How do you "get open"?

On Fridays, I teach physical education to my 6th, 7th, and 8th grade students.  When the weather is nice (in early fall and late spring), we go to the park to either play baseball, football, basketball, or Ultimate.  When the weather is not conducive to outdoor sports, we go to a gym and play basketball exclusively.  I also do a little bit of phys ed every day during recess with my 7th grade students.  We play a variety of games (soccer, team handball, 500, and tag) in the back yard of the school.

The funny thing about working with junior high boys is the disparity in athletic ability among them. Some of my 8th graders are bigger than I am.  Some of my 6th graders are well under 5ft and 100 lbs. Most are in between. When these differently sized boys play together, it is almost like there are several games going on.  Each sport is radically different, depending each participant's level of physical maturity.  It is certainly odd to watch a 4'6" 80 lb kid contest the shot of a 6' 170 lb kid.

The experience of trying to teach the fundamentals of sport to these boys has forced me to really consider how sports work.  Most of us are trapped by our own talents when we try to explain certain skills.  We tend to take a certain level of athleticism for granted.  Imagine, though, trying to teach shooting fundamentals in basketball to a kid who does not yet have the strength to get the ball up to the rim.  You have to start from square 1.

Beyond the strength threshold required for shooting a basketball, there are more fundamental issues that the less physically mature kids have to deal with.  The main one, the one that cuts across almost every sport and game played by children (and by adults, for that matter), is how to get open.  How do you actually get away from somebody who is trying to stay close to you?

The flip side of this issue is the other fundamental question.  How do you stay close to someone who is trying to get away from you?

93% of Ultimate comes down to these twin issues.  And yet, it is almost assumed that everybody is proficient in getting open when covered and staying close to a man who is trying to get away from you.  The collective wisdom seems to be that you can be good at these twin skills if you "just try harder" or "concentrate".  This is, of course, nonsense.  What's worse, it is damaging nonsense born of ignorance.  The collective wisdom, as is often the case, only stifles questions and makes players feel bad about their game.  Think about it: what if when you were learning to drive a car and had no idea what you were doing, your instructor helpfully advised you to "concentrate" and to "just try harder".  Depending on your temperament, you either would have tried to end the lesson as quickly as possible or put on your seat belt and aimed the car at the nearest wall.  

When you boil it down there are only two components to getting open: strength and balance. These are basically the same for staying close.  In order to get open, you must be able to get to a spot on the field before your defender can get there.  The strength component comes from needing to push off the ground with more force than your defender is able to push off the ground.

Strength is speed.  If you can generate more force when pushing off the ground, you are faster.

But, being stronger by itself will not get you open. Obviously, you need the coordination to harness that strength and getting moving in whatever direction you choose in order for the strength to be useful.  This is where balance comes in.  A 175 lb man can generate about 1000 lbs of force when making a hard cut (if my physics is bad, somebody please correct me. I fear that 1000lbs may be too low).  This massive amount of force needs to be steered correctly or the man will simply fall over.  Balance allows the force created by strength to be directed properly.

So, how do you get better at getting open?  The easy answer is to work on your balance.  I call this the easy answer not because it doesn't take time and effort, but because you can work on your balance in the confines of Ultimate practice.  Playing games and doing drills that force you to accelerate, then stop, then change direction, then accelerate again will allow your body to learn how to get open more efficiently.  You will learn to better utilize whatever strength you have.  And although you won't really get much stronger, you will appear to get much faster because your same old strength will be harnessed better.

The harder answer is to work on your strength.  This cannot really be done during Ultimate practice.  Thus, it is "harder".  Strength work doesn't necessarily have to happen at the gym. Manual labor does an excellent job of making you stronger.  The trouble is that manual labor isn't available whenever we want it and for whatever duration we want it the way the gym is. Sadly, however, most people's gym habits are so poor that they would be better served doing 15 minutes of manual labor per week than spending 2 hours at the gym.

To work on the kind of strength that will help you "get open", you need to stay away from the machines.  They are a waste of your time.  Machines are too easy.  They control the weight for you.  They isolate muscles.  "Getting open", however, does not happen in isolation.  It requires you to use your whole body, specifically your lower body (more specifically, your posterior chain, but that is a detail beyond the scope of this blog).  Therefore, we look to lifts that also require us to use our whole body, specifically our lower body.  These lifts are: squats, lunges, deadlifts, and cleans.

These 4 lifts will make you stronger.  They will help you generate more force as you push off the ground.  Squats and lunges are incredibly useful in getting all of the muscles of your legs to work together.  I advise both because, although the movement is similar, lunges tax each leg individually while squats tax both legs at the same time.  Deadlifts are another full body exercise that will add strength and coordination to your legs, but also cause massive strength gains in your torso (core).  Cleans are probably the only full body lift that effectively mimics the explosiveness of getting open.  

Of these 4, cleans are the most technical with lunges being the least.  I recommend, however, working with somebody who knows what they are doing whenever you strength train.  The one advantage of machines is that because they unlikely to help you, they are also unlikely to hurt you.  Full-body lifts, on the other hand, can cause serious problems if they are done with poor form.  Find somebody who knows what they are doing, become a maniac about your form, keep the weight light, and get lifting.  

Good Offensive Communication

There is a spectrum of offensive communication.  On one extreme is the nonsensical offense that explicitly broadcasts its players' every move before, during, and after that move is made.  On the opposite extreme is the offense so secretive that the offensive players themselves have no idea what is going on.  Although both extremes are ridiculous caricatures, very few teams at the non-elite level seem to strike the appropriate balance between complete transparency and absolute secrecy.

It is not terribly difficult to see the advantages and disadvantages of the two extremes, but stating these might be helpful in clarifying our understanding of what "good offensive communication" is.

The advantages of the offense whose players broadcast each of their intentions and movements are surprisingly many. Throwers and receivers will exchange the disc optimally.  Receivers will coordinate their fakes and cuts with one another to allow for maximum impact and efficiency.  And, the overall offensive strategy can be altered on the fly in order to gain the greatest possible advantage over the defense.  In short, there is no chance of miscommunication among players in this offense.

There is only one disadvantage of this offense, but it is a devastating one.  The defense will know exactly what the offense is doing and plans to do.  They will know the offense's overall strategy as well as the individual offensive players' strategy at any given moment.  There is no element of surprise.  This single disadvantage nullifies all advantages.

There is only one advantage of an offense that is completely secretive, but it too is devastating. The defense will not know what the offense is doing.  They will always be on their heels.

Unfortunately, there are just too many disadvantages to name for the completely secretive offense.  They would include, but are not limited to: a high rate of turnovers, an incredible amount of wasted energy, major frustration, and poor utilization of specific player skills.

So, how should an offense communicate in order to gain all of the advantages of the extreme styles while not suffering from any of the disadvantages?

