Thoughts.

Transition zones are one of those things that coaches love to pull out of their strategic hats*. They can be powerful things when leveraged in the right situations.

What is a transition zone? Simply put, you run a zone set that you don’t intend to run persistently, but rather plan on shifting to a man (or clam, or other zone set, if you’re devious) after some set condition has been met.

What condition? For example:

• A certain number of throws are made (by far the most common–usually this ranges from 3-7 passes, depending on your goals)
• A position on the field is reached (ie, halfway to the endzone, or on a sideline)
• The set is broken in some way (ie, a trap gets beaten, or a pass gets around/over the cup/wall)

What sort of condition you use and what sort of zone you throw depends on your goals. I covered some of the goals of a given set when I discussed each (and will cover goals of other sets later), but generally a transition zone’s primary uses are:

1. To break up an O-line’s offensive flow. If you’ve been getting hosed by set play after set play, but aren’t confident in the ability of your zone set to stop them (or aren’t looking to challenge them with it just yet), throwing a transition zone for a few throws might be just what you needed to take them out of their comfort zone.
2. To cause confusion and get a turn. Similar to your clam set (all junk D’s more or less fill the same role as a transition zone), showing zone to start can be confusing if all you’ve run is man, but transitioning also creates a lot of chaos–for both O and D–and, generally speaking, chaos works against the offense.
3. To force an O-line to take something new. You can throw a 1-3-3 and try to force them to take more over-the-tops or get to a sideline when they’ve been working the short game all game (you can make this adjustment myriad other ways too). Sometimes you’re just throwing any old zone to leverage #1 and #2, but other times you’ll want to run it for a little longer and make the O prove itself (this might not always mean a transition, of course).

A couple important considerations for making the transition:

• Your D line should be practiced in making the change–the O can take advantage of a slow adjusting D despite the confusion.
• Be clear on what the transition condition is, and get your D players keying in on who they should pick up just BEFORE this condition is met (ie, look for your man on 2 if it’s transition at 3 throws)
• Primary threat is always the deepest threat. You can recover from a couple passes upfield in transition; a huck to the endzone is final.
• That said, pounce on the short stuff! You really need the disc to not be moving for a transition to be effective, so a seamless shift from a cup to a man on the dump and a man on the mark + immediate upfield covered is a big boon.
• Know who your teammates are taking. Simply pointing works here; with more experience, develop subtler methods so the O is slower on the uptake.

At a high level, your transition shouldn’t LOOK like a transition. If your transition is on 4 throws, and you have sidelines counting throws (alerting the O line to a potential transition), you don’t necessarily have to sprint over to your woman at the 4th throw. Drift, be prepared to spring into action if they start cutting, but let the O keep wondering as long as possible (keep the sidelines counting throws too).

• Double bonus points for a silent transition–that especially takes practice though, as defenders can be easily distracted by on-field happenings and lose track of the throw count.

Other kinds of transitions?

As for transitions other than zone-to-man…keep in mind that generally speaking, there are efficiency concerns with practicing a man-to-zone transition or the like a ton if you’re only going to use it a point or two a game. Of course, that point or two could be universe point, but weigh carefully how your team’s resources (time, especially full-team time, and mental/physical effort) are being deployed–get your fundamentals in order first.

Now, if I were looking at setting up a man-to-zone transition, the absolute primary consideration would be when to make the transition–I think you want the disc to be moving somewhere that your team would be least exposed in transition–ie, a bad dump (one that doesn’t lead to a swing) or other such motion in the backfield that doesn’t enable a quick strike for yardage (or at least, not deep yardage).

Secondly, I think such a transition would mean more or less giving up on the notion of pre-set positions. Even if your deep started last in the stack, who’s to say she’d still be there after 3, 5 throws? Versatility in your players is key, and I think this is probably the number one hindrance to effective implementation–what if your short stubby handler winds up deep? You can shift once the zone is set, but it might be too late by then.

