Chris Ashbrook
What I like to do is to not let the mark dictate the throw, but for the
thrower to dictate the markers positioning and movements. In doing so, I find
teaching young players to break the mark that you must first teach them to
make themselves a threat while holding the disc. I consider the way I hold the
disc similar to what is called a triple threat in basketball. To me, this
means holding the disc in a throwing position. The throwing position that I
teach young players is:
- Feet placement is shoulder length apart, maybe slightly wider.
- Knees are bent.
- Balance is centered.
- Hold the disc with a flick grip, ready to throw.
- Face the mark.
Steps 1-3 allow the thrower to have a strong base position. This type of
positioning allows the thrower to easily step out for the forehand and to
pivot to the backhand. Many young throwers tend to be intimidated due to an
aggressive marker straddling their pivot foot; this type of throwing position
helps to reduce the amount of straddling
Holding the disc in the flick grip, regardless of the force, provides the
thrower with the greatest advantage for two reasons. First, holding in the
flick position allows you to throw the flick, the hammer, scoober, and (if you
are a good enough thrower to rotate the disc into a different grip) a thumber.
Secondly, you are forcing the mark to respect the flick regardless of the
mark’s force. Also, the rotation from flick to backhand is much smoother and
easier than the rotation from a backhand to a flick.
As stated in step 5, I teach the thrower to face the mark. The benefits of
facing the mark are that the mark is no longer able to position closely to
your pivot foot, thereby allowing you to pivot more freely; and you force the
mark to respect the flick regardless of the force. The flick is a very quick
throw, so to break the mark you will only need to step out slightly and throw
to space.
What this positioning has done is you have forced the marker to make a
decision. The marker can play you straight up, and you are able to get a quick
and easy break mark throw off. Alternatively, they can overcompensate to the
flick side which will then allow you pivot to break the mark with an easy
backhand. Many times, with an aggressive mark, you will note that they
overplay the flick position to start, and with a simple pivot they bust to
stop the backhand (which they will do aggressively as well) opening up the
easy flick break.
Another reason to face the mark, the closer you are to the sideline force, the
more important it is to move the disc off the sideline, which will usually
require some type of break throw.
Lastly, I try to teach throwers to recognize the angles and space to which
they are throwing. I try to have them envision themselves in a triangle with
the receiver. The third point being the space to which they are throwing. This
works best with live people, as the throwers are able to see how the angle or
place to where they are throwing the disc impacts the difficulty of the throw,
and in turn the completion percentage.
A 3 or 4 person drill used to help develop the easy break throws was to set up
a 10 yds x 10 yds box. A thrower and maker would be at the bottom halfway
between the bottom left and right corners, with the receiver and defender at
the upper right corner. The marker would then mark at the appropriate 45
degree angle (flick) protecting the upper left corner. The thrower then
initiates the throw to the upper left corner (either flick or around backhand)
and the receiver trys to catch the disc within the box. Keep repeating. This
helps the thrower learn how to move the mark and where the space is for break
mark throws.
Chris Ashbrook
From your experience, what zone configuration do you feel most confident
in?
In general I prefer a three man cup mainly because it can be used to disguise
other types of defensive schemes teams may use, such as a zone to man. The
specific setup I prefer for the three man cup is with the short deep playing
very close to the cup, if not actually part of the cup, working as a unit to
trap the disc on the sideline. Ideally the short deep will float into the cup
as offensive players crash the cup, and falls out further when offensive
players try to extend the cup.
Why do you like this kind of zone? Specifically, what kinds of turnovers or
blocks are you hoping to create?
I like the zone because, and expect the turnovers to result due to:
1. Causing the offensive team to throw and catch the disc as many times as
possible. The more throws and catches the zone can cause, the more likely an
errant throw or a drop becomes.
2. Disallowing any and all throws threw the cup.
3. Allowing, but make very difficult, around break mark throws from the
handler. This causes the disc to go backwards which will allow the cup to
recover.
4. Trapping the disc on the sideline to cause a low percentage throw, and
hopefully a turnover.
5. Making the offensive team throw over the top of the cup as they are
generally low percentage throws.
In Your Favorite Zone, what are the weak points of the zone that they are
likely exploiting?
1. They are probably throwing hammers over the top and completing them. If
so, it fits into the strategy and sometimes you have to tip your cap.
2. They might be getting a continuation throw off when a handler breaks
the mark with an around throw.
What adjustments, from a team-wide standpoint, can you make?
