Thumbing through this post of GC's made me think I am playing in the dark ages of 3 handler v. a zone. Apparently, there are never any risky throws with a 2 handler set...
[NOTICE- i have read no books on ultimate and read that article a long time ago]
Here are my arguments FOR a 3-handler set. And there may be some arguments FOR a 2 handler set too. I do not know where I am going right now.
- I personally believe a 2 handler set puts too much onus on the throwers to make harder throws. (A lot of this is from playing against 2 handler sets and not in a 2 handler set, so please bare with me.) In a 2 handler set, the handler with the disc only has 1 bail out option. Or at least one guy who expects to touch the disc a lot. If I am in the cup and the count starts to get high, there is a good chance I could take away that bail out handler. In a 3 handler set, you have 2 other guys expecting to touch the disc a lot.
- Just standing there v. cutting. One argument for was you are more likely to get the disc in a 2 handler set just standing there. I agree with that, more people up field. But just standing there waiting for the disc is just as dangerous as cutting for the disc for the offense. If you are standing there, most likely the zone knows where you are. If you are cutting, either someone has to stay with you or the zone has to adjust. Isn't that good for the o? Isn't there a more likely event that someone misses an assignment? I feel like a lot of the standing around would be in hard places to throw it. Say a blade or hammer over and in between some defenders. I am going out on a limb and say if you are on a college team you want the team your are zoning to throw that. Even at club nationals this year as a deep-deep on a team that played a good amount of zone, I would say there were only 2 guys at the whole tourney that I was really, really worried about that could throw these throws. I will take those blades + hammers all day from your average handler.
- Movement. I think you can generate more give and gos from a 3 handler set. Either the usual kind or the hook and ladder kind (hit the guy upfield and go). If the 3 guys are always standing there, 15 yards away from each other. Very predictable, requires a lot of dump + swings. But if you have 3 guys at times spaced out, but at times moving. Invading the cup. Give-and-go. Changing fields. It is a lot harder to guard. You now have cutters cutting for the disc downfield (poppers + wings) as well as upfield (handlers even or behind the disc). I think this is actually the most important part of any zone o. The more movement, the better.
- Hitting the wing. Mr. P. argues, if successful, that the 3 handler set gives an inexperienced wing the disc on the sideline, where the 2 handler set stays in the middle. So do you never throw to the wing with 2 handlers? Are the wings that much more expereinced in a 2 handler set? There is a problem if you never use the lines. Any good zone will not guard the lines if you are using them, they will stuff the middle up. I do think the advantage for the 2 handler is more options upfield after you break through the cup. I can't argue that point. But any good zone adjusts by taking away the immediate threats.
Here are my thoughts on zone,
[use whatever handler set you want, b/c I do not feel that is the most important issue (I do recommend 3 handlers, but what do I know)]
1. Movement from all positions,
2. Create 2-on-1s or give and gos,
3. Make the Zone adjust to you,
4. Overload,
5. Don't always do the same thing
6. Go into the cup
[NOTICE- i have read no books on ultimate and read that article a long time ago]
Here are my arguments FOR a 3-handler set. And there may be some arguments FOR a 2 handler set too. I do not know where I am going right now.
- I personally believe a 2 handler set puts too much onus on the throwers to make harder throws. (A lot of this is from playing against 2 handler sets and not in a 2 handler set, so please bare with me.) In a 2 handler set, the handler with the disc only has 1 bail out option. Or at least one guy who expects to touch the disc a lot. If I am in the cup and the count starts to get high, there is a good chance I could take away that bail out handler. In a 3 handler set, you have 2 other guys expecting to touch the disc a lot.
- Just standing there v. cutting. One argument for was you are more likely to get the disc in a 2 handler set just standing there. I agree with that, more people up field. But just standing there waiting for the disc is just as dangerous as cutting for the disc for the offense. If you are standing there, most likely the zone knows where you are. If you are cutting, either someone has to stay with you or the zone has to adjust. Isn't that good for the o? Isn't there a more likely event that someone misses an assignment? I feel like a lot of the standing around would be in hard places to throw it. Say a blade or hammer over and in between some defenders. I am going out on a limb and say if you are on a college team you want the team your are zoning to throw that. Even at club nationals this year as a deep-deep on a team that played a good amount of zone, I would say there were only 2 guys at the whole tourney that I was really, really worried about that could throw these throws. I will take those blades + hammers all day from your average handler.
- Movement. I think you can generate more give and gos from a 3 handler set. Either the usual kind or the hook and ladder kind (hit the guy upfield and go). If the 3 guys are always standing there, 15 yards away from each other. Very predictable, requires a lot of dump + swings. But if you have 3 guys at times spaced out, but at times moving. Invading the cup. Give-and-go. Changing fields. It is a lot harder to guard. You now have cutters cutting for the disc downfield (poppers + wings) as well as upfield (handlers even or behind the disc). I think this is actually the most important part of any zone o. The more movement, the better.
- Hitting the wing. Mr. P. argues, if successful, that the 3 handler set gives an inexperienced wing the disc on the sideline, where the 2 handler set stays in the middle. So do you never throw to the wing with 2 handlers? Are the wings that much more expereinced in a 2 handler set? There is a problem if you never use the lines. Any good zone will not guard the lines if you are using them, they will stuff the middle up. I do think the advantage for the 2 handler is more options upfield after you break through the cup. I can't argue that point. But any good zone adjusts by taking away the immediate threats.
