people from all over the world. Here's a preview of the film

The Evolution Of Squash

I guess I'm dating myself by mentioning that when I was finishing up playing competitively I was still playing you had to serve to win a point and the games went to 9 with a set 1 or 2 at 8 all. After my last year of varsity squash the point a rally (PAR) scoring change was adapted by the College Squash Association. Once or twice a year I'll have the kids play this scoring method for a match and most of them don't like it. I don't blame them, I don't like it either, but back then it was how the game was played. The new scoring system has definitely changed the game. And although match times have gotten shorter at the amateur level, at the professional level the matches can still be nearly as long as each rally carries more importance (although I know this also has to do with how frequently they are mopping up sweat and video reviewing let decisions). The scoring, equipment and court have all contributed to the current state of the game and I'm going to discuss a few of the ways that I've noticed the change, both positively and negatively.

Back when you had to serve to get a point people generally went for more attacking play wen they were serving and played more defensive when they were returning. The idea that was you could take a bit more risk when you were serving because your opponent wouldn't actually get a point if you happened to make a mistake. It also meant that if you're serving you have at least some momentum and this is a more opportune time to play a more attacking shot. So this part of the tactics of squash has definitely changed. You'll see at the pro level players being equally aggressive when returning or serving because they can score a point at any point.

The scoring has helped and hurt beginners. It is less likely that a player will get bagled playing PAR scoring, but they can also lose a game in the blink of an eye. This is why I still encourage new squash players to play to 15. Squash is only fun when you're having rallies and you get a good workout. If a game is done in under 5 minutes it's way too short to accomplish both feats.

The scoring has changed the tactics in a number of other ways too. Currently it is much more difficult to come back in a game. Back in the day people came back from down 0-8 or 1-8 quite frequently. Nowadays you very rarely see someone lose a game when leading 10-0 or 10-1. It's simply a matter of stats in this case. The person at game ball only has to win 1 point and not 2 in a row with the old scoring method. So this can be good and bad depending on which style of player you were. If you are a slow starter you would probably do better with the old school scoring method. If you're also not as fit you're probably better suited for the current style because you find it easier mentally to push even when you're fatigued for that last point or 2 knowing all it takes is 1 good shot or lucky bounce.

Going along with the theme of fatigue is another issue that is lost on current players because of the scoring system. When you had to serve to score a point players would be more prone to lose their concentration in a match. Nowadays big points near the end of a game come up quite quickly where focus is generally not as big of an issue. You are also more likely to have adrenalin pumping to help you fight through the fatigue when the end is near. When the games were to 9 and players traded a number of handouts without scoring more than a single point it was very difficult, especially as a kid to keep your concentration for the duration of a game. Generally juniors go through more ups and downs emotionally and with their focus so the old school scoring method did not favour them for these reasons.

Many of us associate the new scoring to the more attacking style of play, but is that really the reason? Is the equipment, lowered tin and slower double yellow dot ball or glass court not more critical factors? The racquets are lighter, the grips aren't made of leather or towel and the string allows for more power and spin on the ball. Also with the wide use of video analysis and elite coaching, players are learning to add all the extra layers into their games that were probably going unnoticed many years ago. Although the scoring has made a significant change to the style of game I believe these other factors have had a larger influence.

I don't know anyone that wants to see a 100 shot rally with only length hit, but a 50+ shot rally using all 4 corners is exciting and much more physically demanding. This style of play has changed the fitness requirements required to play squash. Back in the day aerobic endurance, one's ability to tolerate pain and their mental toughness were probably the most important traits of a successful squash player. Nowadays these are all still important, but speed, agility and power are much more critical. I've noticed that Gaultier and Matthew are looking a bit slower compared to some of the young guns currently rising up on the tour. No doubt that Matthew and Gaultier would still do exceedingly well at aerobic fitness tests against any other pro payer, but naturally your body slows down just a bit when you get in your mid 30's (yes I know from experience!). I feel if the tin was raised back, the scoring was changed back to 9 and the equipment was from the 80's or 90's they would still be winning almost every title. I think Nicol David would also be more successful under these more attritional conditions. Actually, Gaultier has more problems with his concentration so maybe this wouldn't help him as much as Matthew. Although these conditions may favour certain players, I'm glad that the equipment and scoring has changed as it's made squash more entertaining to play and watch.

