Jai-Alai Question of the Week


Start of Thread

Re(1): #203 - Do subs care?

Posted on July 7, 2007 at 06:44:24 PM by 4decadepro

I know I'm responding late to this very controversial question...but I had to contemplate whether my response was going to have any meaning or just get me condemned by my own thoughts on the matter.

I have read and pondered on the previous responses. Some have valid points but others don't. If you weren't around long enough and through enough managements, players managers and other conditions...then you haven't seen it all. I have.

Many factors go into this. I myself never minded if my programmed partner scratched and someone else filled his spot...but I knew if I was playing game 3 at Tampa and my sub partner was Almorza (RIP) he was going to come out and practice the remate off the court if I let the serve go by...he had just finished eating but he would do the same if I moved up to sub a late game...on the other side if that sub was Daniel, Kosca, Laca then I knew all I had to do was not screw up the game. We had almost sure boleto. If it was me subbing in the 12th game, it was the same. Player chemistry meant everything. With Laca, Daniel etc etc I knew to respect their ability and not screw it up. I ALWAYS felt respected in turn by playing it that way...rebotes would be let come out to me and as long as I kept the serve away from Francisco, Azpiri, Arra, Aramayo etc etc..then we had almost as good a chance...but but but...then comes the post factor. If I was subbing with a weaker late game backman such as Onaindia, Echaniz, Coya in post 7...there wasn't much chance in the late games. Both of us would know it, but we made the most of it. What I guess I'm trying to get across is that with some players teamed together there was at least some sense of respect felt whereas with others it didn't matter who moved up or who moved down...they didn't want to be there !!! When we played the move up or down rotation according to how many wins you had over 2 weeks, there was nothing sadder than seeing a late game veteran trying hard and not being able to get out of the early games...on the other hand, myself and ALL other rostered early game frontmen did not care nor want to move up to the late games for 2 weeks because it meant no boleto and it was obviously only temporary...players manager had you where you belonged.

Subbing wasn't about showing the players manager hustle, ambition and talent. It was 1-2 games that's all. He had you rostered where you were due to his opinions, habits and personal feelings. That's all. When I played in Ft. Pierce in late games only...it didn't matter how bad I was playing. The players manager believed veterans should only be in late games. Many an up and coming player...Benny, J.J., Corky, King, Kent, Anacabe, Ube, Ubilla, Pete, Danny...were relinguished to only play early to middle games while in reality many of us veterans probably needed to be pushed. If I was programmed to sub the early games my only problem was I had to make it to the fronton much earlier...it totally throws off your routine especially if I just finished playing the 13th game matinee 90 minutes ago.

Now talking about the chance to make extra boleto...I had no problem wanting to sub in a singles game...whether it was moving up or moving down. The full 100% boleto was worthwhile.

The end response is touchy, controversial and probably a neverending answer. I cared and I didn't care...I had no problems at times and lots of problems some times. Too many factors...number of games played, fatigue, matinees, cold outside or inside...if you sat for 4-5 games after playing the 5th game and you knew you had to sub the 12th game...what do you think? No player...not one...stayed warmed up or exercised...we all watched TV or slept or sat around talking. I would say most of the time the averages of a team with a sub on it winning the game are less than when the game has its regular programmed players.

Replies:

Home Page