First, you must realize that, although explicit communication is a horrible on-field in-game strategy, it is a very good strategy on the sidelines and during practice.  Offensive players need to start somewhere when they practice running any offense.  Having them discuss exactly what they plan to do in a given situation is an incredibly useful exercise.  When players explain their tactics and listen to the tactics of others, they begin to get a feel for one another.  This feel allows them to work together and run the offense at a higher level.  The greater the transparency in practice, the less miscommunication among players in games.  This transparency should also extend to the sidelines during games.

Secondly, once players have a feel for one another, they are able to communicate in code.  They can read each other with just a look or a head nod.  Often, they will simply read one another's body language.  All of this successful non-verbal communication allows the offense to enjoy the element of surprise.  Thus, they have the advantage of the secretive offense, but they are all in on the secret.

In this way, offensive communication can combine the advantages of both transparency and secrecy to gain the maximum possible edge over a given defense.

The Reason Offenses Fail: Part II (Jury Duty Style)

Good offense starts with 2 basic commandments for all players involved:
1. Understand your purpose in the offense.
2. Be deliberate in your execution of that purpose.

Understanding your purpose in an offense is not an easy thing. For one, it assumes that your offense has a strategy (one more refined than "scoring goals"). Let's say, for example, that your offense's strategy is to get the disc into the hands of your big throwers in positions where they can huck to your big receivers. If you are a big thrower in this offense, your purpose is to get yourself into a position to huck and then huck the disc. If you are a non-big throwing handler in this offense, your purpose is to move the disc laterally (play catch) while looking to set up the big thrower in a position where he can huck the disc. If you are a big receiver in this offense, your purpose is to cut for big yardage by either cutting deep or by faking deep and then catching 20 yard unders. If you are a non-big receiver in this offense, your job is to actively clear space for the big receiver, make breakside cuts to relieve pressure, and move the disc laterally (play catch) when you catch it. These descriptions are somewhat simplified, but I feel they give an accurate notion of the purposes of the 4 different positions in that version of the run and shoot offense.

Understanding your purpose is not enough, however, to succeed as a part of a given offensive strategy. You must also deliberately execute that purpose. I use the word "deliberately" to emphasize the point that, in a good offense, everything happens for a reason. Good offenses succeed on purpose. They fail on purpose. Bad offenses succeed and fail accidentally.

When all seven offensive players execute their purposes deliberately, they each move around the field with confidence.  They move like they mean it.  This sort of purposeful, coordinated movement destroys defenses. When an offense moves this way, it drastically reduces unforced errors (the bane of every offense) because:

1. There is no miscommunication.

2. Individual weaknesses are avoided.

Seven players working together while doing the things they are best at should be the goal of any offense.  So why don't we see it more often?

Reason 1: There is no offensive strategy. No individual can be expected to understand and deliberately execute his purpose if that purpose doesn't exist.  Without an overarching offensive strategy, no player has a meaningful purpose.  This is a failure of leadership.

Reason 2: Players are not able to understand a given purpose or offensive strategy.  This one just comes down to repetition.  The movements and responsibilities of positions in Ultimate are not impossibly complex even for a novice.  They just take time.  How much time depends on the player's skill level and experience.  Sadly, this isn't a failure of anybody.  It's a reality. Sometimes, some players just shouldn't be on the field until they get more reps in practice.

Reason 3: Players are not able to execute a given purpose or offensive strategy.  This one doesn't come down to repetition.  People have physical limitations.  Smart players figure out what they can't do and develop ways of working around that.

Drills/Games for Offense

First, I'm just going to quote Jim Parinella's thoughts on drills.  I do this because he is succinct and smarter than I am.

Good drills: get lots of reps, offer a chance to reflect on whether you did the right thing or not, require decision-making, fatigue you, mimic some aspect of ultimate.

Bad drills: have lots of down time, have poorly-designed incentives, have an easy way to get around the purpose of the drill, simulate something artificial."

I think that the drills/games I wrote out for defense satisfy some of Jim's excellent "good drill criteria".  I also think that many of the defense drills/games cover the movement skills needed by receivers on offense.  This leaves only the skills of throwing and catching to be dealt with in this post.

I will echo Jim's words once more when I say that I hate so-called "flow drills".  These drills involve players in two or three lines moving in set patterns with no defenders.  I'm still not really sure what the point is.  Flow has everything to do with anticipation and reacting to what the defense is giving you.  "Flow Drills" seem to cancel out both of these.  I hate them.  That's all I'll say.

Drills

Useful throwing and catching games/drills are all based around playing catch.  Any drill or game that gets too far from playing catch is likely a waste of time.  One of the problems with many throwing/catching drills is that they incorporate too many other skills to be useful.  The easiest example of this is the "endzone drill".  I'm not sure what the point of the "endzone drill" is, but it cannot be throwing or catching or cutting or anything resembling what actually occurs in the game.  This drill has tons of downtime, too few reps, and reinforces useless movement patterns.

Anyway, back to playing catch. It's wonderfully simple.  The thrower can work a single type of throw a given number of reps, throwing different throws to a specific spot (between the numbers, right hand, left hand, etc), throwing with different trajectories (high release, air bounce, outside-in curves, inside-out curves, etc), and different speeds (hangers, bullets, feathers, etc).  The receiver can work on specific catches (1 hand righty, 1 hand lefty, 2 hand crab, 2 hand pancake, etc), on different aggression (snapping his hand out to meet the disc, letting the disc fly until the last possible moment, etc), and on different hand position (hands extended out in front, hands extended out to the side, etc).

The amazing thing about playing catch is the sheer number of quality reps you can get in a short time IF YOU TREAT IT AS A DRILL.  Unfortunately, most people laze their way through it and get very little out of it.  Also, it really shouldn't be played by more than 3 people.  More than that and you should split into pairs with as few triplets as possible.  Remember, it's all about reps.

Games

The games for improving throwing and catching are just versions of in-game situations in isolation and real games with limitations.

In-game situations in isolation

1. One on One.  This game has 3 players: a thrower, a defender, and a receiver.  The thrower is placed on the sideline and pretends to be forced sideline.  The receiver attempts to beat the defender either on the under or deep.  The defender tries to stop the receiver from getting the disc.  Simple rule: the receiver can only make 1 fake.  This forces the receiver to be decisive and reactive to what the defense is giving.  Note: a head fake before the receiver starts moving does not count as his fake.

2. Quick throws.  This game has 2 players.  The players stand 5 yards apart.  Their goal is to complete as many passes as they can in 90 seconds.  This game is played as a competition with the pair either trying to beat their previous best or beat the best of the other pair(s) on the team.  This game works on touch throws, grip transfer from catching to throwing, and concentration.

Real games with limitations

1. 3 on 3 to 3.  This game has 6 players: 3 on each team. It is played half field and make it take it. There is a hard cap at 3.  This game forces players to be involved at all times on offense, to anticipate and make continuation cuts, to handle the disc.

2. Stall 4 game to 3.  This variation is simply normal Ultimate with the stall count reduced to 4.  It is played full field and make it take it.  There is a hard cap at 3. This game forces players to move the disc at all costs and to make efficient cuts.

