Culture

Javier Tanoira’s insightful essay on Argentinean polo examines the game’s dwindling speed as the pressure to win increases, finds Melanie Vere Nicoll

In an insightful and thought-provoking essay, Javier Tanoira examines polo in Argentina and how it has changed in the 140 years since the rules were first recorded. Drawing on meetings with current and former players, referees, management, spectators, journalists, horse breeders and veterinarians, Reflecting on Polo in Argentina is an informed and objective commentary of the sport. He pulls no punches, however, when he comments in his preface: ‘In January 2009 I was meditating on the high-goal polo season that had just come to a close and I realised that polo was not only changing, but that it was heading towards something that I definitely did not like. I had attended most of the Triple Crown matches for one reason or another, and I couldn’t remember having watched a single game that I could consider entertaining. The Open final between La Dolfina and Ellerstina was the cherry on the cake: it was a cut-up, slow game, fouls galore, where the only thing worth watching was the final outcome in the supplementary chukka. I became aware that players found that they were more efficient when forcing a slow game in which being in possession of the ball and not passing it was key, and by scoring through penalties.’

Tanoira first analyses the existing circumstances of Argentinian high-goal polo, which he defines as the game that to date is played only in Argentina between the months of September and December. It is made up of three main tournaments: the Tortugas Open, the Hurlingham Open and the Argentine Open – together known as the Triple Crown. These tournaments are unique in the world, he says, because they are open by definition, meaning there is no handicap limit and almost no patrons. Further narrowing his definition, Tanoira describes the three basic characteristics needed by a high-goal player: anticipation, horsemanship and skill at handling the ball. He underlines the close relationship between these variables

1 Sticks in the air at the fi nals of the 2008 Argentine Open 2 Cambiaso slowing down, waiting to dribble past 3 Javier Tanoira

and further observes that the common factor present in all three is speed: ‘The level of play is defined by the speed at which the action takes place. The greater the speed, the greater the excitement, the greater the degree of difficulty and consequently the greater the level of play.’ It is this, Tanoira believes, that is being lost in the game of high-goal polo to the detriment of the entire sport.

Tanoira pinpoints the time when polo became a truly professional sport to the early 1980s. It was then that wealthy patrons began to appear on the scene with large amounts of money and a desire to win above all else. This was also the point at which polo players realised that instead of moving around at full speed and hitting the ball hard, it was much more profitable to keep the ball under control and at the same time greatly increase the chances of causing the opponent to commit a foul. However, the author is quick to point out that this change in play was accompanied by an explosion of talent in the 1990s as demonstrated by players such as the Piereses, the Heguys, the Gracidas, Pite Merlos, Cristian Laprida, Piki Diaz Alberdi and others, who were all virtuosos of stick-and-ball and individual technique, and sometime later Adolfo Cambiaso who has held the title of best polo player in the world for more than 15 years. There’s no question in the author’s mind that polo has been greatly enriched by these more complete players. This is why he suggests that they be given a set of rules that will demand they display their skills and at the same time protect them from danger.

The appearance of Cambiaso on the scene created a hitherto unknown factor in the high-goal in that he was capable of developing a play that none of the other players on the field could successfully copy. The play in question – the famous ‘pasadita’ or over-taking – occurred when he would overtake an opponent from behind while holding the ball under control. While most of the secret of this very difficult play is timing, he must first speed up his horse and then hit the ball all the while knowing that he will manage to overtake the other player.

Cambiaso is known as the only player who is successful at this daring manoeuvre most of the times he attempts it. Hence, if

the other three players on his team were riding off the other three opponents once he had overtaken his, the way towards the goalposts would be clear. This has created a new model of play in high-goal that Tanoira views as the principal cause of polo quality impoverishment today: blocking. He is, however, quick to point out that this is in no way a criticism of the players, as they are playing in the most effective way to win today. In the author’s words, ‘there has been an evolution in polo but the regulations are not accompanying that evolution. Polo is being played in 2009 with a set of rules created in 1886’. Surely, Tanoira argues, there can be nothing wrong with changing and improving these rules to facilitate a return to the fast open polo that was previously played in Argentina?

