Tactics

mare is on your team benson.

...think nelson from the simpsons

__________________
it's more polite on the grating than on the subs bench

I agree that we mean by zone play the position a player fills up in his own team. in relation off were there teammates are.

Most off the UWH world plays like those old school zone positions.
but like waterpolo that used it in the past its not "the"tactick.For many years now waterpolo used another tactick. with no positional play.

A quote from the world top off waterpolo(last olympic games)
But you can try to make it seen like crapp. And weak but it isnt. Waterpolo is an profesional sport were people can live from(as job) Maybe when you now that try to answer why by waterpolo, positional play is call't highschool play...and why its not done at the world top anymore.And waterpolo is the closest related sport to underwaterhockey.

quotes before in this discussion
real helpfully? shoot away on anybody but dont tell your own basic tacticks
O yes, i come from a club with 12 waterpolo teams. where 2 off belong to the dutch top-rank. with trainers that are payed for give those trainings and tacticks. And even they tell us its a highschool tactic. That is good. till there is a fanatic team that nows how to play differend. But iff you think its normal at the basic what we do as zone position play. Please tell the wide world your basic tactick. Its no secret then. In basic its the same. (or isn't)

Iff we are so not knowing about what etc. Shoot away and tell. How its done. That was the first question on the first page anyway.

__________________
When you are good, then you are not bad..

thats not true. acordingly, our team doesnt even want to know how your team plays ? we have our own game ?!?

__________________
kurac pička govno sisa RASMC
http://www.phljubljana.si/pictures/razno/uwh_gloves.htm
http://forum.phljubljana.si

everything comes down to speed,skills and power?

Do only top 3 world teams consider opponents strategy ?

i am all ears

__________________
kurac pička govno sisa RASMC
http://www.phljubljana.si/pictures/razno/uwh_gloves.htm
http://forum.phljubljana.si

No. more teams want to now.
I like to now all strategy's. learn from it.
No learning means no improvement.
And i teach and play in a sub-top team.


and like they told
But nobody is telling anything. There is no top to bothem sharing.
Thats the main reason that i started this discussion. To learn.

__________________
When you are good, then you are not bad..

Not at all. But UWH is a sport where
1 players often cannot be in position as they have to breath, and
2 the puck cannot be passed very far in one movement.

This creates limitations that other sports do not have. The foremost of these is that when a player has the puck, their options and the places the puck can go are very limited. Basically, there's a 3-metre circle around the player with the puck and that's all the opposition really has to worry about. So a team doesn't have to care how you've organised yourselves, whether you think you're unpredictable or whether they're up against Bob this time when before they were up against Fred (This of course doesn't take into account wider strategy). There are always people in predictable places (no matter what 'formation' they're playing), and you can organise your formation around that.



Sven, we're not trying to make your concepts seem like crap. We're commenting on our own past experiences of similar attempts. Calm down.

Personally I believe in every player being able to recognise the particular tasks and roles that need to be filled underwater, and the closest player completing that task. Unfortunately the 3-dimensional aspect of the game means you often do not know where your team-mates are, which adds a massive level of confusion to this tactic - especially in hard games - from which I construe that it needs to be applied within the confines of a structured formation. Merging both concepts as it were.

__________________
It's not whether you win or lose - but whether I win or lose.

Really i'm calm.....
I now that sometimes my writing style looks very agresive. I.m really not.

But my tactic works good. And a simulair sport were is much information from in my own club doesnt use that "old"tactic anymore.
I hope you can understand that.

Like you told the most used uwh tactic is on these days the zone positional play. But that does not mean that its the best way. My tactic has weak points but the normal used tactic does to have weak points. (if you look theoretic to it whit teams that are the same level)

And you did told some weak point yourself from the normal tactics.
But i did also. The mean point is sharing information about tactics. and then i mean from the top down.

Now you teld me you tryed it. Maybe some thing simulair. Maybe.(for that you need a team off all round players) but we perfected it for our teams. And we defaid teams with it that are simulair and a little bit stronger then us. so for us it really works. And we use the weak points from the "normal tactick" to lett it work. Like the weak point from the weakest player is always on the same spot. Becuase normal teams dont have many all round players they can not swits. And because ours positional keeps chanching the weakest player/point from our tactick is alway somewere different. And so you are not an open book for the opponent. They must be creative and search for the weakest point all game long. Were we now all the points after a few minuts.

