The 2011 Eastern Regional 3-Wall Handball tournament was held on the weekend of August 19-21 at the courts in Columbia, Maryland. The organizers and hosts made every effort to create a competitive environment and friendly atmosphere. Also of note, and always a constant when planning an outdoor event, the weather looms large. The threat of rain can quickly upset any well laid plans.
At the local level, players who face off against each other are often familiar with an opponent’s game. In exploring strengths and weaknesses, one might gain the slightest edge if these strategies are utilized consistently. But as they say, on paper, everything works to perfection; while in practice, there are so many variables at play. Keeping that in mind for any level of handball, there can be interesting results to be sure as favorites do stumble on occasion. However, at this event there were few surprises as top seeds either waited for their respective opponents to battle their way through the draw or they themselves triumphed at every segment on the way to their crowning glory. Taking into consideration that so many matches are being contested simultaneously, it is not possible to accurately detail the ebb and flow of every game. There is no secret to reveal that what is written here comes from an understanding and love of the game, the players, and what is actually witnessed. Handball is a very simple game played with varying degrees of complexity by individuals who have developed skills to create court magic and masterpieces. At many instances, handball is perfection realized in winning a point, a game, a match, and ultimately a championship. We have all at one time or another tasted some aspect of that perfection.
When summarizing matches, there is so much that can be said about the player or the action, but there really is no substitute for being there to hear the varying sounds of hand-to-ball-to-wall; and to see the movement of bodies that can be simply described as poetry in motion. The serve, the return, and the rally and varying stages of the game often explode like the sound of a powerful kill or flutters like the butterfly to a flower as power is muffled with the softness of a guided drop shot to the front wall corner. More than the score, it is the point by point skirmishes that defines the game as sweat beads flash and fall while bodies and ball glide to rhythms so sweet, it stirs the soul oh so deep. Perhaps it is a state of nirvana for some. And on the way to this enlightenment, time evaporates like the endless vapors of breath exhaled in the intensity that is the moment as described in the paragraphs to follow.
Because of the large draw of Open players in this year’s event, competition began on Friday afternoon and featured, in addition to the talented pool of players who play locally in Columbia, several players from Boston, New York and North Carolina who honored us with their presence.
Saturday’s Open singles matches were set up by winners of Friday’s play advancing to meet each other or higher seeded players. And so, Bostonian Eamon O’Leary eliminated Adam Zimet, 21-4 and 21-13 to meet Dan Zimet. Facing a younger opponent in O’leary, D. Zimet was also well aware of his skills. The battle between these two talented players was sharp and at times fever-pitched. Athleticism and skill were being equally matched as seemingly improbable gets kept rallies alive. But despite D. Zimet’s great effort, O’Leary took the first game, 21-11. Zimet is a great self-motivator and often rebounds from points or game deficits after a time out or break. And so the second game began, with Zimet in control and keeping O’Leary at bay. The game was close and went back and forth until O’Leary emerged victorious, 21-18 and advancing to the semifinals.
On the same side of the bracket, Friday’s matches featured Andrew Schad against Will Bardwell, with Schad prevailing, 21-5 and 21-5. Also, Marc Ozgar, returning after an absence from regular play, went up against New Yorker, Mike Schneider. From the recorded score, this was a hard fought match as Ozgar took the first game, 21-19, lost the second 21-7 but managed to eke out a victory, 11-10 in the tiebreaker. The quarterfinal match of Schad against Ozgar was close as each player matched the strength of the other. In the end, Schad outlasted Ozgar, 21-15 and 21-9 and earned the right to face O’Leary in the semifinals. O’Leary appeared to have an easy time with Schad as he took the first game 21-9. But Schad rebounded and took the intensely close second game, 21-19. Perhaps that second game effort left Schad spent because in the tiebreaker, O’Leary cruised to an 11-0 victory.
On the other half of the bracket, Friday play had Adam Berwitz against Lee Anderson and Josh Osburn against Dave Bardwell. Anderson bested Berwitz, 21-3 and 21-6. While Osburn fought hard against Bardwell, but fell, 21-10 and 21-15. Anderson next faced Kendell Lewis a former New Yorker who now lives in North Carolina. Kendell has consistently been a force on the courts for many years. His style of play, seemingly effortless belies his powerful and precise strokes. All this was on display as Lewis took the first game 21-13 and finished off Anderson in the second game, 21-2 to await the winner of Bardwell versus New Yorker Billy O’Donnell (The Bus). Bardwell is a superbly fit athlete who tends to overpower his opponents with quickness and agility, not to mention, fine handball skills. The Bus has great shot making ability, and with either hand he displays both power and finesse. The match up was a superb battle pitting strength against strength. Bardwell had his hands full and fought hard to gain the edge in some hard, long and exciting rallies, but fell just short as The Bus took the first game, 21-18. With the same intensity of the first game, both players showed a determination of unrelenting effort with different outcome for game two in favor of Bardwell, 21-17. The match deciding tiebreaker was tight until The Bus pulled away to win, 11-8.