**note: the reason these games are played with a hard cap at 3 and make it take it is to reduce the down time that plagues most scrimmages.**

The One.

Almost nothing is as deflating as the high stall count turnover. Here's one common scenario: a mediocre thrower has possession of the disc.  The stall count gets to 6.  He doesn't turn and look for the dump.  The stall count gets to 7.  The dump cut is now smothered by the field defenders.  The thrower looks uncertainly out at the stack.  Players in the stack look at each other.  Stall 10.  

This scenario isn't exactly what happens on every high stall count turnover, but it has the one feature that almost all high stall count turnovers share: uncertainty.  The thrower knows he is in trouble, but he doesn't know who to look for in order to get out of it.  The receivers know the thrower is in trouble, but they don't know who is supposed to go get the disc.  In short, the offense has ground to a grotesque halt.  Everybody is flatfooted.  The disc is still.  The defense has won.

My solution to this particular turnover is for the offense to name "The 1" before they signal readiness to receive the pull. "The 1" ("el uno", "il primero", etc.) is a fixer (kinda like George Clooney in Michael Clayton.  When the offense goes horribly wrong, he must come and fix it. The presence of "the 1" on the field eliminates any uncertainty.  As soon as anybody feels they are in trouble, they square up to "the 1" and prepare to throw to him as soon as he gets himself open.

Obviously, not every player can be "the 1".  Being "el uno" means that you have to be able to get open whenever you feel like it.  If you can, then you are eligible to be "il primero".  It also means that you've got to have good hands.  Throwers tend to panic when they are in trouble in high stall counts.  This panic causes them to make some pretty lol throws.  Being "the 1" also means that you cannot cut deep after "stall 2".  You have to be able to come back and get the disc by "stall 7".

I think that naming "the 1" before the point begins (assuming whoever is named has the skills required) is a simple way to cut down on those pesky turnovers.

The Reason Offenses Fail Part I (jury duty style)

**note: this post was written during jury duty while I was waiting to be called.  It was super boring.  I think that I might be the only person who attempts to alleviate his boredom by writing Ultimate strategy posts**

I have written before about the plague of unforced errors that infects almost all Ultimate offenses at the non-elite level.  To recap, I posited that 55% of all offensive possessions end with an unforced error turnover.  I'd like to explore this phenomenon a little more deeply to try to figure out the root causes for all of these unforced errors.

The first thing that needs to be dealt with when looking for the root causes of the unforced error problem is the fallacy of equality.  The fallacy of equality states that because Ultimate is different from other sports (because it is based around spirit and respect for opponents) and any player can have good spirit and respect his opponents, all players are pretty much equally skilled. Subscribers to this fallacy tend to see Ultimate as a way of life, an attitude, and a social outlet first, and as a sport second.  Again, I want to say that there is nothing wrong with believing in this fallacy.  It is a very positive (yet undeniably flawed) way to view the world.  It is just not a view that I am interested in.

At the elite college and club level, nobody subscribes to this fallacy.  The coaches, captains, and players on these elite teams are not afraid to say: "you suck at ______, I don't want you doing it anymore. Stick to what you're good at". And not only are they not afraid to say it, but they also coordinate their on-field play so as to avoid relying on a player's sucky skills.  This kind of honest assessment is very freeing for most players (yes, you'll get some people who can't handle criticism of any kind, but you're probably better off without them).  When a team leader makes an honest assessment of your game, it allows you to concentrate on doing what you do best.  It also focuses you on what skills you need to improve.

By assessing players in this way, elite teams create a division of labor within themselves. Handlers handle because that is what they are best at and what most helps the team, not because they "really want to".  Primary receivers are the offenses number one look because that is what they are best at and what most helps the team, not because they "deserve a chance". But, honestly, those aren't the players who truly benefit from the division of labor.  Those players would probably play well anyway.  The players who truly benefit from the division of labor are players whose games have severe flaws and severe strengths.  The division of labor allows these players to show off all of their strengths while hiding their weaknesses. 

At the levels below elite, however, the fallacy of equality can be found with regularity.  Time and again, players at these levels find themselves in positions on the field and situations in games in which they are highly unlikely to succeed.  And while some of these bad positions/situations can be chalked up to the chaos that is part of any free-flowing sport, most can be attributed to poor strategy and poor understanding of Ultimate.  For example, player A cuts well and plays hard defense, but is a mediocre thrower at best.  Player A's team is on offense being forced forehand. Player A makes a great cut from the stack to the force side along the sideline beating his defender by two steps.  He catches the disc and turns downfield to survey his options.  His marker traps him hard against the sideline.  Player A makes a few flailing pivots and then throws the disc away on stall 9.  Player A feels horrible about causing a turnover and apologizes to his teammates, but he really shouldn't.  The turnover wasn't really his fault. It was the inevitable result of the poor offensive strategy of his team.

Because nobody ever told Player A that his limited throwing ability meant that he was not allowed to make certain cuts, he made a cut that should really only be made by a talented thrower.  Player A is not at fault because nobody ever told him that it was not his job to make that cut. Nobody ever told him that the sidelines were poison to his skill set.  Nobody told him that his home was the middle and breakside thirds of the field.  And, most certainly, nobody told him that given his particular mix of talents, his job within the offense was to make breakside cuts, move the disc laterally as soon as he caught it, and catch goals.

On many non-elite teams, nobody tells anybody anything (or if they do, nobody really listens). And so, many non-elite teams are a hodgepodge of accidents.  They turn the disc accidentally. They score accidentally.  They make a D accidentally.  They give up a big score accidentally.  The one truth of the fallacy of equality is that if you choose to follow it, all of your players will likely end up feeling equally bad.

Drills/Games for Defense.

I've been thinking a great deal lately about how to get better at playing defense.  Some would say, just play better defense.  In a way, this is correct.  Much more so than offense, defense is a state of mind.  Deciding to play better defense and sticking to that decision goes a long, long way.

The trouble with the "just play better defense" solution, however, is that it assumes that everyone has the same skills and knows how/when to implement them.  This is certainly preposterous as it goes against all experience on the field.  Some people are just better at defense than others.  Much like throwing, defense has its own skills and they can be practiced.  Here are a some ways to do it.

Games

As a rule, games must be fun and competitive.  If you aren't laughing at the start and puking at the end, you're probably doing it wrong.  Here are some of my favorites that have distinct connections to Ultimate skills.

1. 500.  This game requires at least 3 players. You should remember this one from grade school. A thrower tosses a single disc to a group of receivers and they all vie to come down with it.  The player who catches the disc earns 100 points.  Once a player reaches 500 points, he becomes the new thrower and the game restarts.  The practice version can be played 1 on 1 with a single receiver and a single defender.  Or with multiple receivers and defenders.  Or with multiple receivers and a single defender.  Or with a single receiver and multiple defenders. Etc. Playing this game helps players work on reading the disc, body positioning, timing the jump, communication between/among defenders, and catching.