If its effective?
All tactics can be effective. But only iff you train it and so under pressure everybody does automaticly the good move/thing. Thats in the non zone position tactic but also in the zone tactic position play.

Another weak point that you told yourself. Everybody must sometimes leave the game to go to the surface. If thats your defender and he's good (a real specialist) but because you have no all round players nearby. Everybody from another possition loses from the alrounder. A (85%)midfielder can not win from a alrounder attaker (75%) in the defence. When he must fill in the gap the defender makes when he leaves. That replacement will lose that time.

The most important thing is tactick (well trained)
Our vision is still the same. An allround team can win from a specialist team. Because also the specialists must sometimes leave the game. and the specialist are weak when they are forced in another position. And becuase our weak points is always someplace different. It takes the specialist more time and energie to break out/trouch.(because what he/she did the first time did not work for a second time. Every players plays and is different) there were we can keep the same level off power. all game long. (the weak points from the zone positional game is always on the same place.)

__________________
When you are good, then you are not bad..

firstly, mare, what are you talking about when you say 3 teams consider opponents strategy? i dont understand. you've got to KNOW an opponents strategy in the first place to consider it and it's not often anyone has time to figure it out fully in the course of a tournament let alone a game, bar simple things like "they seem to like playing through the middle" or "they go wide on their advantage pucks sometimes" (well, duh, that kind of stuff doesn't help you much cos you have to cover for those things in your basic team-plan anyway...)

which is why benson is right in that the first thing to do is to get your own game running right. for most teams this is challenge enough. there are a couple of sayings that have been around for years and hold true...

"any formation can work if it's done right" (which i only partially agree with but which holds in theory)

and "get your own game right, then worry about theirs"

...once you are confident in the execution of your own formation patterns, then sure, look at the other teams. you might decide there are areas of their game you'd like to try to exploit, in which case you can approach the game with an emphasis in mind for the focus of your team. for instance, if sven was playing against an opposition team, he would obviously try to take advantage of the fact that their hand-speed and skills won't be fast enough to touch the puck when he has possession... i guess maybe that would make him a good distributor for his team and they could focus on beating the opposition with passes.

...here come the quotes!

> "everything comes down to speed, skills and power?"

...you should really read bensons post again and you'll see these words... "They have their own formation, their own goals, their own things that they're trying to achieve"


> "I think the best strategy is to have no strategy. in that case you are unpredictible and the oposition dont know how you are playing"

well, the obvious problem with this is, if you don't have a strategy then not only do the opposition not know what you're doing but YOU don't know what you're doing and neither do your team-mates. ...good luck with that!


> "of course you can play like this only if you know your teammates very well and i you know how your teammate will react in different situtations"

...ok, so you DO know what your team-mates are doing, you all have a set way of reacting in given situations which the others are aware of, and therefore you are in fact following a predictable strategy... glad we got that clear.


> "just becouse your play is limited by static positions."

okaaaaay... now if i understand correctly you guys are thinking that, for instance,in a 3-3 formation no-one is allowed to move out of the structure? for instance backs aren't allowed to go in front of forwards? vice versa? i'm happy to tell you that this is almost never the case. which leads nicely to svens interesting points about waterpolo.

ok...

here is the BIG BREAKING NEWS FROM WATERPOLO that we must learn!

RESOUNDING EPIPHANY, EXHIBIT A! - "Unlike most common team sports, there is no positional play;"

IMMEDIATE RIDICULOUS CONTRADICTION, EXHIBIT B! - "field players often will fill several POSITIONS throughout the game as situations demand."

PROBABLY WHAT THEY WERE ACTUALLY TRYING TO SAY, EXHIBIT C! - "In high school most teams assign positions to certain players and it is less likely for the situations to switch due to the lower level of competitiveness.

APPARENTLY WATERPOLO PLAYERS HAVE ROLES AFTER ALL, EXHIBIT D! - "Players who are skilled at several offensive or defensive ROLES are called utility players."



