And so it was, David knifed through his half of the bracket, not really being tested nor pushed from game to game. However, in all fairness to his opponents, to the man, they all showed resolve in the face of certain defeat. To this end, in the two matches leading up to the championship final, David limited his opponents to two game totals of 10 and 9 points respectively, with each competitor scoring 8 points in one of the two games.
On the other side of the draw, another fine champion, and top seed, Dan Zimet battled and bested a young and talented Michael Schneider 21-14, 21-15 on his way to the finals.
As readers of these pages know, I have always lauded Dan for his handball skills and his other fine qualities. So it was no surprise that during a break in the tournament, the local handball community, tournament participants, and spectators showed their collective appreciation in honoring Dan for his fine achievement of recently attaining Grand Master status for winning his 10th national title. As it was mentioned during the ceremony, Dan’s achievement is quite special because his 10 titles were obtained in 1-wall, 3-wall and 4-wall versions of our sport. Dan joins an elite group of players who have ever achieved this feat.
How would Dan fair against David? was the question on everyone’s mind on championship Sunday. With the fair weather gods applying their own brand of mischieve by dousing the courts with intermittent showers and sprinkles, the possibility of not holding the finals loomed large. After a few attempts at using blow torches to dry courts to playable conditions, a lull in the weather pattern allowed the matches to get underway.
As the spectators gathered and the camera rolled, zero serving zero opened the match with David serving. With a combination of wicked fist shots to the ceiling and well placed hard and soft kills; David made quick work of Dan and ran off several strings of points to end the game at 3.
The second game started out better as Dan collected himself during the break as fine champions are wont to do. Dan took an early 5-1 lead with his gorgeous serves and by moving David around the court with sharper shots and better angled returns. Early on, Dan limited David’s use of the devastating blasts to the ceiling that rocket and ricochet at a steep angle that either severely limits or eliminates the possibility of a return. Whenever possible, David ended several volleys with the signature triple thunder of ball meeting fists, to echo off the ceiling and then finally resound on the floor as they gracefully arc to the deep and sometimes unreachable back court. David sensed that he was in a battle as Dan stretched the score to 7-1. Crisp kills were often met with re-kills by both players as the spectators cheered with appreciation. Soon though, David inched closer with each exchange of serves. After keeping the score close for most of the game, David began pulling away even though Dan showed his greatness by neither giving up nor cracking under the pressure. In the end, David prevailed 21-14 and the two champions embraced at mid court as the spectators showed their appreciation.
The Open Doubles featured Alan Frank and Dan Zimet as the number one seeds. The bracket was filled with other notable pairings, David Chapman and Joe Berman, the always dangerous and tenacious Bardwell brothers Will and Dave, father and son Rick and Lee Anderson who have recently become a formidable doubles team, and a pair of unknown (to this writer) New Yorkers William O’Donnell and Michael Schneider.
Although I did not witness the match between the Andersons and the New Yorkers, by the result, 21-13, 21-17, the Andersons met their match on this stage. The result set up a match between the New Yorkers and Alan and Dan. For years, Alan and Dan have reigned supreme in Maryland and on the national stage as a doubles team in 3 wall play. The first game of the match was swift as the New Yorkers seemed to own Alan and Dan to the tune of 4 points. “Ownership” in the game of handball can be a fleeting thing and this proved to be the case as Alan and Dan returned the favor and held the New Yorkers to 2 points setting up the always thrilling 11 point tiebreaker. At 11-6, Alan and Dan could not overcome the youthful talent of these, no longer heretofore “unknown New Yorkers” who would now await the other finalists in the draw.