2. Tag. This game requires at least 2 players. You should also remember this one from grade school.  One player is it.  The other players scatter around a given area and try to avoid being tagged by the it-player while also staying in bounds. This game translates to ultimate in that a defender needs to stay close to his receiver while the receiver working to get away from him. The practice version can be played 1 on 1 with a single defender (it) and a single receiver.  Or with multiples of each.  Playing this game helps players work on agility, reading other players' movements, acceleration, cutting, and field sense.

3. Leprechaun. This game requires at least 2 players. Leprechaun goes by many names, but is basically a variation of tag where the player who is "it" tries to stop the other players from getting from one side of a given field to the other. As players are tagged, they also become "it" until there is only one player left who is not "it". That player is the winner.  Playing this game also helps players work on all of the tag skills as well as working on defensive communication between/among "its".

All of the above games are really useful for field defenders and for receivers.  As a bonus, almost everybody has played them as a child and has an understanding of the objectives and the rules. Their simplicity, however, does not make them particularly easy to play well. They are all labor-intensive. And, they all require something that rarely gets practiced during ultimate practice, but always seems to show up during games: raw athleticism.  This "raw athleticism" is really just an amalgamation of agility, body control, and strength.  In other words, it can (and should!) be practiced.

What makes games great, is that they (along with drills) replace the need for boring conditioning work (ie track workouts, long runs, etc).  Games are better than conditioning work because games simulate the competition, randomness, and necessary skills that occur on the ultimate field.  Games, played in increments of as little as 5 minutes, should make up a substantial portion of any practice.

Players may object to spending practice time this way.  They may be very interested in a more traditional practice (ie a lot of scrimmaging with drills thrown in).  A traditional practice strongly emphasizes throwing-specific drills with a few catching-specific drills sprinkled in.  The trouble with this should be obvious, but let me point it out.  At any given moment on the field, 92.9% (only 1 out of the 14 players has the disc) of what is happening has nothing to do with throwing. This also means that at any given moment on the field, 92.9% of what is happening has nothing to do with catching either.  Put together, this means that a traditional practice only actively drills the skills that make up 14% of the game. The other 86% of the game is left to chance.

My point is not that we shouldn't work on our throws or our catches.  Or that throwing and catching don't lie at the heart of what ultimate is really about.  My point is that these skills have been way, way over-emphasized in the team practice setting.

Unfortunately, I haven't really come up with a game that is good for marking defense. Thankfully, we have drills for that.

Drills

As a rule, drills are mindless and repetitive.  Most people think drills help you learn to do a specific action or set of actions correctly.  This is wrong.  Drills, when done properly and often, make it so you are no longer able do a specific action or set of actions incorrectly.  Simply put, drills turn off your brain and train your body.

1. Hold the force.  This drill requires at least 3 players and takes 1 minute.  Player 1 is the caller. He calls out different forces (forehand, backhand, flat, no huck, no hammer) at random intervals. Player 2 is the thrower.  He pivots and fakes with the disc in an attempt to break the mark or get off an uncontested throw.  He does NOT ever throw the disc, however.  Player 3 is the marker.  He listens to the caller and marks the thrower accordingly.  He must count out the stall count. His feet must always be in motion, sliding back and forth to set whatever force has been called.  His hands must be properly positioned and be actively harassing the thrower.  This drill can be drilled with 1 caller and a single pair or multiple pairs of throwers and markers.  This drill helps defenders work on agility, listening, concentration, and aggression.  It helps throwers work on pivoting and fakes.

2. Breakdown.  This drill requires at least 2 players and takes 1 minute.  Player 1 is the caller. He calls out "BREAKDOWN" at random intervals.  Player 2 is the defender.  He must sprint (not run, not jog) in place until he hears "BREAKDOWN".  When player 2 hears "BREAKDOWN" he must throw himself on the ground and then get up as quickly as possible and continue to sprint in place. This drill can be drilled with 1 caller and 1 defender or with multiple defenders.  This drill helps defenders work on agility, listening, body control, and aggression.  It helps callers get a much needed laugh.

3. Shadow.  This drill requires at least 4 players and takes 1 minute or longer.  It also requires 4 cones set in a straight line.  The 2 end cones are 22 yards apart.  The 2 center cones are two yards apart (each one yard off perfect center).  The players line up in 2 lines facing one another between the 2 center cones. These lines are perpendicular to the line former by the 4 cones. Line 1 contains the cutters. Line 2 contains the defenders. The goal of the cutter at the start of line 1 is to reach one of the two end cones before his defender reaches it.  The goal of the defender at the start of line 2 is to beat the cutter to the cone he has chosen.  The cutter may fake as much as he likes in the area between the central cones.  This drill works on agility, fakes, cutting, reading the cutter, acceleration, and aggression.

4. Suicides.  This drill requires at least 1 player and takes as long as it takes.  It also requires 5 cones set in a straight line. The cones should be set up at 5 yard intervals (one at the start, one at 5 yards, one at 10 yards, one at 15 yards, and one at 20 yards).  The player lines up at the first cone, sprints to the second cone and knocks it down, sprints back to the first cone, sprints to the second cone and knocks it down, sprints back to the first cone, etc.  This drill works on agility, stopping, and acceleration.

These drills aren't particularly fun or easy, but they will make you better.  A practice that is punctuated by some of the different drills and games from above will be much more useful than one without.  Remember, don't just train 7.1% of the game. Train the 92.9% of the game that is happening to everybody at every second on the field.

Practice? What practice?

In a previous post, I talked about why players and teams who want to get better need to practice. In this post, I want to talk about why practices fail and what can be done to keep them from failing.

In my mind, there are two culprits when a given practice fails: the leadership and the team members.

When a practice fails due to leadership, it is usually caused by one or more of the following:

1. Practice isn't planned out.  This is the easiest way for a practice to fail.  The captain needs to take time before any team practice to decide exactly what drills to run, what games to play, how to scrimmage, and what the schedule of these different events are going to be within a set time limit. I don't think practice can be less than an hour.  I don't think practice should be more than two hours.  Within whatever time limit is set, the captain must plan the sequence and duration of events.  Without this plan, I'm not even sure you can call it a "team practice". "Team practice" without this plan is just pickup with a lot more standing around.

2. Practice is planned out, but the plan isn't communicated effectively to the team members. The captain can spend the time to plan out exactly what they want a practice to be.  It can be scheduled beautifully.  But, if the team members don't know the schedule, then there is a good chance that practice fails.  Leaders ask for a lot.  They want you to give up your time and let them direct you in using that time as they see fit.  Too often, leaders don't give back. By not explaining exactly what the practice schedule is to the team members, they set themselves apart from the team. A captain is not a coach. It is not enough to have a plan. Your exact plan must be communicated to the team members. Even if they don't care about the schedule, team members will respect a captain who explains what is going to happen in advance.