Thirdly, it’d probably be easier and make more sense to shirk a “zone set” in favor of something more junk-y. This gives your players more flexibility to work in transition rather than falling prety to defensive tunnel vision, running to play their ‘position’ and missing the actual/imminent threat.

Savvy field vets are more or less requisite if you’re thinking of trying it as anything other than a novelty.

Generally speaking, a clam/junk D set will be your best bet for these sorts of unorthodox transitions, simply because they have an inherent flexibility to them that other sets don’t.

You might also try zone-to-zone transitions, going from a 1-3 to a 3-2 and shifting your defensive priorities by doing so; this happens to some extent with trap looks, so with some clear guidelines it would seem doable.

What are your thoughts?

*I can say this with somewhat decent authority having looked at the Huddle’s college survey data (I helped trying to identify some topics based on the data for feature authors to write about–won’t say anything else until they publish, though).

Gwen’s point about a 4-person cup being able to push the disc back on dump/swings more than other zones brings up an important facet of any good cup–the ability to, at minimum, keep the disc from moving forward on dump-swing looks.

If a team can’t work the disc up using the easy dump-swing you’ll force them to resort to other methods–generally speaking, “other methods” means methods you’re more prepared to D and/or riskier throws, so this is a good thing.

As Gwen alludes, it’s the responsibility of the far point in the mark to lock down on the swing, or at least cut off the upfield passing lane:

As the disc is thrown to another handler, (assuming it is not on the sideline yet) the pusher/point on that side takes an angle to cut off the next swing pass, then closes in–sometimes to mark, sometimes to just take away the passing lane (depending on the positioning of the other pusher/point and the threats on the field).

This, I’ve found, is an often-neglected but crucial skill to teach your cup players–to not focus on where the disc is going, but where the disc might go next.

Other things I would list as “cup fundamentals:”

• Responding to actual threats, rather than the marker’s fakes–that is, knowing where the targets are behind you and ignoring the fakes to where they aren’t
• Along the lines, ‘flaring out’ as a cup to take away continues if the disc is swung all the way across the field, rather than sprinting straight to your ‘position’ and leaving somebody open in the backfield.

What’s on your list? How do you go about teaching this to your young cuppers? I’m traveling in Taiwan this week so I don’t (or rather, won’t–I’m typing this on Sunday) have time to do longer posts right now, but I’ll be back with clam/junk sets and transition zones next week.

Gwen shares her thoughts on running the 4-person (or 4-man or 4-woman if you prefer) cup below. A lot of what she offers applies not just to the 4pc but can be applied to other zones as well.

Thanks a lot Gwen!

You can find Gwen’s handiwork all over, from the Huddle to Inside College Ultimate to the newly-created UPA Board Blog.

In my mind, the big difference between a 4-person cup zone (why doesn’t anyone call it a 4-2-1?) and a 1-3-3 is the emphasis on pushing the disc backwards in the 4-person cup. The trap looks exactly the same, but in the middle of the field and on the non-trap sideline, the cup curls around, making the passing lanes out of the cup angle back much more than against a 1-3-3 or even a 3 person cup. As the disc is thrown to another handler, (assuming it is not on the sideline yet) the pusher/point on that side takes an angle to cut off the next swing pass, then closes in–sometimes to mark, sometimes to just take away the passing lane (depending on the positioning of the other pusher/point and the threats on the field). A 4-person cup was initially designed to contest the swings of a 3-person handler set, and works quite well to make it hard for the handlers to gain yards through swinging. It’s the ability of the cup to curl that really challenges the swings and can push the offense backwards.

Another great thing about the 4-person cup is that it allows for a lot of flexibility within a point to change up the zone you’re playing. You can switch from FM to trapping quite easily. You can also switch between different types of traps with just an audible. You can also pull one of the mid-mids out of the cup to act as a short deep if your opponents have dropped a couple of throws into the space behind the cup (a general weak-spot of the 4-person cup zone). Alternatively, you can have one of the mid-mids or points play person-D against the dump–taking away crashes and easy resets, challenging the thrower to make a longer and riskier pass to another player not guarded person-on. With an experienced 4-person cup zone team, you can transition back and forth from the standard 4-person cup set-up to a number of these different permutations.