After the Bardwell brothers battled the pair of Adam Zimet and Houseman, 21-16, 6-21 and 11-3, they faced off against David Chapman and Joe Berman. The matched started out even and was shaping up to become a classic battle. The Bardwells, Will and Dave, have faced off against Chapman and another doubles partner earlier in the year at the National Masters in Allentown. That was quite a match even though the Bardwells eventually lost; they pushed that incarnation of the Chapman team to the very brink of elimination, 20 and 19. Back to the 3 wall contest; early into the first game, Joe Berman fell awkwardly reaching for a shot and injured his right shoulder. The injury changed the match as Joe struggled to serve and winced after most attempts at hitting the ball with his right hand. That left David to cover the court on almost every shot. One could sense the team’s frustration as the Bardwells capitalized on the injury and reversed the outcome of the Allentown lost by besting David and Joe, 21-18, 21-19. I would be remiss if I did not single out Dave Bardwell for his fine play and athletic agility as he leaped and reached several of David Chapman’s previously described thundering blasts to the ceiling. At times, seemingly, only the back fence kept Dave Bardwell from completely lofting skyward. The win made the Bardwells finalists to face the New Yorkers. However, Will and Dave defaulted leaving us all to wonder what might have been?
As mentioned before, divisions are often combined to accommodate players and set up fair competition. As a result, for this tournament, the 40/50 Doubles division featured some of the finest players in the region. My partner Bruce Cohen and I were entered in this bracket. To start, we faced the great Roger Berry and his partner Rick Anderson whose game I admire and always praise. To say we faced an uphill battle would be an understatement. Although we were handily beaten, 21-4, 21-3, it is never fun to be schooled as it were, but there are lessons to be learned from these sessions and I enjoyed being on the court with such fine players and look forward to improving the outcome the next time we meet.
Roger and Rick would later face Ray Estevez and Bob Dyke who subbed for an injured Jay Miller who together with Ray had earlier beaten a strong team of Bob Humphreys and Rick Compton. Dyke, before pairing with Estevez, had his own pairing with Ken Greco before losing in a thrilling tiebreaker, 11-10 to Bob Bardwell and Tony Winter.
In the Roger and Rick, Estevez and Dyke match, the games were long with extended rallies for many points. For respective teams, Roger and Dyke lurked in the back while Estevez and Rick controlled the front court. This made for thrilling volleys and each player brought out the very best in his opposite number. In the end, Roger and Rick prevailed 21-15, 21-19.
The other side of the bracket featured the recent 4 wall National Masters 45+ Doubles champions, Alan Frank and Joe Berman. They make an excellent doubles team because they are disciplined in their court coverage, with Alan in the back lofting ceiling shot after ceiling shot and Joe systematically putting shots away with slicing kills. So it was no issue for them to breeze through their half of the draw, prior to Joe’s injury, limiting opponents to 2, 9 and 3, 5 points respectively.
With the finals showdown between Rick and Roger and Alan and Joe in the offing, Joe’s shoulder injury would certainly influence the match. But overnight rest seemed to help Joe as he and Alan kept Roger and Rick on their heels for most of the match. As it is with excellent players, rallies can be extended or ended before they begin. This matched showed fine examples of both types of play. Joe wincingly played all out as Alan seemed to overpower Roger and Rick. Even though the final score was 21-14 and 21-9 in favor of Alan and Joe, spectators sensed the outcome long before the final score was set. But with their warrior heart and spirit, Roger and Rick never showed quit and battled every point to the end.
As the combined 40/50/AB Singles division would indicate, the draw was stocked with an assortment players. As always, the tournament directors show their mettle in sorting out the pairs on either side of the bracket. Placed in this division, my first match was against David Botero, a described …”handball fanatic,” who mentors at-risk youth in the Harrisburg, PA area by teaching them handball. David is to be commended for his efforts; more on this later. Our first game was a seesaw battle for the first few points. Tied at 9, I found my serve and began pulling away and eventually winning the game 21-10. The second game, David served and volleyed with precision and feasted on my down the middle shots with easy overhand corner kills. Down 17-4, I may have thought of saving my energy for a tiebreaker but I decided that I could still win. As the day became hotter and more humid, conservation would have seemed the right choice. But I showed resolve and fought back on two consecutive service runs to draw to within a point. Carelessness and lost of focus allowed David back to the service line and he added two more points. My next chance to serve produced one point and allowed David the opportunity to finish the game 21-17. My efforts were not in vain as the two game total points afforded me the honor to serve first, an often important element in the tiebreaking game. I took advantage of the previous games momentum and raced out to a 3-0 lead. David came back and tied the score at 3 but could not muster another point as I pulled away on two consecutive service runs.
