ASB Glass Floors: Slip Resistance — A Deep Dive after the London Classic
- Markus Gaebel
- Sep 19
- 4 min read
Referees and players say the court behaves like an “ice rink” under sweat. Engineers point to the physics of micro‑texture and moisture. ASB says wear isn’t the issue—and climate control is the real lever.
At recent top‑tier events, including the London Squash Classic, play on the glass show court has been interrupted repeatedly to mop sweat and check moist patches. The floor in question—the ASB Glass Floor, the glass system currently used at many official pro tournaments—has become the most polarizing surface in the sport. Supporters say it modernizes presentation and performs to spec; critics say it compromises safety when the floor is even slightly damp.
What’s driving the concern is not just the stoppages, but slippage under sweat load in the most trafficked zones. That is exactly where squash’s movement pattern—violent lunges, decelerations, and direction changes—demands the most reliable traction.
Voices & statements to the ASB Glass Floor
Nick Thompson PSA Court Projects & Sales Lead: “The PSA is aware of the ongoing discussions around floor slip resistance, including the criticisms voiced on social media, and we take all comments seriously. Safety and fairness on court are at the heart of professional squash, and we are committed to upholding those values across all our sanctioned events. We will therefore continue to work alongside our partners to review all feedback, analyse the situation and ensure the highest standards and best playing conditions for players.”
Tom Oldroyd, Chair, WSF Courts & Equipment Commission: “The slipping shown in the YouTube video is completely unacceptable. We will do everything we can to work with the manufacturers to reduce or eliminate this problem.”
Steve Johnson, Referee: !In my mind, there’s a lot more slippage on the glass floor than on a traditional wooden floor… it’s not good for the players. I think it’s potentially dangerous for the players.”
Gina Kennedy (World No. 8): She has publicly criticized the glass floor and expressed frustration that player feedback on safety “doesn’t appear to” be fully reflected in decisions.
The Science of Grip (and Wear): Why the same floor can feel different on day 1 and day 100
Standards & baselines. Indoor sports floors are typically referenced to EN 14904, which uses a pendulum test to define a safe sliding-friction window. However, because each sport has very different movement patterns and safety needs, there should be sport-specific regulations for the friction coefficient. In squash, no such dedicated standard has yet been established—leaving a critical gap between the generic EN 14904 baseline and the real demands of the game.
Moisture, micro‑texture, and hydroplaning. A smooth surface plus a thin sweat film can create a fluid layer between shoe and floor, cutting friction dramatically—akin to micro‑hydroplaning. Surfaces with micro‑roughness (think tens of microns peak‑to‑valley) disrupt that film and allow the shoe rubber to mechanically interlock with the floor, preserving grip even when slightly wet.
Abrasion is routine in squash—on wood. Under heavy traffic, the “peaks” of any textured surface polish down. In wood courts this loss of micro‑texture is expected and fixable: re‑sanding the top layer is standard maintenance to restore bite and keep the floor in the safe friction band. Importantly, wet‑grip degrades first as the texture smooths, even when dry grip still feels acceptable.
The open question on glass: micro‑abrasion. Several surface‑engineering experts we consulted note that the same polishing mechanism could, in principle, occur on engineered textures—e.g., ceramic micro‑features bonded to glass. If high spots round off under traffic, wet traction would be the first casualty. That does not mean it is happening on any given installation; it means the failure mode is plausible and should be checked with pre‑ and in‑event wet‑friction and roughness measurements. The engineering basis for that concern—micro‑texture loss under heavy use and its outsized impact on wet grip—is well established.
Dust matters, too. Fine dust acts as a dry lubricant on any floor, further lowering friction. Day‑to‑day cleaning and rapid spot‑drying therefore make a measurable difference to safety, regardless of surface technology.
Manufacturer Response: ASB’s position to the Glass Floor
ASB told SFN it has not observed wear of the ceramic dots that provide traction on its glass surface. As a reference site, ASB cites the MSquash facility in Connecticut, where the ASB Glass Floor has been in daily multi‑hour use since 2017 “without such signs of wear,” provided proper cleaning is maintained.
On climate, ASB says the issue is similar to other floors: high relative humidity can temporarily reduce performance. To better manage this in squash settings, ASB says two measures are in planning/testing for the ASB Glass Floor:
Underfloor heating to accelerate evaporation of sweat or other moisture (mimicking the natural warming observed on outdoor glass courts).
Low‑level floor ventilation/AC—two units per side—to blow air just above the surface and assist evaporation in tandem with heating.
ASB also urges caution about “emotional” social‑media commentary. The company says it takes player feedback very seriously but finds it “often very subjective.” It adds that any floor is a risk under extremely wet conditions and says it has seen no statistical spike in slips on wet spots with GlassFloor installations. ASB argues that glass reveals wet patches more clearly, which is safer because court services can identify and remove hazards more quickly.
Governance & evidence: what’s clear, what isn’t
What’s clear: Squash is uniquely punishing on traction: sweat is inevitable; movement is extreme; the most trafficked zones concentrate moisture. Micro‑texture is the first line of defense, and on wood, re‑sanding is the known remedy when that texture polishes down.
What isn’t: Whether in‑service micro‑abrasion meaningfully alters the wet‑grip of specific glass installations over time; how humidity bands and maintenance protocols interact with real‑match sweat loads; and how frequently wet‑friction values are measured and published to reassure players and officials.
Bottom line
Squash players don’t need a floor that’s perfect in a lab; they need one that’s predictably grippy in the messy, sweaty reality of pro play. The physics are simple: micro-texture + moisture management = safety. On wood, that formula is well understood and maintained by re-sanding. On glass, ASB says wear isn’t occurring and climate control is the key variable. Until there’s transparent, in-service data that settles the question of wet grip over time, this debate will keep resurfacing every time a player slides.
Let’s hope PSA and WSF move quickly to define clear, sport-realistic surface requirements—so athletes can focus on what we all want to see: spectacular squash at the edge of the physically possible.
I was at MSquash in Connecticut three weeks ago, they didn’t have a glass floor?