Tanoira believes that there are two equally important issues that need to be addressed through an updating of the rules. The first is to try and open up the game and the second is to restore a rhythm to the play through a decrease in the number of fouls. In order to eradicate the “slowness” that is now endemic in high goal polo the author suggests that: ‘If the “walking” penalty is “holding of the ball while walking”, then why can’t we implement one that reads “holding the ball at a gallop”?’ The time span permitted for a player to keep possession would be sufficient for him to gain control and get a clear picture of the field and the positions of his team mates and opponents. Tanoira further suggests that if this penalty were properly applied it would eliminate the need for blocking as the team in possession of the ball would be obliged to speed up the game. Furthermore, a total ban on blocking would ‘contribute towards all players (particularly the younger ones and those with lower handicaps) learning to play polo and hitting the ball instead of spending most of their time blocking people off’. This in turn would eliminate the use of players who are very good horsemen but are employed on the field as nothing more than robots, whose function is to ride off, cancel out an opponent and never touch the ball. As Tanoira asks: ‘How can (these players) possibly hit the ball if they’ve spent the last five years of their lives cancelling out, blocking and hooking sticks?’ There are other areas of debate too, such as turning versus backing the ball, and Tanoira relates many relevant suggestions made by former 10-goal players that would be fairly easy to apply to further speed up the game.

It is a thought-provoking statistic that 40 per cent more fouls are committed per game today than 25 years ago. Tanoira believes that in the case of fouls committed in defence (60, 40, 30-yard and from-the-spot penalties) the penalty is sufficient and does not need to be made any tougher. However, fouls committed while in attack are very low-cost to the player, which is why they are committed more often. The author lists three ideas in support of tougher penalties for fouls committed while in attack, all of which are attributable to 10-goal players, winners of the Open and ‘men whom I respect on and off the field’. The first is that counting from the beginning of the match, for every three field goals scored by a team they will receive an extra goal automatically. This would ensure that the team defending is not tempted to stop the opponent from making a goal by incurring a foul.

The second suggestion is that a goal should be worth double if made from behind the 60-yard line. This would encourage shots being taken from much further out, similar to basketball where a shot from outside the semi-circle is worth triple. The final idea is that for every four fouls committed in defence, one goal is taken from the responsible team.

This rule would toughen the fouls penalty and provide teams with the incentive to make field goals on the one hand while penalising the defending team more severely if it commits a foul. A further interesting change to the rules would involve discouraging hitting the ball out of play by giving possession to the opposite team to the one that threw the ball out – a move that could eliminate up to 25 per cent of throwins. The immediate effect of this rule would be that the ball would go out less frequently as it wouldn’t suit any player in possession to send it out of play. Another suggestion is to eliminate the midfield throw in after each goal, instead allowing the team that converted the goal to hit in from the back line. As Tanoira asks: ‘If it works perfectly in practice matches why can’t it work in official

ones?’. He further points out that ‘with these alterations we will have eliminated almost 95 per cent of throw-ins in a polo match, with the exception of the one at the beginning of the match.’

Of course no discussion of high-goal polo would be complete without an examination of the horses that are the soul of the sport. Tanoira again fields fresh and interesting ideas, including the possibility of a rule requiring the players to present a list of 14 horses before the first match of the Triple Crown and limiting themselves to only those ponies. Although he calls this a ‘beautiful utopia’ the author concedes that the players will never want to try it out. He further highlights the fact that: ‘Most of the good mares belonging to players of the 80s lasted seven to eight seasons on average. Nowadays the average is four, with luck... the difference is to be found in what a player demands that his horse do now and what he expected from him before. Today a horse has to do much more complex things: take orders and counter-orders within micro-seconds, run, stop, spin around like a coin, shoot forwards and after two gaits stop dead again’ – all leading to more wear and tear than in past years. He further points out that in videos of matches in the 80s it is noticeable that the players never stopped completely dead. ‘They ran all the way through the chukka... so we would be perfectly right in saying that what wears the polo pony down most is not running but stopping (and starting again, of course).’ This further supports his theory that an open running game of polo is better for all involved; spectators, players and horses.

Tanoira does not shy away from the difficult topic of umpiring and looks to other professional sports such as football, tennis and rugby for ideas on how to help the umpire impose verdicts and sanction fouls. While underlining his belief that Argentine umpires are the best in the world he suggests that a good school for referees would be welcome, along with a general change in attitude that would reinforce the message that being a polo referee is an honourable and decent occupation.

This is only a sample of the many stimulating ideas in this excellent launch pad for discussion and reform. In his acknowledgements, Tanoira thanks a comprehensive and authoritative range of players and experts involved in the sport who have provided ideas and support, before very sensibly concluding: ‘The idea is not to go too fast. If we are changing something that was written 140 years ago, we must make sure that what we are inserting is better than what we are erasing.’

To read the essay in its entirety in English or in Spanish go to www.hurlinghampolo.com

Above left Paco de Narvaez in black and Javier Novillo Astrada in white Above Marcos di Paola going behind Bautista Heguy