It's easy to see that the players have evolved because of the equipment and scoring. Do we have the right balance between attacking and attrition? I wonder how the game will evolve in the next 20 or 50 years? Hopefully it stays attacking, but also remains physically demanding. It's the balance of the technical and tactical skill under extreme duress which makes the game so challenging and breathtaking to watch at the professional level. Watching a few of the hardest hitters play I do think the ball needs to slow down just a bit or the court temperature drop. I don't enjoy watching a player like Mohamed ElShorbagy win on sheer power (he would definitely still be one of the top back on the higher tin with the old scoring). ElShorbagy once had a really solid short game, but I haven't seen it on display much this season. Gaultier too relies mostly on attritional length to win. If the ball is so fast the players can't attack short when they get an opening the ball is a too quick in my opinion and we are on the verge of bringing back attritional squash. If I was ElShorbagy I would ask for a new ball at the start of every 3rd game in his matches because I can't imagine someone maintaining the pace he can create with a fresh ball.

Maybe the men should lower the tin another inch or just use a 2 dot ball on the glass court instead of a 1 dot. Just pace and athleticism takes away from creativity and the chess tactically gameplay that I love about squash. The pace has made ElShorbagy a 2 dimensional player (court coverage/endurance and pace). I see so many kids now that only focus on hitting the snot out of the ball and don't develop other areas of their game. And what's troubling is they don't know any better because they get away with it against most other juniors. I want to see the layers develop in a players game and to all be on display at the highest level of the game. It's up to the PSA and the WSF to ensure that tactics and creativity are continually rewarded at the top of the game. I understand that speed and pace are critical factors (as they should be) they just shouldn't be the only ones in my opinion. As a coach if I want a player to attack more I simply add targets or bonus points for winning or hitting the target at the front of the court. I just hope squash doesn't fall into the grip it and rip it and the best athlete always wins as opposed to best squash player. The game scoring, equipment and tin height have all attributed to rewarding attacking players and making the game more enjoyable to watch, but have they done enough? If the PSA wants to see more Superman dives they should give players more opportunities to be out op position on the court by either lowering the tin, slowing down the ball so the ball stays shorter on drops and boasts, making the court longer or wider or adjust the scoring once again!

I can't finish off today's topic without a quick mention about the rules. This is a simple way the game must evolve to improve squash from a players and spectators perspective. There is so much inconsistency between refs and left open for interpretation. The 1 obvious rule which is always taken advantage of is giving your opponent direct access to the ball. Most players appear to think that just because their opponent has hit a loose ball around the middle and they are standing around the T that their opponent must go around them. To my knowledge this is not stated anywhere in the rule book. I also can't stand when players counter drop and don't clear out afterwards. The ref often states the shot was too good, and although that may indeed be the case, who really knows if the player doesn't have any chance of retrieving it. I don't know why they haven't made it a stroke decision every single time a player hasn't made every possible effort to get out of their opponent's direct path to the ball regardless of the quality of their shot. Good players know exactly where their opponent is coming from and they can get out of the way if they were forced too or otherwise they may choose to play a different shot when they would otherwise be unable to clear their drop. So please WSF and PSA change this rule and get rid of the blocking and reduce the number of 'lets' called in our game and clean up the flow of the game. Who's with me?

Have you checked out the new items at SeriousSquashShop.com yet? Yes, I've designed some Serious Squash merch! Pick up a cap, hoodie, bandana, tee, tank top or a sport psych wristband! Use the code 'SSROCKS' to receive 15% off your order.

Is Your Self-Perceived Weakness The Source Of Your Greatest Strength?

We've all heard the tale of David and Goliath. I even wrote a post awhile back about  common misperceptions we have about strengths and weaknesses. I'm going to pick up on these prior discusses about how your weakness could actually be your greatest asset. 