...ok i will stop using capitals, sorry for all the shouting.


> "And waterpolo is the closest related sport to underwaterhockey"

...hmmm, can't agree with you there sven, the only similarity is that they're played in the water buddy! waterpolo is very similar to basketball and maybe ice-hockey as well as many other sports i'm sure... but despite the gaping inaccuracy of that statement, there are still similarities between waterpolo and uwh.

- in waterpolo there are set positions and roles (irrespective if better teams have players which can switch through them in a game)

- sometimes those positions are set by zone, most particularly where the center forward or forwards set in front of the goal when attacking


unfortunately, like most other sports, pretty much every other aspect of waterpolo is a good reason NOT to use it as an example of how uwh should or even could be played.

- the ball can clear the court in a single pass

- pretty much all marking needs to be man-to-man unless a player is sinbinned when they have to switch to zone and even then they just try to take 2 men each

- a shot at goal can come from anywhere

- the sport isn't 3d

- players can talk to each other or at least yell things

- players can see each other easily all the time (unless they're being dunked!)


anyway, enough of that. sven, if you just wanted to know what other peoples ideas were for playing an effective formation, you could have just asked without basically saying the whole uwh world apart from your wee club was using outdated tactics that are weak and inferior and which your "fanatic" club team could beat easily ...careful sven, that "fanatic" name could stick!

well here i'll tell you my view and i'll try to give you some examples... a good formation (i think) is one in which

A- everyone in it knows their role in every situation (sounds simple)
B- every role that is required of a given player is realistic and the players are physically able to carry out their roles to an acceptable standard in the environment of the tournament/games in which they will be competing (ie, if part of someones role is to finish breakaway opportunities and you know every back on the team you're playing is faster than that someone... it's probably unrealistic)

...thats it. it's up to you to decide what roles you need filled, depending on how you want to play... common ones are having players between the puck and the opponents goal... these are known as forward positions in most formations. players behind the puck are often called backs. players in the middle are called centers. players on the sides are called wings. or, not so based on the shape of the formation... players whose job is to get the puck are feeders and players who swim with the puck and make ground are runners, players covering for opposition breakouts are sweepers... whatever you want.

but roles aren't just about where you receive the puck or if you are in charge of the left side of your formation or the right or always in the thick of it or sitting out covering... roles are also about what you DO, on and off the puck. some formations might have some players always assigned to the wall side of play and others always to the open, to suit their strengths or preferences... some formations use their forwards to come back behind the opposition and tackle, some would prefer they didn't so they have more energy to make runs when they're given the puck. some formations have positions that can attack at times and defend at times... some have purely defensive positions that always stay behind all the others, some have positions that can swap momentarily or for a given number of phases or depending on where the play is in the pool or if the team has a player in the sin-bin.

obviously there are few limitations... you can try anything, but all your players need to know what they are trying to do, or you're not a team... you're just a bunch of players swimming round in their own little worlds trying desperately to second-guess what their team-mates are going to do next.

is there some kind of record for length of post i can enter with this one?

__________________
it's more polite on the grating than on the subs bench

The lenght of a postings say compleet nothing about how good it is. Sorry.
And the artikel off Benson was really longer....

Can i ask. Have you ever played waterpolo? I did and many off my players did. And like i told my club is a swimming club with many waterpolo teams even on top level. So in now were i talk about when i say waterpolo.

So also by underwaterhockey only the distance are smaller. But a good shot can come from every position in every way.

Yes and no. Have you ever seen a game in real? then you see players swim underwater to get to another point without direct notification from the opponent. i think you can call that 3d. the opponent can come from below.

The real comunication is not done by yelling. Much time its totally different then what they do. The mean thing is comunication whit sign. we use them also in our team.much is also done by simply looking were the game and were the players are.

I can see underwater also. Is that not the reason why we have googles by uwh. I think by uwh you can even see beter each other then by waterpolo. By UWh you can see them under water and when you are on the suface and that give a good view over the compleet teams underwater. by waterpolo only when you are on the surface. and you cant see from above were everybody is exacly.