The hardest position to play in the 4-person cup zone is wing. There’s a lot of ground to cover if a team likes to try to go over the top of the cup. The wings and deep deep usually have more than one person to cover each, so the ability to triangulate the threats is key. Speed is also a must to be able to cover big swaths of the field. When the disc gets into the redzone, many teams will transition out of zone, but it can still be effective as long as the wings and deep deep re-orient themselves to each take away a third of the shortened field behind the cup. In general, the requirements of wings and deep deep when playing a 4-person cup are pretty much the same as in a 1-3-3 and the spacing is roughly identical.

I’m not terribly fond of the “standard” zone set, as I’ll touch upon at the end. That said, it IS a classic zone and it wouldn’t be popular if it didn’t work, so here it is.

I should disclaim that the zone I describe, with goals, risks, etc, like the ones before it, is simply how I’m familiar with it–your mileage can and should vary.


Personnel:

• Three in the cup:
  • One middle (upfield), who works with the middle-middle
  • One on-point (mark)
  • One off-point (non-mark)

  Depending on whether you’re running a force middle or a trapping zone your point/off-point designations will either change dynamically as the disc moves or be more permanent designations.

• One middle-middle, whose job is to take charge of protecting the middle of the field. Particularly, he ensures no throws go through the cup or over the top (short yards) to poppers, as well as communicating with the middle of the cup (and possibly the points).
• Two wings, whose general job is to cover the long over-the-top and continues off the dump-swing, but who can “pinch” in to the middle of the field closer to the cup as coverage and situation dictates.
• One deep, whose job is to not get toasted. Oh, and he should be communicating with the wings and potentially the middle-middle depending on distance and field savvy.

Setup

The setup for a standard zone has a lot in common with a 3-2-2, with the pivotal difference being the presence of the middle-middle, who almost (but not quite) acts as a fourth functional member of the cup, roving around in the space behind.

This middle-middle has several simultaneous responsibilities:

• Communicate with the cup about crashes,as well as to the cup’s middle (upfield) on which way to shade
• Fill holes in the cup, either by moving into them or directing the middle middle to do so
• Be constantly on the lookout for poppers lurking behind/around him
• Keep an eye on the thrower to be ready to D passes forced through or over. (Being in position is worthless if you don’t act on it).

Each (all) of these things can be very easy to do or very hard, depending on the team you’re up against and how active the offense chooses to be in terms of movement. The middle-middle position is the lynchpin of this set.

The wings also contribute to midfield defense–generally speaking, they stick to whoever’s on their side, but as the disc moves farther from their sideline they have the liberty to pinch in towards the middle (pending communication with the deep to ensure coverage of any deep shots). Your traditional wing role in a force-middle standard zone will wind up doing a lot of man coverage in the backfield on a swing before the cup gets set (and even afterwards), and pinching in/looking to help as the disc moves to the other side.

I can’t speak a ton to a trap in this set, as I’ve never played on a team that’s run a standard zone with a trap, but I imagine it’d look something like this, very similar to a 3-2 only the middle-middle has a bit more leverage to bait and make a play close to the cup (as opposed to a 3-2 where the bait typically comes from farther away), or simply remain in a lockdown, setting up the wing to play a role similar to the short deep in a 3-2. Anybody have some experience/differences to specify here?

Goals

More or less the same as the 3-2-2–you’re still focusing on shutting down the backfield, but you’re asking your backfield to think more in terms of actual zones instead of individual people, leading to a more liberal switching mindset. This can work well with an experienced line (or a static/predictable offense).

It’s also worth noting that this shift in mindset tends to save energy in your backfield (never much rest for the weary in the cup, sadly), and by placing more responsibility on your middle-middle you shift some load off of the wings compared to having two short deeps and two deep deeps in a 3-2-3.

Risks

Again, I’ll refer you to the 3-2-2. The standard is in some ways more prone to break down on a pass that beats the cup simply because backfield players are more likely to have space instead of defenders manning up on them.