I'm only 5 7" and I was always one of the shortest kids in school. I've had many thoughts about how much better I would be if I was a few inches taller; I'd be able to cover more court and volley more shots. What I experienced sounds like a fair assessment. But we are unable to change our physical traits and genetic makeup. 

Many of us have asked the questions if its environment or genetics that allow the greatest to be successful. If only I was 6 foot maybe I too could have played professional squash. I know I've got you wondering now how can my height be an advantage? Let me explain. 

Squash is a sport that anyone can play. There are all different sized players on the tour. Rodriquez, Gaultier and Au all demonstrate that a shorter man can be a great squash pro. Nicol David has done the same on the women's side. But how exactly does my size give me an advantage on the squash court? Let's find out. 

First of all I have to be faster, quicker to react and more efficient with my movement. If I was a few inches taller perhaps I would reach for balls more and not be as fast off the mark. So yes I may have to work harder to get more balls back, but this makes me faster and fitter. Rodriguez must be one of if not the fastest and he's one of the shortest. He is almost too fast for his own good though and often hits shots that must make David Palmer cringe. 

Being shorter in stature means that my shot selection is even more critical. I can't get away with floating shots to the front of the court. I have to send my opponent up there under pressure or I'm in trouble. A lot of taller juniors I see get away with lots of terrible shot because they can dig a lot back. If they played against more polished opponents they would also learn quickly that you can't just float a ball with no purpose to the front of the court. I still want to play an attacking style of squash so I just know I need to set up better openings and be more exact with my attack. Can you see where I'm going with this? Because I don't have a go-go gadget reach I am forced to make better shot selections and execute more precisely. I know this so I've spent hours and hours working on my short game. Annie Au must be the best example of this on tour. She is not very quick, but because of this she has worked on other areas which become much stronger. I doubt Au's style of played would have been as it is if not for her size and speed. 

There are also a number of things that are advantageous to shorter people in squash. Because of my size it is harder for me to get jammed by a shot. If a ball is hit right at me I have less area to get my feet out of the way to get set. I am also lower and have to lunge less deep compared to taller players. When I play a tall person I always hit shots low and right at them. 

Also, because of my height I have a more compact swing than taller players. I can get my swing set quicker and when I contact the ball at proper spacing I am slightly closer to the ball which means means more control and balance. I have more control just like when you move your hand up higher on your grip. As you do this you are closer to your projectile (the ball) and you will generally be slightly more accurate. My balance is better than a taller person because my centre of gravity is lower and the radius of my swing is slightly smaller. 

There really are lots of advantages to being short in squash and it's helped me become the player I am. I can say honesty now that my height is not the reason I didn't become a top psa player. It has a lot more to do with quitting squash at the age of 14 for 5 years. 

A couple of months ago I had knee surgery. I also believe that this will make me a better player when I come back. I will enjoy being on court more and will try and think less about the outcomes. It also gives my mind and body a bit of a break, which is probably long overdo. On top of this having this injury has made me more aware of taking proper care of my body and I plan on doing more preventative training to stay stronger and healthier. The same could very well happen to Ramy. I believe that there is a positive side to these injuries if we stay open minded and driven to succeed. But just like our self-perceived weakness, if we only look at it as an awful thing with no positive side to it we are missing out on a lot of opportunities to learn and grow from our experience. Nobody ever wants to think that an injury can be a positive experience, but I believe they can have lots of positive consequences and when we come back from them we will have learned a lot that we just never would have if we never went through it. Guess this is where the saying, 'what doesn't kills us makes us stronger' comes from. 

Another example of the more we're challenged the more we gain is in sport psychology. The bigger the challenge you face the more you have to gain and improve from. This is the approach you must have when things seem to be going against you. Imagine if everything was easy in your matches, the ref made all the calls in your favour and you never got down in any of the games. This is a level of comfort we would all enjoy, but this situation does not present us with the best chances to improve our mental game. 

I hope I've given you lots of reasons to rethink how you perceive your so-called weaknesses. The only detrimental part of a perceived weakness is the lack of confidence you have because of your destructive interpretation of it. Perhaps looking at your perceived weakness in a new shade of light will let you see that it actually helps to make you stronger and develops other strengths you would not have otherwise. If we don't get pushed and have things too easy we won't become tougher and will never reach our potential. 

