Monday, June 2, 2008

Marking Time

So it has been brought to my attention that most of the Sydney juniors suffer from a mystical disease known as 'weak mark-itis' whereby we hold extremely weak marks.

Hah. I scoffed as I was informed of this. My marks are fantastic. I have never been broken in my entire ultimate career!

But it's true. I did always hold a weak mark. Or, perhaps 'soft' is a better term for it - weak kind of implies that I get broken a lot, and while it certainly happens, it is not like I am failing at my basic imperative of holding the force. By a soft mark, I mean:
  • I will giving disc space, possibly a little bit more.
  • Not biting overly on fakes.
  • Keeping my hands low, and relatively static.
I believe this is serviceable, and in my experience of being marked it seems this is how most people do hold a force. However as a thrower it really does not put very much pressure on, if at all. Depending on the size of the person marking this way, a throw will not have to be released with much pivot, or very low, effectively ensuring that all the throws made from this sort of mark are at a high percentage.

There's a lot more that you can do as a marker to pressure the thrower into resorting to lower percentage throws without compromising some basic tenets:
  • Never intentionally foul the thrower.
  • Never lose balance (sprinting too hard to the mark, layout bids or committing to fakes).
Get a lot closer. Really bump and grind. See if you can't make babies with their team strip. In Australian ultimate (perhaps because by and large aggressive forces are not held) 'disc space' and 'straddle' are not calls one often hears. If they are not going to call it, exploit. Essential etiquette: tell them after the point to call it. Same goes for double team. That's really the only 'revolutionary' adjustment I have had made to my personal marking technique, the rest is stock standard. Hop around on your toes, flash your arms across to stop throws. You know. The usual. Without a doubt, a mark of this kind makes it a lot harder for the offense to play inside their comfort zone.

But there are also some things to watch for. That extra 10-30cm of distance you are closer makes you a lot easier to break. The thrower can step forward (even only slightly, without fouling you!) to deliver a punishing I/O throw. The O/I flick blade (if the thrower is competent enough) is extra punishing because, at such a proximity, all the thrower needs to do is extend his or her arm slightly behind and around the mark. With this in mind, my tendency would be to shade slightly more to the break side than I would with my standard mark, while really watching to discourage that I/O flick break with your pointblock hand.

9 comments:

Rachel Grindlay said...

If they are not going to call it, exploit.

This fundamentally goes against the rules of ultimate!

1.2. It is trusted that no player will intentionally violate the rules;

Tiger said...

I'm so glad you mentioned that!

This was directed at those who already have a clear understanding of the rules of Ultimate - clearly nobody is putting these sorts of crazy marks on rookies at Albert Park Social League.

The problem with Ultimate - if you view it as a problem - is that the self-refereed nature of the sport lends to flexibility in its rules. Handlers in a zone can call double team or float a speccy high backhand throw that would be battered down by a legally positioned cup to a now-open receiver.

Barefoot encourage their players to have fouls called on them in the first few points of the stall count to disrupt flow. I'm not taking it to that extreme but I do think being closer on the mark is something most of us could afford to do - although, as I have stated, it comes with its own disadvantages.

Anonymous said...

This kind of thinking is troubling to me, Tiger.
So if a player knows the rules of Ultimate and understands why and how to make calls if infringed, other players no longer have the responsibility to ensure their own play is within the rules?

You can argue however you want, but as Rachel has said, this fundamentally goes against the basic tenets of the game.

---------------
1.1. Ultimate is a non-contact, self-refereed sport. *All players are responsible for administering and adhering to the rules*. Ultimate relies upon a Spirit of the Game that places the *responsibility for fair play on every player*.

1.4. Highly competitive play is encouraged, but should *never sacrifice the mutual respect between players, adherence to the agreed-upon rules of the game*, or the basic joy of play.
---------------

Using your suggestion about the double team rule... As a strike handler, I often enjoy getting double teamed, because it means that my targets are even more open. Just because I may be capable of exploiting this, does that mean the defenders don't have a responsibility to uphold the rules of play?