Quote:

well here i'll tell you my view and i'll try to give you some examples... a good formation (i think) is one in which A- everyone in it knows their role in every situation (sounds simple)

Thats tactic. Its in non zone positional play possible and in zone possition play. But that line is the basic for all tactics how good or bad they are it dont matter.

Quote:

B- every role that is required of a given player is realistic and the players are physically able to carry out their roles to an acceptable standard in the environment of the tournament/games in which they will be competing (ie, if part of someones role is to finish breakaway opportunities and you know every back on the team you're playing is faster than that someone... it's probably unrealistic)

Maybe unrealistic for you. But if a slower person is the only one to break away. simpley because he can.(it can happen everywere on the playing field) Its not good iff then because its not his roll he does not do it. Please lett him break away. Break the game open. And the faster player can come after him to recieve the puck and go further or help him as long as possible. and 25 meter is not far to swim and that is the longest possible distance in a game to swim with a breakout. Most times in less distance.

Quote:

...thats it. it's up to you to decide what roles you need filled, depending on how you want to play... common ones are having players between the puck and the opponents goal... these are known as forward positions in most formations. players behind the puck are often called backs. players in the middle are called centers. players on the sides are called wings. or, not so based on the shape of the formation... players whose job is to get the puck are feeders and players who swim with the puck and make ground are runners, players covering for opposition breakouts are sweepers... whatever you want.

Indeed whatever you want to call them. A player does not play better to call him defender or midfielder or what name more. A players played good when you let them play. And the formation does not say much about the tactick or iff you play in zones or not.

Quote:

obviously there are few limitations... you can try anything, but all your players need to know what they are trying to do, or you're not a team...

Yes indeed but zone play or non zone play. Iff you train, the players now what to do. And trust is also a mean ingredient therefore, iff you are a team. Iff you dont trust each other you formation can be as good as you want but it will never work as good as you want. With no trust there is no team but a bunch off players that have the same colour cap and stick. I never said my team does not now what and were to do. Agian a good thing to tell but it is a thing that counts for all sorts of tacticks


I did in my first posting

quote: You can read about most off the aspects from underwaterhockey here on this forum.
And most off the people that post something and want to discuss anything are top-rank players or were good players.
So I’m really surprised that there is still nothing about tactics out here.
What is the tactic the top off the world play with?

Quote:

without basically saying the whole uwh world apart from your wee club was using outdated tactics that are weak and inferior

Will you ever react if i did not do that?

The first reaction tell more then you about the willingly from the topp to share

quote Benson: There's lots of new and interesting strategies.
But telling your opposition in depth how you play also teaches your opposition how to stop you.
Which is why not many of us care to expand...

Like you seen there was a reaction. But not telling how a simpley basic works
Iff you think i'm compleet wrong and the most off the world is not. Why not tell everybody all about tactics. As long as i and my teams can defaid our (same level) opponents i think my tactic is better. And you can easely tell me that every top-rank team ripps my teams appart. But they will do that also when we use your tactics. But that does not say much about your tactic but much about my'n tactic. that you must have a top-rank team to win from me and ripp me appart. Its a greath compliment for a sub-top team that compleet played for fun.(you can ask that on every team we played against.)

Quote:

and which your "fanatic" club team could beat easily ...careful sven, that "fanatic" name could stick!

I never said that my team is fanatic. i did tell that my team is lazy and played for fun. Iff you calls that fanatic????I think compleet nobody that ever played against my team will take you seriusly anymore when you told them that the tilburg players are fanatic.... but you give them a very good time. But i did tell somewere that my players are technical players. And that is indeed so. A good skill and a working tactick prevent us to use to much energie..........And nobody on the classes we played can tell that they can win easly from those lazy/funny but skillfull players. But most off them can tell you that it were those lazy funny players that trown them out the first class were we played many years .
(even the team from TAN (barramoenda) we did trown out off that class, at that time without her, and that team(barramoenda) has help from top rank players simply in trying to beat us in a tactical way. and because its a club that is the top from the netherlands. But it did not happend and they lost from us! in 3 games we won 2 times so it was 2-1 for our tactic and it was pure tactic those games because they were faster and manuvereble but we were more skillfull. so the tactics was the turning point.)

__________________
When you are good, then you are not bad..

__________________
When you are good, then you are not bad..