I'm a big Toronto Blue Jays and Marcus Stroman fan. Stroman's famous line is 'HDMH' which stands for 'height doesn't measure heart.' He's only 5 8" and asked the Jays to lower his height listed on their program to his proper height. He embraced his perceived weakness because he realizes that it's his greatest asset and is what gives him an advantage over his competitors. He uses his stature as motivation to work harder and has become such a positive individual and more mentally tough because of it. Surely this wouldn't have happened if he was an average height for a major league pitcher. He wants to prove all of his naysayers wrong and is one of the most motivated athletes in all of baseball. 

There's nothing quite like demolishing stereotypes and proving not only to yourself, but to others just like yourself how often we misjudge people. If you need some help believing that your perceived weakness is an asset use vicarious learning by looking at someone who has a similar perceived weakness and is successful. And if someone hasn't done it yet, remember that doesn't mean it can't be done. If you're confident and keep working at it you can do more than you ever thought was possible. Be the next David, Rodriguez or Stroman or better yet be the first of you and become someone else's example and motivation! 

The sooner you change your attitude towards your perceived weakness the more you will benefit from it. Not being good at something or being titled 'genetically inferior' for your sport means you will make up for it in another way and will be stronger because of it. This is the reason anybody can play the most physically gruelling sport in the world at the highest level.

Lastly, be sure to check out my new online squash store at SeriousSquashShop.com I have men's and women's shirts, tank tops, sport psych wristbands, hats and bandanas! Enter the code 'SERIOUSSQUASHROCKS' to receive 15% off your order! Thanks for reading and supporting Serious Squash! 

Playing The Big Points Well

I've been busy the past week at the Canadian Junior Open but I am getting back on track with my posts. Today I'm going to talk about playing the big points well. I consider a big point near the end of games and matches. A big point can be at 6 all or 9-7. Playing a point a rally scoring method makes a single rally at the late stages of a game extremely important. You can go from leading by 3 with game ball to being up just 1 point. Almost as important as the score differential is the momentum gained or lost. Sometimes a big rally is a really long and physically gruelling point. if you win one of these tough rallies it can crack your opponent and turn the match around.

The mental game is such an important factor in winning the big points and eventually the match. I've done a previous post on Gaultier's mental collapse http://www.serioussquash.com/2014/11/gaultier-breakdown-vs-ashour.html. This doesn't happen to everyone and at all levels. In the World semi's Gaultier was physically taxed which played a big part of his mental collapse. Although we may not be as physically damaged as Gaultier was during this match we can still suffer from the same heart breaking loss he felt. There are very few people that can lose a close game that they should have or could have won and don't let it affect them one bit the following game. 

So what qualities enable someone to play points well? Is it something that you are born with or nurtured to do well? If you don't play the big points well there are a couple of questions you have to ask yourself. Here they are.

1) Are you fit enough? Are you getting tired at the end of games and giving up cheap points? Do you have trouble keeping up the same level of play throughout the match? 

2) Do you get nervous near the end of a game? 

3) Do you get ahead of yourself? Do you think the game is over before it is? 

4) Do you try to rush to finish off the game? 

I believe these are the biggest issues facing people that fail to play well at the end of games. What should you be doing and thinking instead? Do you play the same throughout the entire game or do you change your tactics slightly towards the end of the game? This is what we're going to talk about now.

1) Fitness

If you're tired and not fit enough you can still play big points well. This takes a lot of mental strength and discipline. I find this easier if you believe and know you can beat this person. You are able to push harder and you can overlook the physical fatigue and pain. Somehow when you're on court with someone you think is fitter and/or at a higher standard we can mentally cave in slightly easier. I can't say that this happens for everyone, but I do believe this to be true for most people. Those that can play at a high standard through physical distress are extremely difficult to beat. This is why I feel that psychological strength is such a crucial skill to be a top competitive squash player. 