3. Practice is planned and communicated effectively, but the plan isn't executed.  The captain needs to keep to the plan.  This can be done quite easily with a stopwatch that has countdown mode.  The only way to figure out what kind of plan works best is to follow a given plan all the way through. Then, after practice is over, analyze what worked and what didn't.  A plan that is abandoned halfway through eats away at a leader's credibility.

4. Practice is planned, communicated effectively, executed, but the plan sucks.  Maybe the drills are bad.  Maybe the games are boring.  Maybe everyone hates you and feels bad about themselves after your practice.  This isn't the end of the world.  Although the result wasn't ideal, the framework for a good practice is in place.  Thankfully, there is no rule that says you have to ever repeat that practice.  Chalk it up to experience and design something else.  Team members will forgive this sort of bad practice easily, provided that you don't make the same mistake again (and again, and again...)

When practice fails due to team members, it is usually caused by one or more of the following:

1. Team members don't show up.  You can't get better if you don't show and unfortunately your team can't really get better either.  Missing practice is dreadful.  If the team leader is going to put the work in to properly plan, communicate, and execute a practice, the least you can do is show up.  It is hell on the leaders of any team to have no shows.  But, it is worse on the team members who do show.  Their commitment is cheapened and team bonds are weakened.  In the best case, the team moves on without the no shows.  In the worst case, the team ends.

2. Team members show up late.  Now, this one can also fall on the leader(s).  Obviously (although not obvious to all captains) practices need to be scheduled at times when team members are available.  Let's assume that the captain has scheduled practice properly. Showing up late is simply disrespectful.  It is disrespectful to the captain, it is disrespectful to teammates, and it is disrespectful to the person who is showing up late.  Nobody's time is inherently more valuable than anybody else's.  The leader(s) need to respect everybody's time and so do the team members.

3. Team members are unfocused or disinterested.  Be where you are.  If you are at a team practice, then be at a team practice.  Don't be at the office or at home in your head.  Respect your time.  An hour is not too long to concentrate on getting better at a game you love.

In the end, like most things that are team related, all of these issues really come down to trust. When a captain screws up a practice, it means he doesn't trust his team.  He doesn't trust that the team is worth his time.  Likewise, when a team member screws up a practice, it means he doesn't trust his captain.  Everybody is insecure.  Nobody wants to be the guy who looks like he's giving a f@ck when everybody else is screwing around.  This fear causes both practices and teams to fail.

Whatever you're role on a team, you've got to be willing to put in 100%.  That's the only way to get anything back.  Captains, trust your team members.  Team members, trust your captains. Because once this trust is established, everything else is easy.

The offensive skill set.

I've been thinking a lot lately about what it means to be a good ultimate player and what it means to be a good ultimate team.  In my limited experience, I have played with and against 600-800 different players over the past 5 years or so.  A few have been great, some have been good, many have been decent, and many more have been poor.  

Similarly, over the past five years I have played with and against about 40 different teams.  I have never played with or against a great team, but I have watched a ton of game tape of the Buzz Bullets, Sockeye, Wisconsin, Florida, Chain, Rhino, etc and they qualify as great.  I have played against and been beaten by some good teams.  I have played on, been beaten by, and beaten some average teams.  And I have played on, been beaten by, and beaten some poor teams.

Looking at the players I've seen, I think that the offensive skills needed are:

1. Moves well.  This, I believe is the number one skill on the field.  This doesn't necessarily mean fast, although having good speed is a plus.  It has to do with being able to put one's body in position to make plays more often than not on offense and defense.  A lot of this skill comes with experience and anticipation of the plays before/as they happen.  Moving well accounts for all defense and all offense that occurs without throwing or catching the disc.

2. Has Good throws.  This comes closely behind number one.  It doesn't mean that a great player has to have 70 yard perfect hucks from the forehand, backhand, and overhead.  It means more that the player completes nearly all of his easy to medium difficulty throws and completes a fair percentage of his difficult throws.  It also means that the player doesn't throw difficult throws very often, either because he's so good that the throws aren't really difficult for him or because he decides to take a different throw in that spot to avoid a potential turnover.

3. Has Good hands.  You have to be able to catch the disc, obviously.  Having good hands means that you can make the difficult catch with a defender on your back, catch a floating disc in a crowd, and layout to reach discs that you can't reach otherwise.

Even a great player needn't have all of these skills, so long as he can make up for what he lacks in one area by being excellent in another.  For example, an amazing thrower doesn't necessarily need good hands to be a great player.  Or a player who makes astoundingly good cuts as a receiver and is a shut down defender doesn't necessarily need good throws.

But, a player who is lacking these offensive skills should at least know what he has to work on in order to get better.

It is much more difficult to determine what offensive skills a team needs.  Great teams are not all built the same way.  Some teams thrive on high risk offense based on taking long shots down the field.  Other teams attempt to control the disc and practice risk avoidance.  The one thing that is clear about the great teams is that they all know exactly who they are and they play to the strengths of their best individuals.

I don't think that a team can really start by saying that they are going to be a high risk/high reward offense.  If that is the sort of offense that their personnel dictates, then that is the sort of offense that they should play.  But, just deciding beforehand that that is "the best" offense doesn't really make sense to me.  Similarly, I'm not sure that a team can really decide without looking at their personnel whether to run a horizontal stack, a vertical stack, a split stack, or a German.  It all comes down to what individual skills a team has and how its members play together.

Why practice?

A LOT of teams don't practice.  And, a LOT of really decent teams don't practice.  AND (gratuitous caps) I think I understand why (beyond the fact that the time commitment is a pain in the ass).  It's because they are not trying to get better.

Which is not to say that they are trying to not get better.  These are two very different things.  I don't know any player (well, maybe a few) who actively try to not get better.  But, I know plenty of players who don't actively work to get better.

These non-practicing teams figure that they'll either improve by playing together in individual games and tournaments (which does happen) or they'll just maintain their current level of competence and have fun playing together (which also happens).  Here's the crazy thing: I totally understand where they are coming from.

Even when it is run by fantastic coaches who completely tailor it to the individuals on the team and the individual team as a whole, PRACTICE SUCKS.  Now, remove the fantastic coaches and replace them with a captain or captains who have little experience designing workouts and no real team philosophy beyond a repeated cliche.  It is not difficult to see why players would rather do other things with their time and just play in games and tournaments.

As long as a player or team isn't looking to improve, this is fine.  

If a player or team is looking to improve, however, just playing in games and tournaments is a waste of their time.  Again, they may improve, but they'll have no way of knowing it.  You might say, "Wait, wait, I know when my team has improved.  We win more games."  Or, even better, "I know that my team improved last year because we beat a team at the end of the season who beat us at the beginning."

Now ask yourself, "Did my team improve or did the other team get worse?  If my team improved, did we all improve or did the offense at the end of the year just run through fewer players?  Did we get unlucky at the beginning of the year and lucky at the end?  Was the other team actually trying to win or just goofing off?