The Sunday finals would find Boston versus New York or O’Leary against O’Donnell in a close match as two relatively young players dueled for supremacy. O’Leary appeared to have the edge as he raced out to an early lead in the first game and never looked back, winning 21-7. O’Donnell, not lacking in tenacity, fought hard and gained control of the second game to win 21-15. At a point in the second game or early in the tiebreaker, O’Donnell hurt his left shoulder, making it difficult for him to unleash the deadly weapon that is his left hand. Whether out of courtesy or respect, O’Leary discontinued serving to the left, a most effective serve throughout the match. This unexplained action seemed to energize O’Donnell who savored the gift of having the ball placed mostly to his right as he out gunned O’Leary to win the Open singles championship, 11-8.
In Open Doubles, some of the singles players teamed up to create formidable teams; among the pairings, 3 brother teams consisting of Will and Dave Bardwell, Lee and Erik Anderson and Bobby and Marc Ozgar. Other pairings include O’Donnell and Schneider, perennial champs, Alan Frank and Dan Zimet, Rick Anderson and Adam Zimet, Josh Osburn and Adam Berwitz and O’Leary teaming with fellow Bostonian, Roland Langevin.
With matches set, O’Donnell/Schneider squared off against Anderson/Zimet resulting in 21-8 and 21-8 victory for O’Donnell/Schneider. The Andersons faced O’Leary/Langevin and bested them 21-11 and 21-9. The Andersons would now face O’Donnell/Schneider in a rugged battle of fire power and skills. There were no easy points in this match as bodies skidded off the concrete as often as the ball. Losing the first game 21-17, the Andersons were determined as ever to take the second game and push for the tiebreaker. As tight as the first game was, the second game was even tighter. Tried as they might, the Andersons could not muster the last 2 points necessary for a win and lost a heartbreaker, 21-19, sending O’Donnell/Schneider to the finals.
In the other half of the bracket, Frank/Zimet bested Osburn/Berwitz, 21-5 and 21-1 to meet the eventual winners of the Ozgars vs. the Bardwells. The Bardwells overwhelmed the Ozgars, 21-5 and 21-5 and geared up to face Frank/Zimet. The first game of the match lacked drama and competiveness that one might expect from a showdown of this caliber. Frank/Zimet wins easily, 21-2. In the second game, the intensity picked up as the Bardwells geared for a fight, but only scoring 12 points for their efforts, Frank/Zimet was in yet another finals.
Befitting of any, including this Open doubles finals, the two strongest teams faced off, with the edge going to Frank/Zimet because of experience and all important home court advantage. Frank and Zimet showed their usual sharpness and pressured the serve to the left side opponent of the O’DonnellSchneider team. That strategy worked superbly as they secured a 21-7 first game nod. The second game found O’DonnellSchneider implementing a strategy overheard between games. Their tact seemed effective against FrankZimet as the game remained close throughout. Knowing how to win is a grand element in the FrankZimet collaboration. That element, combined with superior skills overcame a tenacious O’DonnellSchneider as victory was secured in a scintillating second game, 21-19 and another championship bestowed on Frank and Zimet.
As is almost standard with a state or regional tournaments, brackets are a combination of one or more age groups or one or more skill levels. This holds true for the 40+/50+ singles division. This is a small but strong field that I find myself in. My first round opponent was Roland Langevin, the Bostonian who also teamed up to play in the Open doubles. Langevin is a solid player who out played me in every aspect of our two games. With all respect to Langevin’s skills, the final scores, 21-7 and 21-5 did not reflect how well I am capable of playing. Langevin later met Joe Berman in the semifinals and was soundly defeated, 21-8 and 21-6. In the other half of the draw, Bill Tebbenhoff and Bob Maguire played an opening round match to determine who would meet George Alicea-Ruiz in the semifinals. Maguire proved too much for Tebbenhoff, taking the match 21-5 and 21-11. Against Alicea-Ruiz, Maguire had his hands full, but managed to keep the game close and pushed Alicea-Ruiz only to fall short, 21-20. Encouraged by the closeness of the first came, Maguire wasted no time and readily handled Alicea-Ruiz in the second game, 21-10. In the 11-point tiebreaker, both players played each point as if it was the last, with Alicea-Ruiz gaining a distinct advantage on serves and as a result, took the game and match, 11-5.