Here are my thoughts on zone,
[use whatever handler set you want, b/c I do not feel that is the most important issue (I do recommend 3 handlers, but what do I know)]
1. Movement from all positions,
2. Create 2-on-1s or give and gos,
3. Make the Zone adjust to you,
4. Overload,
5. Don't always do the same thing
6. Go into the cup
posted by sometallskinnykid at 9:32 PM
6 Comments:
In order,
[onus for harder throws]--Well, that's why they're handling, to an extent. Mostly, the risky throw is one that is wide open if it's a good throw, but it's a tougher throw than a swing.
[only 1 bailout]--The side handlers also have only one handler bailout. And in the 2 handler, part of the front popper's job is to recognize when it's a high stall count and be ready to fill in a void created by a gambling off-point or wing.
[standing] I like to play the popper position as a slider. I'll try to shuffle or walk to a more open position, especially if the defense is reacting to me, but I will never run hard except when the disc moves outside of the cup. If you end up moving a lot, then not only do you confuse the defense, you confuse the handler who no longer knows where you are.
[give and go] Using it probably improves the 3 handler set over the static positioning, yes.
[inexperienced wing] Yes, but it's a matter of frequency. In the 2 handler, a wing might get the disc on the line only once every 2 or 3 points, whereas in the 3 handler, that'll probably happen several times a point, and when it does, the cup will be on him sooner.
1. Movement from all positions,
Ok, but not a lot of it, just enough to make yourself a little more open and to force the defense to keep you in mind.
2. Create 2-on-1s or give and gos,
Absolutely. Probably the #1 rule for zone offense.
3. Make the Zone adjust to you,
Ok, but I think you'll do more adjusting to the zone. The D sets the tone.
4. Overload, Yup, related to the 2 on 1.
5. Don't always do the same thing
6. Go into the cup Only if you have to to do #5.
I will throw the hammer or blade, without a blink of the eye (and did at Nats), so it is possible, but never over 25 yards. :) The count and I talked about how few people would actually make the throw as you wrote earlier.
It is a very aggressive zone O. And many of the same arguements about the 2 vs 3 man zone O can be made about making 1 60% huck, or throwing 60 99% passes.
What I mean by that, is you are going to throw the disc back and forth many times in a 3 person set, so while the percentage throws may be higher, your chances of scoring *may* go down.
On the other hand, with a 2 person set, you are looking to attack and will take a turnover 20+ yrds down field from a hammer or blade that may be a 60% throw. Reason being is that if you complete any hammer or blade over the cup, you are playing a 5 on 4 game with a bunch of easy throws. Additionally, you turned it over down field, which puts you in a better position defensively if a turnover occurs.
There's more to it than that, such as spreading out the defense, especially with the hammer, etc. but I don't have the time.
$
It's an oversimplification to just talk about 2-handler vs. 3-handler. Some teams run a 2-handler set where the wings play very far back and catch lots of swings for short yardage (arguably a 4-handler set). Other teams run a 3-handler set where the three are active and one of the them is ahead of the disc 80% of the time. I think Jim would rather play in the latter system than the former.
Ultimately, the question is whether your zone O can adapt to more or less agressive (or differently agressive) zone defenses.
Geoff- I forgot about Midwesterns and your assesment- "It so cold, don't expect a powerbar to warm up if you put it in your underwear."
$ - If I lose b/c an OU alum beats me w/ a hammer, then I deserve to lose...
Stuff that I will buy-
-more options upfield when the wing gets it
-cutting not as good as slowly reading the d, moving into a position
-Kind of agree with the 5-on-4 thing after you beat the cup. But any good zone will leave that thrower open and slow down the fast break until the cup can adjust.
-Handlers will have to make tough throws. But there is a big difference between an invert through a cup and something over the cup and around some other defenders.
Stuff that I do not buy-
-2 handlers better for a trapped player. Instead of 2 guys to help out, you have 3. Obviously, whichever you play the far away handler has to move closer. But we 3 guys, I like attacking that cup from behind it.
-I do agree that hammer + blades work on the elite, club level. I will say again there were exactly 2 guys at club nationals that this really concerned me. There are exactly 0 guys + girls at the college level who can do this. To say that these hammers are 60% on a college level is very, very generous. Trust me, I saw this with the Florida college team we played at natties.
I guess here is another concern/thought that I have, it seems to be really advocating focus on the middle 25 yards of the middle. Won't a zone just stuff that up with you? Or is that getting the zone to do exactly what you want?
To me, you have to use the lines. This spreads the zone out, creates more holes, and really more opportunities to use the hammer.
If they are trapping one way, well you use the non-trapped line as best as you can. And you tell the trap side handler never to get within 10 yards of the trapped line.
Obviously not the greatest analogy, but in bball if you just have your 2 guards 15 feet apart behind the 3 point line, never looking to wings, it is easy for the zone. Either one of these guys will have to hit a 25 footer (just like a blade or hammer) or you have an amazing post up player you can just lob it into to (a grant or clark if you will).
I am not going to tell Jam or Dog what to do, but I am not sure if other teams can use this as effectively.
$ - If I lose b/c an OU alum beats me w/ a hammer, then I deserve to lose...
Very Funny
1. With a two handler set you should never get trapped on the sideline. You keep the disc in the middle of the field.
2. The wings are 25 yds + downfield next to the sidelines. Really the only option is a hammer. You are making the wing defenders make a choice. Either leave open a long hammer (which will turn into a quick goal), or leave open a short pop over the top.
Depending upon how the wings play will dictate the shots you take.
3. Assuming the wings play deep. The cup is playing with 3 D against 2 O. However behind the cup it is 2 O vs 1 D. That makes it quite easy for a nice hammer or blade over the top.
As I learned from Idris,with a Zone O, you want to do the opposite of the defense. If they are playing soft, then attack. If they are playing tight then spread it out.
$
Tim,
I am trying to get my girls to have both available to them.
-G
Post a Comment
<< Home