1. Start taking the around away and make the handler beat you on a
different type of throw.
2. Possibly drop the short deep a bit further outside of the cup.
3. Bring the deep in closer.
4. Bring the weakside wing closer to the middle of the field.
If you had only enough time in one time-out to talk to a single player in
your zone D, which position would that be? What might you tell them to
adjust?
To me, the sideline is the most important player in a zone D point. Remind
everyone that they need to be talking (not yelling) to a specific player in
the zone. Everyone should pick out a player to talk to so that the player is
not receiving conflicting instructions.
The on field player that I talk to most is the short-deep. He has to be very
vocal to the wings and to the cup. He should be looking around, directing the
cup as to threats so they can position themselves appropriately. He also must
pass players off to the wings and deep, so the communication has to be
excellent. I would remind him to be very active in vocalizing what he sees.
The second person I would talk to would be the deep. The deep needs to be
vocal to identify the threats to the short deep and the wings they can’t see
as the offensive player slips in back of the short deep and/or wings.
Chris Ashbrook
Two players that come to mind when I think of good footwork are Idris Nolan
offensively and Hensley Sejour defensively. Idris is quite a good basketball
player, which requires a significant amount of body control as well as
footwork. Hensley, coming from a football background as a defensive back (I
believe) has worked on his footwork extensively.
Whether offensively or defensively, Idris and Hensley have the same traits in
common:
1. Awareness of the current situation.
Each player understands where the disc is on the field. Knowing where the disc
is on the field allows you to position yourself to make a play. They are also
keenly aware of the type of player that is opposite of them and are able to
identify their strengths and weaknesses. Additionally, they are aware of they
player who has the disc.
2. Positioning themselves.
Using the knowledge from assessing the situation, they position themselves to
make a play. Offensively this could be repositioning yourself to a location
that will make the next throw easier, or closing the distance between
themselves and the defender. From a defensive standpoint, it could be as
simple as taking an extra half step toward the disc, or a step to the break
side.
3. Making people commit.
Offensively, Idris is great at making people commit one way and changing his
direction. I think that comes quite a bit from playing basketball and trying
to get people off balance. Defensively, Hensley will position himself so that
the offensive player only has one cut. However, with the footwork of a
defensive back, if he is feinted, he is able to recover quickly without
tripping over himself.
Their awareness, positioning, and footwork to make people commit or recover
allow them to make plays on offense and defense.
Over the past two years, our teams have started to implement footwork drills
during track sessions. Most of the footwork drills are ladder drills at this
time. Our workouts in sprinting have incorporated some footwork drills, but
usually the focus is on Ultimate specific type of sprints. Everyone on our
team has noticed that their footwork in Ultimate is better from even doing
something simple as ladder drills.
I think the Ultimate community is very slowly coming to the realization that
there is a proper way of doing things, but have yet to make the change. Mostly
because there has not been an authority figure to say this is the right way to
do something. For instance, we may do some defensive drills, but each player
executes their footwork as they know how and are unwilling to change because
they have been successful in the past even with poor footwork.
This will change in the future, as I see the implementation of soccer and
defensive back football type drills into ultimate, as players start to make
the association between the footwork in those two sports and Ultimate. This
implementation will have to come from players who are/were low level college
players who have practiced the footwork and know the drills that work to
improve footwork. With few exceptions, we are not there quite yet…but we
will be shortly.
Chris Ashbrook
I like to look at the bigger picture before making adjustments for just one
player. (This is assuming you have used the same strategy in previous meetings
and have been successful).
Assumptions
1. The third goal was scored in the normal flow of the O (whether Man or
Zone).
2. Two goals were scored while the D was in a straight man D, ie no zone
transition.
3. The game is not determined by the wind, ie a windy upwind/downwind game.
1. How has the D squad performed in the first half?
A. Did the D squad generate turnovers during the first half at a higher
rate than if the O player was handling, but the D squad did not convert those
turnovers into goals? If the D is generating turnovers, pull play excepted,
then this probably indicates that the D is playing well and you may only want
to make small tweaks to the D and not worry so much about that one player. A
small tweak could be to insert a strong O player (one who is very good on D)
onto the D line in certain situations to improve the D team scoring
efficiency.
B. Did the O squad not turn the disc over at all? If this is the case,
then it might be time to adjust your overall strategy. This could involve
playing a zone, a zone transition, or a different type of man D based upon the
conditions.