Berman and Alicea-Ruiz are players of contrasting styles, with Alicea-Ruiz more mobile, Berman plies his trade in the front court with amazingly quick hands directing well placed kills. With both players serving well, the first game came down to keeping each player out of his comfort zone. For his scoring opportunities, Alicea-Ruiz pushed Berman into the deep court to retrieve and then cut off his returns, thus stifling Berman’s chance to be in position to execute his signature kill shots from inside the short line. But Berman is a smart player who manages the court well and limited Alicea-Ruiz from pushing him deep and took the first game, 21-14. It seemed momentum from the first game flowed to the second as Berman made quick work of Alicea-Ruiz with crack servers and a hook serve to the deep right side. With Alicea-Ruiz having no answer for these weapons and no offense of his own, Berman took the second game and the championship, 21-2.
The 40/50 doubles for this tournament consisted of six teams with the two top seeds, Alan Frank/Joe Berman and Roger Berry/Rick Anderson poised in the semifinals. To earn the right to play Frank/Berman, George Alicea-Ruiz and Tony Winter went up against long time pairing of Rick Compton and Bob Humphreys. The match turned into a marathon as the first game saw Compton/Humphreys race out to a 16-3 lead and then Alicea-Ruiz/Winter woke up. They slowly pecked away until the lead evaporated. In between, the numerous side outs without scoring by either side made the game that much longer. The comeback stunned Compton/Humphreys as their lack of recent 3-wall play began to take its toll. Sensing an unraveling, Alicea-Ruiz/Winter pounced and snatched the game, 21-18. The second game was but a formality, as Compton/Humphreys was only able to muster 7 points, sending Alicea- Ruiz/Winter to semifinals against Frank/Berman. In a word, Frank/Berman overwhelmed Alicea-Ruiz/Winter. At 21-1 and 21-1 this strong pairing glided to the finals.
On the other half of the bracket, Bob Dyke and Bob Maguire teamed up to face Steve Estrada and yours truly. Dyke/Maguire is a formidable pair and proved too tough for the Estarada pairing. We seemed to be playing in slow motion in response to Dyke/Maguire quickness; and the 21-9 and 21-10 defeat reflected our lethargic play. As a team, Estrada and I played well together and with some seasoning could make a better showing. In facing Berry/Anderson, Dyke/Maguire was up against seasoned discipline. Anderson never leaves the front court to defend and puts away most balls within his vast reach; while Berry is his usual deliberate steadiness as he carves out segments of the court to keep his opponent off balance with crisply flicked shots and kills. Dyke/Maguire could not decipher the Berry/Anderson mystique and quietly fell, 21-7 and 21-7. A showdown and repeat of the 2010 finals was now set. The match was played twice because rain disrupted the first attempt which I believe saw a split of the first two games. So instead of playing a tiebreaker after several days off, the players agreed to play the entire match from the beginning. From the score, Frank/Berman appeared to have little trouble besting Berry/Anderson, 21-5 and 21-8 to repeat as champions.
As a alternative to watching and following many matches, I often volunteer to referee matches at tournaments. Some see this as a mundane task and begrudgingly do it because it is required if you lose prior to the finals. I find refereeing as a unique way to watch handball and learn the rules of the game. As a referee, you certainly do not want to be the focal point of the match. And one certainly hopes that the match does not turn on a poor or incorrect call. As a referee, one tries to be fair and certainly impartial. It is rare that a match is called where some call is not questioned by one player or the other. Fortunately, players can overrule the referee and that helps to keep any disparity in balance. The best part of refereeing is being close to the action, especially in the 3-wall game. You watch as points develop and end. You see the intensity, elation and disappointment from ground level; as close to the game as is allowed without being a player. Whether it is a match featuring top notch talent or one showcasing beginners or lower skilled players, arbitrating potential infractions of the rules is equally important. And because handball players in general are honest and self-policing, being a referee is made that much easier by that fact. For example, numerous times in my experience, a player will call the double bounce on a retrieve, even if his body may have shielded the action from his opponent and the referee. This honesty is in part of what makes the sport great and refereeing less of chore than it might be. On some occasions a referee will make the right call, but the player(s) who may not benefit or are on the negative side of the call will cite his or her skill as a reason why that call might be unfair. Resolving those situations is what refereeing can entail and each incident must be evaluated within the realm of good judgment. Even though the game in reference is called “perfect,” players and referees certainly are not.
As the action unfolded throughout this 3 day event, the 60 plus division’s players dueled each other in singles and doubles events. The singles matches featured five players of the qualifying age for this bracket. Charles Parsons bested Tony Truman in a 3 game opening round match, 9-21, 21-18 and 11-4. Parsons would now face Dan Ho in one semifinal. Ho was able to keep Parsons at bay and won 21-10 and 21-14. In the other semifinal match, George Fambro and Bob Bardwell tangled for the right to meet Ho in the finals. When the dust settled, Bardwell emerged victorious, 21-14 and 21-5. The final between these two equally tenacious rivals is a familiar tournament staple. Anyone who is aware of Maryland handball, know that these two fine players have faced off in many previous finals. With similar styles of play of keeping rallies alive, the games between these two players are often long affairs. As a referee and first hand witness, I was not bored and was drawn in by the volatility and skill of play. The first game went to Bardwell 21-15 after long periods of scoring droughts precipitated by repeated sequences of side outs. Ho hoped to push Bardwell in the second game and possible force and third game tiebreaker. On this day, it was not to be as Bardwell took hold of the game early and scored in two lengthy run of points as Ho could find no answer to these barrages. Championship earned by Bardwell, 21-10.