This is the signal-to-noise ratio problem of trying to gauge your improvements by measuring your team's progress after a game or tournament.  There are just too many variables interacting during a game or tournament to be able to draw any meaningful cause-and-effect conclusions about what has happened in the aftermath.  This signal-to-noise problem doesn't stop people from pontificating after games, saying things like, "we won because we all played together in the second half" or "we completely choked because we let ourselves get psyched out."

After awhile, the others grew tired of Chad's post-game analysis.

Sadly for the post-game pontificators, there is just no way to know what actually happened.  Perhaps, you did win because you all played together or perhaps you won because the wind shifted or because the opposing handler got in a fight with his girlfriend at halftime.  The point is: you'll never know.  There is too much noise (emotion and information) to pick out the signal (useful cause-and-effect information) in a game or tournament.  Because of the signal-to-noise ratio, learning from games and tournaments after the fact is impossible.

So, improvement by post-mortem analysis following games and tournaments is virtually impossible.  But, what about going into a game or tournament with a distinct game plan and gauging your results from there.  For example, a team decides pre-game that they are only going to play man-to-man defense with a backhand force this game so that they can improve on this skill.

Although this team is in much better shape than the improvement by post-game analysis team, they are still destined for frustration and failure.  While they will be better able to decipher the signal from the noise during the game because they are looking specifically at their man-to-man with a backhand force defense, they are still attempting to measure themselves against a moving yardstick.  The problem with the attempt to gain specific information from an opponent is known as the fog of war.

From her position as deep-deep, Karen simply couldn't tell if the cup was effective.

You have to deal with the fog of war in game and tournament situations.  There is so much that is unknown about one's opponent, combined with the uncertainty created by field and weather conditions, and on top of these is the ambiguity inherent in trying to coordinate the effort of the 7 players on your team.  These known unknowns and unknown unknowns interact so constantly and so fiercely that it creates what Prussian military analyst, Carl von Clausewitz, called "a peculiar difficulty... in planning any action".

Again, if your man-to-man defense shuts down the opponent, you can be sure that it really happened.  You were watching carefully.  You studied the interaction between the opposing offense and your defense.  Of course, you know nothing about the other team really.  You don't know if their regular players are there.  If they were trying out a new offense.  If they just outright suck.

You get the point.  Archimedes said: "Give me a place to stand and I can move the earth."  We aren't looking to move the earth at all.  We're just looking to improve our game.  And yet, we run into Archimedes' same problem.  When you try to glean information from games and tournaments, you have no place to stand.  There's nothing to measure the results against.

And therefore, in order to get better, we must practice.  Soon I will write about exactly how we should do that.

What tennis can teach us about ultimate.

I just got back from my weekly tennis lesson.  I play over in Brookline High School's gym on Wednesdays.  Tennis lessons are hard.  You only get an hour and you are playing with 5 other wackers and a pro.  So, you don't get to hit a ton of balls.  To compensate, you try to make every ball you hit count.

Unfortunately, as is the case with most things done by amateurs, you tend to do it wrong.  When I try to concentrate and hit a good shot, I grip the racquet more tightly, tense my arm muscles, and hold my breath at the point of impact.  Every single one of these things is the antithesis of good tennis.  They suck actually.  Gripping the racquet more tightly removes any touch or feel from your shots.  Tensing my arm stops the energy transfer from my hips and robs my shots of power.  And holding my breath does nothing but screw up my balance and make me tired. Now, I'm still a decent player, but my "concentrating" isn't doing my game any favors.  I'm much better when I don't have time to think about each shot and just let my body react.

As my pro says, it all comes down to muscle memory.  Right now, the thought of "concentrate" in my mind causes my body to tense up.  Hopefully as I play more, I can relearn how to concentrate while staying loose because that is how the best players do it.   The only solution I'm told is to hit more balls and "concentrate" less in order to loosen up.  A tennis player who is loose and breaths has more touch, more power, moves better, and can play at a high level much longer than one who is tight.

So what does any of this have to do with ultimate?  Well, it got me thinking about why some players rise to the challenge of strong competition and some seem to wilt.  I think that it has something to do with that same muscle memory that I'm trying to relearn in tennis.

Everybody plays ultimate better when they are loose.  We throw better.  We cut better.  We flow better.  So, why aren't we loose all the time?  One word: evolution.

Our ancestors were competing for some serious stakes: life and death.  That's a far cry from bragging rights and maybe the first round at the bar.  When you are fighting for your life, tightening up makes some sense.  You may need every last ounce of strength to stay alive, so your muscles respond by contracting to their limit  in order to most efficiently fight or run. Today on the field, we aren't fighting for our lives, but often times our bodies respond to the stress of competition as if we were.  We get stressed.  We get tight.  We play worse.

So, what's the solution.  How can we play better when faced with stiff competition?  Well, the cliched ultimate response would be that we should just "chill out" and "take it easy".  Sadly, these dismissive sayings do little more than annoy a player who is feeling stressed and playing worse.   

I hate to disappoint, but there is no magic pill that a player can take to react better to the stress of competition.  At least no magic pill that won't affect the rest of his game negatively (lol drugs). Once a player gets on the field in a high stress game, it is too late for him to do anything about the stress.  It will affect him how it affects him.

If a player wants to play better under stress, then they need to: play more often under stress. This is the only way to improve muscle memory.  Practice hard against the toughest competition you're likely to find: your teammates.  The more elevated you can get your stress level in practice, the more your body will learn to cope with the stress.  It is too hard on the body to be in that tight state for long stretches.  Eventually, it gives in to a more relaxed level of alertness.

Now, writing this is easy.  Practicing hard is a huge pain in the neck.  The fact is: your body doesn't like to be stressed.  You will come up with all kinds of excuses for why you want/need to practice at a lower level.  Maybe your hamstring is a little sore or you're just looking to work on your hammers.  You'll always have an excuse as to why you don't want to work hard and stress yourself.  

Those excuses are cold comfort, however, when you aren't able to play your best in a tournament in which you'd like to play your best.

What the first principle of defense suggests about offense.

“What is of supreme importance in war is to attack the enemy's strategy.”

-Sun Tzu

In previous posts, I have tried to construct the defense that logically follows from the premise found in the first principle of defense: when the disc is in motion, the offense has the advantage; when the disc is at rest, the defense is able to gain the advantage.  In this post, I will examine what sort of offense would logically follow from that premise.

First, it is important to note that a disc at rest is a necessary condition for the defense to gain the advantage, but it is not sufficient.  In other words, there can be plenty of good offenses that allow the disc to be held for long periods by a single player.  If a team chooses this static offensive strategy, however, they must acknowledge that they have opened the door for a well designed defense to gain the advantage over them.  And this door, once opened, can be difficult to shut.

Given this, my offensive strategy is based around moving the disc quickly before the defense is able to set up.  Whenever the disc moves, the defense needs time to set up properly. Accordingly, the offenses best opportunities will occur during this time.  As long as the disc is moving, the defense must react to its motion.  The better the defense, the quicker the reaction. But, every defense will lag behind the offense they are reacting to somewhat.