2. What type of hucks did the player catch, including the pull play huck.
A. Were they hucks off of a break mark? This indicates a breakdown in team
defensive strategy or in executing the team defensive strategy.
B. Were the hucks made by players you want to make hucks? That is, was the
player who hucked it a weak thrower, but just happened to make a great throw?
(It happens). This should not necessarily indicate that the strategy for the
one player needs to change.
C. Was the defensive player in a position to make a play on each of the
hucks, including the pull play? If he is playing good D and is in a position
to make plays, unless you have a player who matches up better against that
player, you would probably want to keep your best defensive matchup player
against him. (Note that I did not indicate your best defensive player overall,
as this might not necessarily generate the best results defensively).
By answering these questions you can best identify if your current strategy is
working and make adjustments as necessary as a team, and on an individual
player level. Secondly, if you do make adjustments, I feel the adjustments
must stay within the framework of your defensive strategy.
Chris Ashbrook
Do young players have any chance of making the team as an offensive
player?
Absolutely. There are a number of college players that have now played on club
teams while still in college (Watson, Heijman, Cahill, Gibson, etc), some
while in high school. These players are usually the best offensive players on
their teams and have been to college nationals, at least once, if not multiple
times. Although they may have inexperience on the club seen, they have crunch
time experience and are able to eventually translate that to the club scene.
What about as a handler? As a hucker? What would they have to show you to
prove their worth?
If you are a handler, you must be composed and make the right throw. This
means understanding what the offense is trying to accomplish and what your
role is in accomplishing this goal. Upon understanding the goal, the second
part is to actually make the decision to make the throw that completes the
goal of your offense. Finally, the handler should know the throws in their
repertoire.
Understanding what the offense is trying to accomplish and your role to me is
key. By understanding the offense, you are able to position yourself for the
dump cut (or any cut) that will allow the thrower to make an easy completion
and retain the disc. After receiving the disc, this means that you know where
other people will be cutting so that you can keep the disc moving to your big
throwers.
When watching handlers, I am ok with turnovers during tryouts when the handler
made the the throw easy for the person with the disc and subsequently made the
right decision in where to throw the disc. Sometimes the throw isn’t complete,
it happens to everyone. However, if the throw is habitually not completed,
catching the disc and making the right decision will take you only so far in
the tryout process.
What I am not ok with is:
- When the handler looks off a throw that should have been made within the frame of the receiver; or
- Tries a throw that is not in their repertoire (even if completed). This shows to me a lack of confidence in their throwing ability, not understanding the offense, and/or lack of decision-making abilities.
For a hucker, this is usually a down field player. They need to have the
ability to gain yards and time their cuts. More importantly, they must be able
to make a consistently good choice and throw.
Note, not every huck is a good huck. This should be made known to the hucker
and if they continue to make hucks that are low percentage as they fall out of
the framework of your offense, they may not make the team.
Is calm, conservative play better? Or do you want to see highlight reel
moves, throws, and catches?
I want to see the player play to the best of his skills, abilities, and within
the framework of the offense. The highlight reel plays will be a byproduct of
doing so.
Say you are a young player with a specialty throw (something out of
thenormal repertoire). You are confident in that throw, but it doesn’t really
fit easily into a team’s offense (rather, they could change how they play to
take advantage of this talent). Should you show this in tryout scrimmages?
I would recommend throwing it only when the situation dictates. To throw it in
any other circumstance, most likely will be a very low percentage throw and
probably be looked down upon. However, if you are able to identify the
situations in which the throw is highly effective and has a high completion
percentage I would be looking for a way to implement it only in certain
circumstances (such as a stopped disc).
What is most important; practices or tournaments?
Practices are more important. Here the captains are able to explain and work
on the skills that are important to their offensive and defensive and
philosophies. This gives the captains the opportunity to view which players
can and will fit into their style of play. It also gives them the opportunity
to identify the weaknesses of the tryouts within their structure.
The tournament should be more of a confirmation that the player either is
capable, or is incapable of performing their role on the team.
How should tryouts behave and carry themselves? Some captains and coaches
love people that ask a ton of questions, and others want people that want a
lot of feedback. Or give their opinions. Or are silent, strong teammates. What
are you looking for? Does the personality of a player figure large into
whether they can make the team? What about an obnoxious player with tremendous
talent?
Always ask questions, always ask for feedback. Most of the captains I know are
more than willing to provide that feedback.
In ultimate, I have found that personalities always figure into whether or not
the player makes the team. Two players of equal talent, the one who fits in
personality wise with the team will most likely make it over someone that does
not fit in well personality wise.