"The problem with Ultimate - if you view it as a problem - is that the self-refereed nature of the sport lends to flexibility in its rules."
I agree in a sense; however, I believe this flexibility should *only* apply in the case where someone is being/has been infringed by an opponent (like in your double team example, choosing to ignore the chance to make the call). There is never "flexibility" to initiate a wilful violation of the rules.

John

Maple said...

tiger is a cheat!

so cleverly disguised by amusing barbs and a tendency to chat to his opposition...i got you figured now mate :)

Rachel Grindlay said...

what Johnny said!

a1214 said...

1.1. Ultimate is a non-contact, self-refereed sport. *All players are responsible for administering and adhering to the rules*. Ultimate relies upon a Spirit of the Game that places the *responsibility for fair play on every player*.

1.4. Highly competitive play is encouraged, but should *never sacrifice the mutual respect between players, adherence to the agreed-upon rules of the game*, or the basic joy of play.
---------------

Using your suggestion about the double team rule... As a strike handler, I often enjoy getting double teamed, because it means that my targets are even more open. Just because I may be capable of exploiting this, does that mean the defenders don't have a responsibility to uphold the rules of play?

-----
*All players are responsible for administering and adhering to the rules*.
then you go on to say
...I often enjoy getting double teamed, because it means that my targets are even more open. Just because I may be capable of exploiting this...

Upholding the rules is a two way street, that means making calls that aren't to your advantage.

I remember in waterpolo some refs would play 'advantage fouls' which means they would only call a foul if it didnt give the offense an advantage. I guess this isn't really covered in frisbee and its just whatever you feel liek doing.

Simon Talbot said...

"Using your suggestion about the double team rule... As a strike handler, I often enjoy getting double teamed, because it means that my targets are even more open. Just because I may be capable of exploiting this, does that mean the defenders don't have a responsibility to uphold the rules of play?"

I call it, then throw it.

With double team, disc space and fast count violations, O players don't call them. Yes, it's up to the D to simply not break the rules, but until the O starts calling them there's no disincentive to doing it. D players may not even be consciously violating these rules, but if they are called on it twice or three times in a game then they will certainly start to pay attention what they are doing.

Anonymous said...

There is no reason why, by not making a call, I am not adhering to the rules.

The rules DO describe legal positioning and movement by players on the field. If, for example, a player initiates contact or stands too close, they are violating an explicit rule. Clearly, they are infringing in this instance.

The rules DO NOT require a player to make a call when an infringement has occurred. Read them carefully - the wording states that a player "may" choose to call a violation (this applies to marking violations, fouls, picks and even the stall count).


However, Simmo, you make a great point... I might try to start doing that, because I agree - players may not realise it's occurring. Good call.

Tiger said...

My original point was that, disc space and straddle are not called precisely because people are taught to mark softly- a lot of players who are quite good on defence sort of laze about on the mark, give a good disc space and a half and allow easy throws, both open and break.

So that was a bit anti-climatic, I agree whole-heartedly with you, Rachel and JMc.

But there are some other things to think about as well: even all the way up to Nationals, people don't really know the rules, much less have actually sat down and read them.

At that point (Nationals) while it is not necessarily right in my opinion I can understand how certain players may interpret

All players are responsible for administering and adhering to the rules

and

Highly competitive play is encouraged, but should never sacrifice the... adherence to the agreed-upon rules of the game

to mean that basically, if the opposition has not read the rules, they deserve to be fouled. Reasonably, especially at higher levels, the onus can not entirely be on the more intelligent opposition player to constantly explain to people who are at Nationals the rules of a game they are, by definition, supposed to have prior knowledge of. It would conceivably be the task of the more experienced players on the offensive team to point out to their rookies once they take a sub.

Sure, this viewpoint would go against Spirit of the Game, but if going against SOTG is really such a bad thing, why do we let Chilly compete every year?