Impatient anteater refuses to let his defense lag behind.

"Okay," you say, "I get it.  Let's move the disc.  But, where should we move it?"  Obviously, all things being equal, we'd like the offense to move downfield toward the endzone we are attacking.  Strangely enough, all things are not equal.  Different defenses will bother different throws.  This is up to the individual thrower to decide which throw offers the highest expected value.  

What is important in this decision, however, is for the thrower to consider what the defense wants him to do.  It isn't very difficult to tell what most defenses want you to do as a thrower. They will force you to either throw a forehand or a backhand.  For this discussion of offense, I will assume the more common forehand force.  Now that this has been decided, we know that the defense wants us to throw to the forehand side.  

Our opponent has given us a great deal when this forehand force is revealed.  We now know that the defense will look to cut the field in half by positioning their marker in the way of our thrower's normal backhand.  The field defenders will then play one or more steps closer to the forehand side of the field in an attempt to better contest the throws that should go there.  This is our enemy's strategy.  How do we attack it?

We attack it by breaking the mark at every conceivable opportunity.  Unless we have an amazing opportunity to do what the defense wants us to do, we should look to do exactly what they don't want us to do.  For example, we should throw to the forehand side of the field if the receivers are uncontested and the yardage is good.  This is too good of an opportunity to pass up because the throw to the forehand side is basically undefended.  Combine an undefended throw with an undefended cut and you'll see great offensive efficiency.

Most defenses, however, do an okay job of contesting a lot of the cuts on the forehand side of the field.  In this case, the offenses goal should not be to force a throw into the strength of the defense.  Instead, the offenses goal should be to throw into the weakness of the defense (the backhand side of the field.  The backhand side of the field must be the defenses weakness because the field defenders are giving up 1 or more steps on cuts to that area.

How do we attack the defense's weakness?  We break the mark.  Breaking the mark can be done any number of ways, but the easiest is to pivot so that you are facing the marker squarely, then throw around or over him.  Fakes help a great deal in this spot.  The nice thing about breaking the mark is that your receiver will likely be uncontested on the break side and so should catch a halfway decent break throw almost 100% of the time (provided it actually gets to him).

Catching a break throw is so easy, even this actor could do it.

There are two basic breaks: for yardage and position, and just for position.  When you throw a break for yardage and position, it has to be a pretty good throw because more defenders will be in the vicinity.  When you throw a break just for position (aka a dump), it just has to get there.

The break itself does not often destroy a defense.  And how could it?  Most often, the break will not gain any yards.  The throw that directly follows the break is the one that can destroy a defense.  This is because the throw following the break can be to receivers who have a massive advantage over the field defenders.  In essence, while the defense was initially cutting down the field to half of its original size through the force, the break allows the offense to have the entire field to work with.  Field defenders are caught in no man's land as their angles of defense are completely inadequate to respond to the receivers new potential angles of attack.

Of course, if an offense waits for a few seconds after a break throw, then the defense can recover. The field defenders will readjust their angles of defense to account for the new disc position and the new marker will position himself in such a way as to cut off half the field.  This is why it is so important that the receivers time their cuts so that they begin just as the break throw is being caught.  This is also known as flow.  The break throw plus cut for big yardage on the break side is the nightmare scenario of every man-to-man defensive scheme that employs a traditional force (ie most of them).

So, the first principle of defense suggests two things about offense.

1. The offense should move the disc as quickly as possible.

2. The offense should try at all times to avoid the defense's strength and attack the defense's weakness.

Are all Ds just offensive mistakes?

In thinking about my previous post about the dump throw and how it can vastly reduce the amount of unforced errors for an offense, I realized that I don't really understand Ds.  Before I ask for your opinion,  I think that it is useful to define our terms.

D - A turnover directly caused by a defensive player.  Typically refers to a turnover caused by a field defender who intercepts or knocks down a throw.  I will also use it to refer to a point block made by a marking defender.

Unforced error - A turnover that is not caused by a defensive player.

Mistake - a throw that the offense, if given the chance to do over again, would not make regardless of the actual outcome of the throw *.  

*a horrible throw that ended up being caught by a receiver for a score after being tipped by several defenders would still qualify as a mistake.

Basically, I'm asking if the offense is ever not at fault when there is a turnover.  Does the defense have any real agency?  Or do they simply have to position themselves so as to best take advantage of offensive mistakes when they occur?

Inquisitive Horse wants to know your opinion.

The most important throw in ultimate.

The man with insight enough to admit his limitations comes nearest to perfection.

-Johanne Wolfgang von Goethe

So far, almost every post I've made has had to do with defense.  I figured that I would change it up with today's post.  As I've written previously, I believe that offenses at the non-elite club level turn the disc over in about 65% of their offensive possessions.  This statistic is purely of my own making.  If you feel that it is different (especially if you have stats), I invite you to share your information and thoughts.  I also believe that only about 10% of the turnovers could be categorized as Ds.  The remaining 55% of the offensive turnovers are unforced or slightly forced errors by the offense (mainly throwaways and drops).

The fact that 55% of the offensive possessions end due to unforced errors is sad.  It's very sad.  I don't mean to suggest that no thrower or receiver should ever make a mistake.  We're all only human.  However, making the occasional mistake is a far cry from making a mistake more than half of the time.  

Even Self-Satisfied Horse takes offensive mistakes seriously.

Now, I understand that 55% does not refer to any one player, it refers to the offense as a whole. 

And perhaps, some will suggest that the individuals making up an offense are each only making the occasional mistake with the aggregate of those mistakes being the 55%.  But, I disagree.

Having 55% of your offensive possessions end due to unforced errors is NOT a simple aggregate of rare individual mistakes.  It instead reflects a pervasive disregard for throwing limitations, an incoherent offensive strategy, and tactics that are either lazy or fundamentally poor.

My solution to the 55%, the most important throw in ultimate, the savior of championship caliber college and elite club teams is: the dump.  The dump or reset does not refer to a specific type of throw.  It can be a backhand, forehand, hammer, scoober, push pass, chicken wing, pizza toss, etc.

The dump or reset refers to the purpose of the throw, which is to re-initiate the offense from an offensively advantageous position on the field.  I define an offensively advantageous position to be in the middle third of the field (aka not near either sideline) with the disc in the hands of a handler.

Only an idiot would impose a fine for the making the most important throw in ultimate.

Why is the dump so important?

The answer to this question goes back to the 55% of offensive possessions that end with an unforced error.  I believe that disproportionate number of these unforced errors come from: non-handlers (aka people who are uncomfortable making throws under pressure), throws made under pressure close to the sidelines, and throws made to avoid being stalled.  In short, unforced errors come from throws made by non-ideal throwers in non-ideal circumstances.

These non-ideal throwers can make great throws.  And great throws can come under pressure from near the sidelines and to avoid being stalled.  However, just because great throws can come in these spots doesn't mean that we should attempt throws from these spots.  