The biggest risk with running a standard, in my mind, is what I’ll call defensive tunnel vision. Say you’re a wing in this set–you “do your job” and cover the one popper who wanders over into your side, shut him down on the swings, etc. Then, on a swing back to the other side, this popper goes ALL the way over to the other sideline, out of your area–you let him go–and gets the swing pass, as the other wing was preoccupied covering a different player.

Is it your fault that popper got the disc? Oh, of course not. And that’s the problem. Though the zone encourages a mindset that encourages dynamic switching and area coverage rather than sticking to individuals so much, situations can emerge where you are simply out-numbered in a given zone (a fundamental tenet of good zone offense is to flood an area and use that numbers advantage). It’s imperative that such defensive inefficiencies are recognized and proactively addressed–it’s easy to write the above occurrence off as a one-time event, but good teams will systematically exploit a systematic flaw.

Perhaps this is just my relative lack of high-level experience running this kind of zone showing, and this issue doesn’t crop up as much as I think. If you’re teaching this zone to a relatively inexperienced group, however, you should be wary of this effect and take precautions to get your group thinking less in terms of static positions and more in terms of the dynamic and proactive.

A 3-2-2 zone has a lot in common with the “standard” 3-3-1 (or 3-1-3, 3-1-2-1, whatever), but I much prefer the 3-2 as roles are a bit more clear-cut and there is less dependency on a single deep or a super-savvy middle-middle for success (I’ll write about the standard next time).

Personnel

• Three in the cup, further subdivided:
  • One middle, who should be able to set a pretty strong mark if you’re going to trap
  • One on-point (mark), who doesn’t need to be exceptional on the mark but does need to be able to avoid being broken easily
  • One off-point (non-mark)–this would be a good place to put a quick, field-savvy veteran if you have to choose. (A good alternative for this player is as a short deep)

  Depending on whether you’re running a force middle or a trapping zone your point/off-point designations will either change dynamically as the disc moves or be more permanent designations. Additionally, depending on how comfortable your cup is you can shift roles off of a trap, too–this allows for slightly quicker response on a swing.

• Two short deeps/middles/popper defenders/whatever you want to call them. Generally speaking these two are looking to man up on whoever is directly behind the cup or in that general vicinity. Lots of communication here will boost coverage efficiency.
• Two wings/(deep) deeps. Neither is a “true” deep, but rather the two communicate and shift dynamically as the disc moves to contain deep threats and/or pressure sideline/close threats depending on how the offense moves.

Setup

I’ll again refer you to the pictures here. The 3-2, in contrast to the 1-3-3, only has 3 players in the front field around the disc–this allows for more players in the backfield and better coverage, making this zone a bit more usable in non-windy/weather conditions if leveraged properly. Against a normal 3-handler offensive set, you can generally have your four in the backfield man up and have a great deal of success in making passes difficult (which is why I have omitted movement priorities for the defense here–outside of the wings being more likely to stay behind their men and the short deeps more likely to be between their men and potential holes in the cup, they’re going to be moving with them), but with experience you might find switching a more efficient and effective route.

The middle again acts as a sort of “field general” for the cup, likely directing how tight or loose the cup is (tight to discourage passes through and crashes; loose to force short over-the-tops to become long ones and take up more of the backfield in case of a swing), and again acts as a crash coverer coming straight in to the disc when poppers move in.

The cup here appears to be forcing towards the forehand sideline but in a force-middle set the force would simply switch to the other side when the disc moves far enough in that direction (the point and off-point in the cup can switch roles to do this, or not–effectiveness of this depends on how comfortable your cup is working together). The off point has some liberty to try to D throws that go too far upfield to her side, but like with the 1-3 the cup’s first priority is to stop passes from going through. Communication from the backfield when the through is not an option allows the cup to be much more dynamic.

