|
02-06-10
The PSA rankings system never rests and to maintain the top ten status that the biggest names have so long defined requires a constant diet of rankings points, the kind only available in the latest stages of a tournament. The two semi-finals at this year’s Bluenose were staffed by some of those names and all four competitors could easily see themselves playing for the lion’s share come Sunday. With Peter Barker and David Palmer on opposite sides of the draw the prospect of a rematch championship was there, but Daryl Selby and Thierry Lincou, confident in their own intentions, made the day theirs.
Barker vs. Selby
Having competed against one another several times over the course of junior squash, British national play, and PSA events, countryman Daryl Selby and Peter Barker are no strangers to each other’s style of play. This was quite evident in game one of the semifinals of the Bluenose Classic as the match began as a back and forth event with long rallies and an even exchange of points. Early on, Selby pushed the limits of Barker’s agility with precision length and accurate shot placement while Barker tested Selby’s endurance through an impressive display of anticipation and retrieval which contributed to very long rallies. Midway through the first with the score at 5-5, Selby went ahead by one on a hold and drop that landed in the front corner nick. Barker countered back with a crisp forehand drive that caught the sidewall nick to again tie the score at 6-6. A volley drive into the tin from Barker followed by a stroke against Selby kept the score tied at 7-7. Over the next exchange of points both players traded winning shots ending long rallies – again bringing the score even at 8-8. During the next point, an aggressive volley boast from Selby found tin to put Barker ahead 9-8. Over the next two points, pressure from Barker forced both of Selby’s shots into the tin for a marathon thirty four minute 11-8 game one win.
Similar to the first, the second game began with long rallies comprising an entertaining display of shots and retrievals as the score remained close at 4-4. With a couple of strokes called against Barker supplemented by well-placed winners, Selby claimed the bulk of the next seven points as he took a 9-6 lead. Barker responded back with a pair of boast and cross court winning shots to close the gap by one point at 8-9. A drop into nick and “no let” call against Barker moved Selby to 10-9 and serving for the game. Over the next point, Barker hit a cross court ball that innocently caught the back wall nick to even the score at 10-10. A pinpoint front court drop put Selby ahead 11-10 and serving for the game. The next rally – Selby clipped tin for 11-11. Over the next three exchanges, Barker continued to stave off game point as the score remain tied at 13-13. Selby pulled ahead 14-13 on a stroke called against Barker. In his sixth game ball attempt, Selby slammed a forehand down the wall for a marathon thirty five minute 15-13 game two win.
To start game three, a sequence of tight upfront drops and pair of tin errors from Selby, enabled Barker to quickly build a 5-1 lead. A deceptive backhand drop and off-speed winner from Selby brought the score to 3-5. Just past the midway point in the game, Barker maintained a 7-4 lead. Both players continued to exchange points with Selby making steady progress in catching up to Barker. At 9-8 for Barker, the momentum began to shift toward Selby – who had trailed for the entire game – as he hit a sharply executed cross court in the back corner for a 9-9 tie. The next point was a long rally with Barker striking the tin for a 10-9 score. At game point, Selby hit a tight-to-the-wall sidewall shot that handcuffed Barker for an 11-9 game three win.
The fourth game saw Barker come out extremely flat as Selby mounted a commanding 8-0 lead. Backed by encouragement from the crowd, Barker took the next point to get on the score sheet. With increased confidence and the lead, Selby stayed the course of solid and consistent play as he exhibited throughout the match and muffled any attempts by Barker to get back into the game. Selby took the fourth by an 11-5 score to advance to the finals. -KB
Lincou vs. Palmer
At the top of the mountain the differences between rankings are very fine, reversible any given day. While ranked ahead of Lincou in the world top ten as of the tournament seeding Palmer would not have allowed himself the conceit of entitlement in this clash of marquee names.
Palmer got the quick start, 2-0 up, then 4-2. Variety was his weapon of choice at the outset, with drops, drives and volleys all contributing to the bottom line, aided by a couple of misses as Lincou struggled with his range. If it could be judged at this early stage Palmer appeared quite relaxed, more so even than through yesterday’s quarter-final match. Lincou’s focus remained on his own needs and he never strayed further than two points off the pace, recalibrating his instruments to meet the Australian at an even 6-6. There was little time spent on one side of the court without a visit to other, both players searching to force a gap between themselves and their opponent. With Lincou now up at 8-7 a critical “no let” in his favour put him two from Palmer and two away from the 1-0 lead. In a moment of drama Palmer hid a beautiful boast under the guise of a drive from mid-court and Lincou slipped on the way to the ball, almost a full sprawl at the T. This didn’t unsettle the Frenchman as it could have and instead it was Palmer who was wrong footed into the back left. With a stroke against the Australian in the next rally Lincou was up 1-0.
As would happen more than preferred at various times in the match a couple of front wall nicks started the second. These were both judged to be strokes for Lincou and he went all the way to 5-1 in relatively short order on the strength of that beginning. Needing a reset Palmer clarified a few things with the officials and then clawed back to only 6-4 down. There were a number of lets creeping in to the fabric of the match and it was a shame at this point to have a huge rally of equal recovery and attack be called as such. On the restart, via a Palmer service from the left box, Lincou tested a “change up” serve return that died short and wide ahead of the server. It was a pattern to repeat itself three to four times elsewhere in the match and a real momentum killer after a hard won Palmer point. Three points adrift at 8-5 down the climb back was made virtually impossible when Palmer tinned an open volley from just off the T and then his frustration peaked with a stroke against for Lincou game ball. The next rally was never played as the ref judged Palmer’s reaction conduct stroke worthy – 2-0 for Lincou.
A quick collision to start the 3rd might have distracted Lincou but Palmer, knowing his back was against the wall, pushed through to a solid 7-1 lead. Lincou potted a hard volley for his second point of the game but thoughts were already on the fourth game and the last three points were well executed formality for Palmer.
The fourth game was fast and hard out of the gate – both players unloading. Palmer’s will to fight – never in question – was aggravated by the many lets that were popping up in both directions and betrayed by a couple of open volley errors. Lincou dented the tin to sit only 5-4 to the good amongst it all but soon accepted a couple of earned strokes and might have comfortably contemplated the end. Palmer seized a flash of momentum to get to 8-7 down but an error on a drop and then one of Lincou’s that was glued to the wall put match ball in his hands. It was an attempt at a serve return nick that Palmer couldn’t quite get to roll that Lincou then pounced on and drove deep out of reach for the match. The crowd was thrilled and the players tired – a great combination at a squash match.
Main Draw – Semi-finals:
(4) Daryl Selby (Eng) bt ( 1) Peter Barker (ENG) 8-11, 15-13, 11-9, 11-5 (105m)
(3) Thierry Lincou (FRA) bt (2) David Palmer (AUS) 11-8, 11-5, 2-11, 11-7 (60m)
Finals matchup:
(4) Daryl Selby (ENG) vs. (3) Thierry Lincou (FRA) (2:00pm) |
