SquashTalk> Columns> The Spin > The Venerable British Open [last update was 5-oct-05 ]

The British Open:

... will it survive as a "Major" ...

The Greatest Squash Event In Uncertain Ground © 2005 SquashTalk.com
by Ron Beck (Ron Beck is the editor of SquashTalk and spent five years on the WPSA pro tour)

Egyptian Stars, Amr Shabana and Karim Darwish are passing up this year's British Open. Shabana was the 2004 finalist in Nottingham.

The British Open is without a doubt the most famous and historic squash tournament in the world of squash. It is important for the heritage, public consciousness and continuity of squash around the world. It's the event where Hashim Khan burst into prominence and gave an identity to a new nation, Pakistan. It was the stage for epic battles between Hashim and Roshan, Hunt and Barrington, Jahangir and Hunt, Jahangir and Jansher.

But, perhaps as a danger sign for the British Open, the epic battles between Jonathon Power and Peter Nicol (and they've met 43 times in PSA play) have all happened in other events --- in Qatar, at the TOC in New York, in Toronto, even in St. Louis.

Shifting Sands and the Importance of Money
For the past few seasons the British Open has been operating on frayed lines and borrowed time. It started in 1999, when the sponsorship agreements the SRA thought it had in place collapsed, and the event was almost cancelled before being rescued at the last moment by Scottish Squash and the City of Aberdeen. The traditional London event moved north to the offshore oil capital, Aberdeen, Scotland, on a cold and windy December. From there the SRA made an ill-fated move to give promotional rights to the short-lived "Eye Group," an organization that had a history of ill-fated sports ventures and moved things backwards with their involvement in squash. The Open moved to Birmingham, Manchester and then to Nottingham. Now it moves back to Manchester - an attempted move back to London this year foundered.

The prize money and promotion has been problematical, and as a consequence the top players have appeared at the British Open, more as a courtesy than out of driving ambition or conviction. This year the men's prize money at the British Open is an almost embarassing $40,000. That means there are ELEVEN other PSA events in 2005 with more prize money than the British Open. The women's prize money is $31,000. There are SEVEN women's tournaments in 2005 with more prize money than the British Open is offering.

History suggests that a tournament of this nature, no matter how steeped in tradition, must maintain prize money prominence to survive as a major. The US Pro Tennis Tournament, formerly one of the most important Tennis Tournaments in the world, is a good object lesson. It's organizers were unable to keep the prize money at world-standard levels, and the event rapidly diminished in importance despite having been the site of some of the most famous historic battles. The tennis organizers of Wimbledon and the US Open understand this well, as do the organizers of Golf events such as the Masters.

It will be nice this year to win the British Open, and place one's name up alongside Hashim and Jahangir or Susan Devoy and Heather McKay. But in the final analysis it won't be critical in the calculation of the year's #1 rankings. The battle between Rachael Grinham, Vanessa Atkinson, and Nicol David for women's world #1 will more be decided in Hong Kong and Qatar than in Manchester this year.

The "Hometown Discount" May be Wearing Thin
So far, most of the world's top players are giving the British Open organizers the benefit of the doubt. In fact the players, the pro associations, and the squash world, are all rooting for the British Open. But the willingness to bow to the tradition, in the face of practical considerations, is wearing thin. NONE of the top Egyptian players, men or women, are participating this year. Amr Shabana (world #5 and last year's finalist), Karim Darwish (world #9), and Mo Abbas (world #20) aren't coming. Nor are the women. Omneya Abdel Kawy (world #9) and Engy Kheirallah (world #26) are both absent.

The US players are absent as well. After World #4 Natalie Grainger, who is going and is seeded fifth, perennial participants Latasha and Shabana Khan are both skipping the event.

What's the Problem?
Don't blame Paul Walters and iSquash this year - this event was dumped into his lap only about 45 days ago. But we hope some real progress happens by this time next year.

And the real problems run deeper. Going back certainly longer than to 1999, the SRA, who "own" the British Open, has failed to understand that what they have is largely a marketing problem. The SRA has failed to make the necessary commitment to getting a real, world class sports marketing person involved in the British Open and in major squash events in general. What we have instead is a line of shoe-string promotional companies, each of which must take a very short-term outlook in order to survive financially and none of which has the financial resources or marketing professionalism to do the work to develop the British Open, squash, and pro squash as a valuable brand and therefore in a broader marketing context.

Now with iSquash in the mix, with a professional marketing man at the helm, things may just be on the upswing.