Does everyone try out, or are returning players safe?
On every team, you know pretty much that the top 10 (or possibly more) will be
returning. So it is then up to the captains to let those players who are on
the bubble know and tell them what they need to do to make the team.
In general, when evaluating the bottom half of the roster, the question I ask
is whether or not the tryout would significantly improve the team over a
returning player. If the answer is no, then the returner will most likely
retain his spot. The reason for this is that the returner has history with the
team, understands the offense, defense, and his role on the team. There are a
number of intangibles the returner could possibly bring back. But there is
always the flip side, so you can never take your position on the team as a
returner for granted.
How long are your tryouts? Is this optimal?
6 - 8 practices and includes a tournament so that you can confirm your
thoughts on the player.
Is there anything about the tryout process that you think teams should do
more often?
During the tryout process I would like to see teams work on the basic skillset
of their tryouts (and their current players included). Then work the skillset
into their offensive and defensive philosophies. This allows you to identify
areas in which the players excel and where they are lacking.
For instance, you might run a hucking drill to see who can actually huck with
consistency. You would then explain how the huck drill fits into your
offensive philosophy and the types of looks you want to take. This allows you
to identify those who can huck, then actually huck in the framework of your
offense during scrimmages and tournaments (confirmation) successfully.
Chris Ashbrook
I want to first analyze what type of team we are and what type of team we are
playing in determining which offense (and defense) to run.
Downwind
Here I generally prefer the horizontal stack, regardless (and variations), as
I feel you a thrower is given more choices from nearly every position. Players
also tend to overplay defensively when guarding an O that is going downwind
which I feel tends to open up cutters underneath and away more often.
Additionally, there is usually plenty of space to put throws out like hammers
or scoobers if needed.
With the Ho set I prefer to be a bit more aggressive going downwind with hucks
(smart hucks though). The reason is that on a huck incompletion, you are now
making the defensive team, whose throwers are usually not the best throwers on
the team move the disc 70 yards for a goal. Watching the Sockeye/JAM 07 Semi,
this appeared to me to be one of deciding factors in the game. Although JAM
would generate turns against Sockeye, they were unable to move the disc well
against the D and turned the disc back over to Sockeye.
Crosswind
Here is where I like to see a hybrid of the two offenses.
Last year our team focused on playing a horizontal stack to begin the point
and moving the disc to the upwind side immediately if there was a crosswind.
We did this is because most teams force the disc to the ‘downwind’ sidelines
so that to break the mark you have to throw into the wind. However, if you
start on the upwind side, the throws are generally easier, and you are able to
move the disc to mid-field before you are stopped. Secondly, the option is
there to get off a big throw with a crosswind.
What we didn’t do well is then transition to a vertical stack from the
horizontal stack after crossing midfield.
The reason for moving to a vertical stack near the goal line is that I believe
the Ho stack is less effective in scoring goals than the vertical stack in a
short field (this could just be dogma as well). I tend to believe that the
horizontal stack is better with a lot of field space and that a vertical stack
is better with a short field. The reason for this is that teams are able to
maintain possession better in a vertical stack offense near the goal line than
other offenses as they focus on possession.
Upwind
Here I believe you have to go with your strength as a team, which requires an
honest assessment of your team’s skills and abilities. Two teams stick out
over the years is DoG and Furious George, both used different types of
offense, but both were very successful.
In my view, and from the couple years I saw, DoG ran a stack/iso offense. DoG
took the throws that were given to them and were very disciplined in their
throws and decision-making. Each player knew their role and executed their
offense efficiently, which allowed them to move the disc and take the big
throw on what they considered a high percentage throw.
Furious, on the other hand, had some great throwers who are able to make
outstanding hucks upwind to very good receivers and were not afraid to make
the big throw. By having great throwers, they were able to maintain the disc
until they were able to put up a huck that was a high percentage. (Maybe I’m
arguing for Ho, but I still feel that both are effective and it depends upon
personnel).
Where I think that both DoG and Furious are the same is that they ran the same
offense on pretty much every possession. Both were excellent and disciplined
in executing their strategy.
Another team I feel that did both well was JAM 04. Watching the tapes, they
were equally adept at running both vertical and a stack offense. The players
on the team knew their roles and how to execute their roles very well. This
worked to their advantage throughout the series, though whether that hurt them
is a question in and of itself.
1a. See Crosswind. I believe the strategy for the crosswind can be equally
effective, if not more effective