That victory boosted my confidence going into the semifinal round against George Alicea-Ruiz who had earlier dispatched Randy Wolfe, 21-3, 21-3. I know George’s reputation from playing against him in doubles. George showed his tenacity from the start of our match and never let up. Admittedly, I was just a step short of returning and volleying with George. He capitalized and feasted on my meaty returns to the tune of repeated kills and passing shots. The first game ended quickly at 21-2. I vowed to gather myself and push George in the second game and possible force a tiebreaker. What I thought and what I did were completely opposite. George used a variety of service changes and shots to keep me off balance and unceremoniously eliminated me from the tournament at 21-4.
I wished George well as he would now face Jay miller in finals. Jay’s road to the final was not as easy as George’s seemingly cake-walk victories. Jay’s first round match went 21-18 and 21-17 against a Boston area resident last named Cullen. Speaking with Cullen the next day, he lauded Jay for his precise shot making down the side walls. I nodded in agreement about this refined 3 wall skill possessed by Jay and many other successful players. Jay later faced Steve Bossung who managed 10 points in each game of their match. Again, what should have been a spirited final never materialized because Jay defaulted and was a no show for the Sunday finals.
The 60+ Singles and Doubles divisions in our local tournaments seem to always pit familiar foes against one another. Having witnessed many a friendly game among the participants, come tournament time, competition is ratcheted up several notches.
In the Singles side, Dennis Uffer and George Fambro went toe-to-toe, splitting the first two games. In the tiebreaker, George edged out Uffer, 11-7. Dan Ho also fought a hard battle against Diminico as the two split the first two games with Ho winning the tiebreaker 11-6. Paul Healy faced ‘bionic’ man Woody and lost, 14, 7. Earl Savino and Joe Pleszkoch faced off with Joe getting the best of Earl, 4, 15. The two semifinal matches pitted Woody against Ho and Fambro against Pleszkoch. Both matches went the marathon route and ended up in tiebreakers with Ho triumphing over Woody, 11-5 and Fambro eking out a victory against Pleszkoch, 11-8.
The final saw Dan Ho rely on his lofting serves down the right wall that gave Fambro a great deal of trouble and resulted in a relatively quick first game at 2. In the second game, Fambro kept rallies short and used his serve to keep the match close. But in the end, Dan Ho had too many weapons in his bag of tricks and he closed out Frambro, 21-13.
The 60+ Doubles bracket combined many of the aforementioned singles combatants. The top seed for this draw paired longtime local and national standouts Dave Hinkleman and Dan Ho. On the other side of the bracket, Paul Healy and George Fambro also received first round byes. As it often is in a balanced division as the 60+, top seeds usually advance to the finals. This being the case, Hinkleman and Ho held true to form as they executed with business-like efficiency. As with all great doubles teams, Dan and Dave communicate well and remain true to their designated roles. In addition, for this match Dan and Dave each had magnificent service runs of several points each. When an opponent is fighting to stop the points from tallying in these types of run, it is often most demoralizing and puts a strain on your game focus. In other words, it is hard to recover from such runs unless you are able to muster a similar or greater run in return. This was not the case with Fambro and Healy. Hinkleman and Ho ruled the day, 21-5, 21-3.
The C and Novice divisions, though separate, featured the future of our game. In the C division, with young players such as Nathaniel Frank and Sam Worchesky steadily improving; their dedication is beginning to bear fruit. Nathaniel was the runner up in the round robin format, sustaining one loss in a tiebreaker to the eventual champion Dave Botero.
The Novice division featured at-risk youngsters from the Harrisburg, PA area. These kids show a great promise and love for the game as their mentor, Dave Botero. It was great to be a small part of their expanded horizons. Unfortunately, in the hub of the tournament atmosphere, I personally did not spend time with them. I hope they did not think us selfish for our singular focus that surrounds tournaments. However, if you missed the opportunity to meet these young people, all is not lost. Use this link to an informative article from Randy Wolfe posted on the Maryland Handball website.
Another successfully run tournament has come to an end. We played, had fun, stayed healthy and enjoyed the experience. To the champions, finalists, and participants, I salute your efforts. It can be said, over the days you played, you the champions played best. And for those of us who played good or better, we should never let it rest until our good is better and our better best.
See you in Toledo; all the best!