These spots (when the disc is in the hands of non-handlers, or when the thrower is under pressure near the sideline, or when the stall count is high) are situations where the offense needs to prioritize safety over taking a chance on a non-dump throw.  As we've seen taking a chance on a non-dump throw in these spots is a big reason for the high number of unforced errors that plague offenses at this level. The safe throw in these spots is the dump or reset.

Why is the dump safe?

The dump is safe because: 

1. It gets the disc back in the hands of the person whose disc control your team trusts the most, the handler.  All things being equal, the offense would rather have the disc in the handler's hands than anyone else's.

2. It gets the disc back into the middle third of the field.  From this position, the handler is able to use the entire field for his next throw and receivers are able to target any area of the field for their cuts.  The trouble with keeping the disc near the sideline is that the sideline acts as an extra defender, cutting down on the available target area for receivers to cut into.

3. It resets the stall count.  This allows everything to settle down.

But, why is the dump the most important throw in ultimate?

Well, if you haven't been moved by the above arguments for utilizing the dump, then consider this: the dump is a high percentage throw that allows the offense to maintain its advantage over the defense by changing the point of attack.  Given the first principle of defense posts where I talked about how the defense's job is basically to keep the disc in one place so that it can gain an advantage over the offense; it logically follows that by simply moving the disc, the offense can gain an advantage over the defense.  And because the dump is the highest percentage way for the offense to move the disc, the dump is the most important throw in ultimate.

Defensive Communication (the sounds of silence)

The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.

-George Bernard Shaw

Everybody's talking at me.  I don't hear a word they're saying.

-Harry Nilsson

The ultimate field can be a lonely place, especially if you are a defender.  Unlike offensive communication, which is characterized by excessive eye contact between throwers and receivers, defense is communication cannot be non-verbal.  Often, a defender cannot afford to take his eye off his mark without blowing his assignment.  And even when a defender is positioned in such a way as to have a view of a teammate as well as the receiver, it is unlikely that the pair of defenders will have time to exchange meaningful glances.

This does not mean, however, that defenders should give up on communication.  On the contrary, verbal communication is arguably the defense's greatest advantage.  What I mean by this is that the offense needs to worry about giving away information to the defense through verbal communication.  If a thrower were to yell "go long" 3 seconds before every huck, the offense would lose it's main advantage: the element of surprise.  The defense has no such worry as defense is, by definition, responding to the offense.  Even if the thrower hears a defender scream switch as his man goes deep, the thrower doesn't necessarily gain any advantage unless the switch doesn't happen and the thrower wouldn't have noticed the deep cut without the "switch" call.

We can agree, therefore, that communication for a defense can be at worst a neutral and at best a significant advantage.  Defenders literally have nothing to lose by talking.  So, why then can we hear a pin drop most of the time we are playing defense? 

Self-conscious Pin hates quiet defenses when he's trying to drop.

1. Defenders aren't paying attention to what the offense is trying to do.

2. Defenders are paying attention to what the offense is trying to do, but they don't know how to communicate what is happening to other defenders.

3. Defenders are paying attention and know how to communicate, but are embarrassed to do so because others may not know what to do or because they fear that yelling on the field makes them look aggressive/foolish.

Let's sort out these reasons.  

1. This can be solved by paying attention and getting more experience playing with teammates who are also paying attention.  It is also solved by understanding what your particular defensive strategy does and doesn't do. Truthfully, most of the defensive silence comes from a defense not knowing exactly what it is trying to do.  People are correctly reticent when they don't know what is going on.

2. This is a serious problem.  It is useless for captains and team leaders to scream about "needing to communicate" without giving defenders the vocabulary to do so.  We use these different calls to even out the information concentrations in the defense.  The marking defender knows a great deal more about what the thrower is doing than the field defenders do, so he communicates details of the thrower's actions to the field defenders.  The field defenders know a great deal more about the shape of what the receivers are trying to do than the marking defender, so they communicate the details of the receivers actions to the marking defender.

Marking Defender Calls to Field Defenders

-"Up": The most basic and arguably most important call is "up".  "Up" should be screamed by every defender or bench player who sees a throw released by a thrower.  The "up" call needs to be repeated with emphasis until all field defenders react to the call.  Obviously, it is most important for the defender on the targeted receiver to react.  Often, especially on deep throws, this requires repeating the "up" call as well as repeating the defender's name so that he gets the message.  The "up" call is so important because field defenders cannot always see the disc.  They are often blind as to what is going on apart from their receiver's movements.  This call allows them to stay in contact with the play while staying in contact with their receiver.

-Piggybacking on the "up" call are several calls that can be made to help a defender whose back is to the disc after the up cal is made.  These calls are details about the throw that the defender would know if he could see the throw himself.  Calling out things like "floating", "right", "left", "directly over head", "turn for it", etc. can all be useful to the defender who cannot see the disc.  To know exactly which call to make, you must be able to put yourself in the position of the tracking defender and call out which details you would need to make the play if you were in his position.  We make these calls because there are times on hucks when a defender must concentrate on sprinting with the receiver and cannot look for the disc without giving up an easy score.

Field Defender Calls to Other Field Defenders

-"Switch": the "switch" call is used when field defenders trade receivers or trade defensive areas during the run of play.  The key to getting the most out of the "switch" call is to make it early and make sure that the defender you want to switch assignments with understands that you are talking to him.

Some men need a little help with the switch.

-"Help": the "help" call is the nightmare version of the "switch" call.  A field defender makes the "help" call when he has no chance to make the play that he is sure is coming.  The "help" call is basically telling the other field defenders to abandon ship and make a play if they can.  As such, it should be used sparingly in spots where the field defender is clearly beat and his receiver is going to gain serious yardage or score.

-"In" or "I'll take the in" paired with "Out" or "I'll take the out": this pair of calls are made before play starts.  The "in" portion is made by a defender or two defenders at the front of the stack.  The "out" portion is made by a defender or two defenders at the back of the stack.  These calls are premeditated "switches".  The field defenders in the stack know that the front defender or two front defenders will play the in-cut or in-cuts and that the back defender or two defenders will play the deep cut or deep cuts.

Field Defender Calls to Marking Defenders

-"No forehand" or "No backhand": These are two calls that are especially useful to defenders marking the thrower.  These calls are made to communicate to the marking defender to which side he should shade his mark and get active with his hands.  The marking defender cannot see the cuts that are coming from behind him, but the field defenders can.  This communication from field defenders to marking defenders is the most difficult, but can also be the most beneficial.  These calls are used when something in the field defensive plan has gone wrong and the field defenders need a couple seconds to play catch up.

-"No big": This call is used to communicate that the field defenders are especially vulnerable to a huck and that the marker should step back from the thrower and make himself as wide as possible.

This man is trying to prevent the ocean's big forehand huck.

3. If you are genuinely embarrassed about communicating on defense, get a new sport.  Honestly, ultimate is difficult enough without you acting the part of the blushing bride.