In the doubles division of this bracket, although there were matchups of local and familiar players, most games were not close. But unfortunately, the final between the team of Dan Ho and Ken Greco versus, Joe Pleszkoch and Murzy Jhabvala was postponed because of rain.
At the skill levels, B and C divisions, a great many players participated. The B singles crown was earned by Max Guzman who out dueled fellow Pennsylvanian Joe Gritter in a tight matchup of rapidly developing talent. These two players are a small part of a contingency of players from the Harrisburg area who are being mentored by Dave Botero and the Hope in Handball organization. In the past couple of years, we have witnessed the rise of some of these individuals as they have participated in state and regional tournaments for both the 3 and 4 wall games. Their eagerness to play is both inspiring and infectious. With continued dedication, mentoring and encouragement, these new players will soon help carry the torch of our sport forward. Competition among these individuals can be fierce and unrelenting as anyone who has witnessed these matches will tell. Many of the matches in the B singles bracket went to tiebreakers. To help shine the light on this developing talent pool, I will mention all the players in this division, including locals, Sam Worchesky, Nathaniel Frank, Chris Simeti and Joe Green, and part of the aforementioned Harrisburg crew, Ray Persaud, Senior and Junior and Tony Velez.
The B doubles bracket also featured many of the above mentioned players and more who teamed up to further hone talents and develop games. With the addition of Bill Tebbenhoff and Jerry Kittner, Bob Woodward and Dante Chinni, Dave Flemming and Kevin Kibson as pairings, this draw featured young and older players vying for supremacy. Joe Gritter and Tony Velez handled Woodward and Chinni to later battle new comers to the 3-wall game, Tebbenhoff and Kittner. In all fairness, many of this division’s players are new not only to the 3-wall game but also to handball. Tebbenhoff and Kittner are seasoned handball players and it was that seasoning that helped them overcome a younger and less experienced Gritter and Velez, 18-21, 21-12 and 11-10 to reach the finals. The other half of the draw saw Joe Green and Chris Simeti successfully fended off Fleming and Gibson in a first round match and then went on to neutralize Joe Guzman and Dave Botero to reach the finals. Would age and experience win out over youth and quickness? That was the question surrounding the B doubles final. Tebbenhoff and Kittner wasted no time asserting their experience to establish leads in both games and never slowed the pace against their younger opponents in their race to the title, 21-9 and 21-12.
The C division (doubles and singles) is populated by players new to our sport or beginning to develop their skills. Of note, Sally Snyder, a mentor with the Hope for Handball organization and Amanda Blanchard who is relatively new to our area and the 3-wall game, joined the up and coming young juniors to fill out the singles and doubles brackets. In the singles bracket, Chris Persaud and Jacob Rienhard battled their way to the finals, each enduring a match that went to a tiebreaker. In their finals match up, a persistent and determined Persaud out lasted Reinhard to take the title. Each of these players mentioned and unmentioned, show a strong determination as they work their way up the handball ladder of success. As more advanced players, we should offer our support by giving them a game and offer a lesson, not only in skills but also in encouragement.
The doubles bracket of the C division found the singles players teaming up to ply their skills in a round robin format. Synder and Blanchard and Persaud and Will Martinez each won their matches against Reinhard and Daniel Andrews. When Synder and Blanchard faced off against Persaud and Martinez, it was in a single game to 31 easily won by Persaud and Martinez, thus securing the title. With Persaud slamming at this skill level and his joy shown playing the game, this young man has wonderful promise and potential. We should all keep an eye out for this brash 13 year old.
Finally, the 65+ doubles featured the elder statesmen of the Columbia courts. Mort Frank teamed with Elliot Greenwald against Tony Truman and Eli Zimet to produce a good match won by Frank and Greenwald, 21-19 and 21-15.
This tournament is usually the penultimate test before players take their games to Toledo, Ohio at the national level over the Labor Day weekend. For those whose tournament life is limited to this stage, this is their ultimate display of their skills as it is developed and hone throughout the summer. Through the heat, the sweat and intensity, we all meet on the 6 courts in Columbia and give our best while having fun. The fun does not stop as the 3-wall season wanes, but being in the great openness of the outdoors has a greater sense of fulfillment, as if to say, whether young or old: “I am outside and I hope this day will never end.”