Clearly preparing properly for competition is important not only for your physical fitness but as well for your confidence and psychological strength when things get tough. Training hard also makes you a little mentally stronger. You improve your ability at pushing though the pain barrier. You don't stop your session when you feel tired. How long can you keep pushing through the discomfort? Can you learn to enjoy this painful sensation? This reminds me of another quote, 'when you think you cannot go on any longer, you are on the verge of doing something special.' This builds your mental strength and confidence in your ability to play long and hard matches. 

2, 3, 4) Nerves, Thinking Ahead and Rushing

Many people get nervous at the start of a match. We then settle down until it gets to a late stage of a match. Getting nervous has to do with thinking ahead and rushing to finish things off. Here the big problem is that we begin thinking. Our focus shifts from just playing (the process) to winning (the outcome). When we start thinking about the future we are no longer in the zone. When this happens our actions are delayed as they involve thought and reaction opposed to instinctive play. 

I find it fascinating that to have the best chance of winning you can't focus on it. If you try too hard and think about just trying to win the game you won't be playing the same you did throughout the rest of the game. You'll notice that most people get down game ball and start hitting everything as hard as possible. And other times people think they are going to lose and often play better because they relax and stop focusing on winning. If we can focus on the process all the way through a game we improve our chances of winning. When you try and finish off a game when you're ahead you are prone to rush things. If you begin thinking 'I may actually win this game,' or 'I can't believe I might beat him,' you are setting yourself up for disappointment. If this situation presents itself you may feel you need to play low percentage shots to try and squeak the game from the stronger opponent instead of just playing the same way that got you into this winning position. 

What happens when you get to a tight part of the game? Do you keep playing the same shots? Do you play slightly more conservative when you get to the end of the game? What can you do if you want to play the big points better? 

The first thing is deciding if you want to play the same way regardless of the score. This is what many of the Egyptians are able to do and is why it so challenging to play them. They play without any hesitation or fear. This can be a tricky thing to do when you get to a big point or after a few errors. If you play one way all of the time you don't have to worry much about playing the big points well; you will likely have 1 tactic and stick with it no matter what (attacking or defensive).

Many of us would benefit more from formulating a plan for these situations before getting into competition. If it's 10-9, 9-10, 9 or 10 all what do you do? If you're nervous you should try and sow thing down between points. Take a deep breath, stick to your routine and use positive self-talk. As for the tactics at this stage of a game. Depending on how confident you feel at that moment you would benefit from picking the right time to attack short. If you can feel the nervous tension in your body you will have to be a bit more cautious. I believe you have to go for your shots when they're on, but you won't be as accurate when you're body is tight and your mind is racing. If you don't have a good attacking game or have much confidence in your short game you will have to keep the rally deep and try to win in the back or hope you're opponent makes a mistake. In my opinion this isn't the best strategy for long term success in the big points. I feel that you are better learning to control your nerves and maintain your focus on the present and on the process. 

You can see there are a few ways you can play the big points. If you wait to get into this situation to decide what you should do you may make a decision based on your fatigue along with yours and your opponents perceived abilities. What is your strength and your opponents weakness? This is always a good way to play a higher percentage point. 

Some people have a history of winning or losing tight games. If you're one of the people that's notorious for losing close games you have to ask yourself a few questions. Is your fitness to blame? Do you get ahead of yourself? Are you nervous and tight? Do you lose your focus and think ahead to what may or may not happen? If you know what is happening you will have a better chance of being able to change your underachieving history. 

The best method for playing the big points well is to be fit, stay in the present, focus on the processed and planning ahead for these situations. Know your strengths and your opponents weaknesses. Focus on what you can control. Plus winning breads confidence. When you win a couple of tight games your confidence will increases and you will be more likely to win big points down the road.

I've seen a few people that enjoy big moments in matches. Some naturally get tight and don't play well, while others appear to stay more relaxed and enjoy these situations. Clearly if you an enjoy thee moments you will play them with a clearer head and less tension in your body. Learning how to enjoy these and stay calm is easier said than done. 

