Racquetball’s official scoring method is a millstone around the game’s neck.<\/p>\n
What’s better?<\/p>\n
Let’s score to make games more even, with longer rallies.<\/p>\n
How?<\/p>\n
First: Rally scoring. A point is scored on every rally, not just when the server wins a rally. Volleyball went to rally scoring a couple decades ago. Big improvement.<\/p>\n
Second: Who serves? The person with the lower score chooses. If the score is even, the person who did not have the serve-choice the previous serve chooses the server.<\/p>\n
Third: Single serve. A fault is a point for the opponent. (I prefer two serves in racquetball, but that’s probably not the best way to do it. Most probably not the best in other sports.)<\/p>\n
Fourth: The serve rotates in team games, doubles, etc., when the serve-choice changes. And the serve-choice side can force a single rotation of the serving side at any other time.<\/p>\n
Fifth: Game is to 15 – win by two.<\/p>\n
The result: Short, competitive games between players of differing skills. Longer rallies because the weaker player starts more rallies with an edge.<\/p>\n
Bonus: Faster games. More action in a match. More fun to play. More fun to watch.<\/p>\n
Applies to other games: Volleyball, ping-pong, badminton, squash. You name it.<\/p>\n
Racquetball is inherently fast and action-packed. Why should it have a plodding scoring system? Why not a system that fits the game?<\/p>\n
Which leads to how games will change when judging and ref’ing become automated. Why should points only be counted once a rally? But that’s another subject for another day.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Racquetball’s official scoring method is a millstone around the game’s neck. What’s better? Let’s score to make games more even, with longer rallies. How? First: Rally scoring. A point is scored on every rally, not just when the server wins … Continue reading