I can't finish this conversation without noting how often I hear people blame 1 instance near the end of the game for losing. This may be a bad call or a lucky shot. Whatever it is, I don't like making excuses and pointing the blame. If you haven't read this previous post you can do so here http://www.serioussquash.com/2014/12/no-complaining-no-excuses-just-play.html. One point is never the reason for losing an entire match. Even though it may be a big point, it is just 1 of the many rallies you play. If you let a match come down to extra points in the 5th game anything can and will happen. You don't want to end up in a situation where the referee or 1 lucky or unlucky bounce is the difference between winning and losing. It's what got you to that point in the match that has put you into the current predicament. The last rally or 2 is a small sample of a large number of rallies. Every point is important so play them all as such.

Gaultier Breakdown vs. Ashour

Today I've decided to discuss the semifinal match of the World Open between Gregory Gaultier and Ramy Ashour. The first game was one of the most entertaining games I've ever seen. It really felt like 2 full games and after 35 minutes Ashour finally took the game 17-15. Unfortunately this was it for the match. I know the first game is crucial, but it was quite disappointing if you're a Gaultier fan.

I know this first game took a lot out of Gauliter, but I'm sure he had more in him. Would the same mental collapse have taken place if he had won the game? Gaultier didn't make a push in the third game either. Ashour looked very suspect against Goaln the night before. So if nothing less, Gaultier just needed to extend the match and fight all the way through. Ashour has been out of competition and unable to train as hard for 6 months. Surely the longer the match the better for Gaultier, right?

I've seen this type of collapse from Gaultier before. He had a similar dismal performance against Shorbagy in the semifinal of the U.S. Open. I think once a top player has beaten him the next time they play he appears more fragile. If Gaultier goes down in the next match he tends to get negative and stops believing in himself. He played such a wonderful first game it's a pity he had nothing left to offer in the last two. Even if he just slowed the pace down and kept the ball in play maybe Ashour would show signs of slowing down himself.

Ashour didn't look very positive against Golan. I thought maybe he wasn't 100% healthy. Even in the 3rd game against Gaultier his shoulder seemed to be bugging him. I feel Matthew would have matched up better because psychologically he is tougher and never gives up. I know it's easy sitting here on the couch watching, but I find it surprising that a former #1 player in the world could be so easily mentally defeated. We all have a physical and mental breaking point, but in the semifinal of the World Open I can't believe it only took 1 game (yes I know it was a mega-game) to break him. This shows the importance of the mental game in squash. Ashour talked in his pre game interview about always fighting the demons, the negative thoughts that arise in his head. I don't think Gaultier was very good at that on this occasion. He almost lost in the 1st round and has a poor record against Ashour. But really, if he was ever going to beat him again it should have been tonight. In Gaultier's pregame interview he admitted that he didn't know what to expect out of the match. Gaultier didn't sound very confident to me. Ashour looked so shaky the night before. Gaultier should have picked up on that and should know that Ashour is not confident in his body or his movement.

So what can we learn from this? First and foremost is the importance of staying positive. No matter the situation, you have to do everything you can to be positive about the situation. Don't get ahead of yourself and think it's over no matter what. I don't think any amount of extra physical training or drills will help Gaultier. He just needs to be more positive when things aren't going his way and he gets behind. I also think we learned the just how important that first game can be. It can be extremely psychologically damaging when it is a long game and goes into extra points. Sometimes you feel like you played your best squash and to lose it can be disheartening. So you begin thinking there is no hope. These are the negative demons you need to fight. Instead focus on one shot and one point at a time. The tougher the situation you're in, look at it as a challenge and always believe in yourself, and that you can come back. Of course if you start doubting yourself and you don't believe you can do it you likely won't.

So who's your pick in the final? I'm a little worried about Ramy's shoulder. He really looked to be favouring it and stopped hitting the ball hard. I think Shorbagy is going to be nervous. To my knowledge he hasn't beaten Ramy before and as I said a couple of posts ago, you're not really #1 in the wold until you beat Ramy when he's healthy. I just don't think Ramy is healthy and I don't feel he'll have enough in the tank. I'm picking Shorbagy, but I think it will all come down to his nerves. If Shorbagy can relax and play his game he should win. I hope they both play like they did in the semis and if they do it should be a great match. Whoever is going to be World Champion better win that first game!