In a trap set, roles again shift. The middle of the cup will become the mark (but note the comments suggesting an alternative), while the former mark will typically remain around the last thrower and guard against the easy backfield dump (+ swing). This usually means man D, but she’ll need to be careful not to get pulled too far away from the disc (or too far upfield if the handler comes close–this qualifies as a crash and should be switched off of), as both leave a hole for a second dump to fill. On the chance that a short dump does get off to her woman, she can set a mark (likely canceling the trap but keeping the disc on the sideline) or let the middle continue to mark (risking a swing); this is a matter of judgment and comfort with changing roles in the cup,
as well as a strategic decision.

The upfield in the cup remains upfield, but should shade towards the middle of the field to discourage a break throw to get out of the trap (another trap where a short pass towards the sideline is considered a positive outcome). Generally speaking one of the short deeps will act as another upfield for the trap set, taking any short cuts in that sideline area, and the near wing’s primary duty becomes preventing any long throws up the line.

The far-side wing now shifts into more of a true deep role, roving the backfield as a hammer stop and also looking to pick up any deep threats.

The money part of this setup again relies on baiting a cross-field throw to D–in this case, the far short-deep will be doing the work. She’ll generally be covering a popper in the backfield, but also be eyeing whoever sets up as a cross-field bailout dump. This bait relies on the mark being able to a) take away a quick inside break cross-field and b) force some kind of floaty throw, ideally a hammer. Quick strikes will generally be too fast to poach, so this is important.

The short deep has a lot of flexibility here–she can choose to bait this throw if she wants (Check Gwen Ambler on baiting with stealth), or she can choose to try and draw a longer over the top by moving more conspicuously to the handler, leaving a popper in the backfield (relatively) open. If the player with the disc doesn’t have that throw this move can make the trap lethal.

While having a spry, devious short-deep can make this trap very effective, it’s also possible to be successful running this trap set without if your opponent doesn’t have good break throws. I’m positive there are teams out there that run this trap with different priorities, so be creative and try different looks with how you place your defenders.

Goals

1. Shut down the backfield. This set allows for man-like coverage against a 3-handler set; as such, an offense will need to be very patient and move the disc upfield slowly with their handlers or working very hard in the backfield for sparse opportunities. In various weather this means a better chance they’ll turn the disc over without you doing anything, and if a team’s handler corps is not particularly strong this set will give you similar odds in most conditions, particularly if you include a sideline trap.

   It’s worth noting that the focus on what’s being taken away is nearly the opposite of a 1-3-3‘s priorities (shutting down rather than baiting in the backfield, applying less pressure to short throws), making these two good sets to throw in tandem during a game to throw off an opponent.

2. Force a lot of throws. Given #1, if you throw a 3-2-2 and it takes the other team dozens of passes to score you’re probably doing a good job. (That said, the name of the game is getting turns…)
3. Trap and punish a weak thrower. This is the general goal of most traps; not a lot more to say here. Unlike the 1-3, however, in a 3-2′s trap the look changes pretty significantly, shifting from little pressure on the handlers to significant pressure on the handlers, and from more or less man coverage in the backfield to something more dynamic, encouraging risky throws. Changes of pace will get you D’s if you can catch the other team unawares.

Risks

1. Doesn’t apply a ton of pressure on the handlers outside of the trap. If you’re running a force-middle style zone you’re inviting a team to make lots of short passes–which can be well and good in the right conditions, but against teams that complete their short throws you’ll want to interject some kind of change-of-pace or calculated risk. A 1-3 has a little more flexibility on the mark to move and pressure the easy dump, but in a 3-2 the mark is also part of the cup and preventing the upfield generally takes precedence.
   Control by: Bait a throw here or there in the cup, have a short deep swoop in and cover another handler. Try and throw them off and get a turn if they avoid the trap (#2).
2. Traps are avoidable. This is true to some extent of all zones, but in contrast to a 1-3, you have fewer players around the disc here and are giving the handlers more leeway to work as they see fit. When you’re not applying a ton of pressure on the handlers, odds are good that eventually they’ll get wise to your trap set and start avoiding the sideline.
   Control by: Changing your defensive set. A force middle with different defensive priorities means their tendency to avoid the sideline will play more into your hands. Consciously choose to have your backfield D poach off when a popper wanders toward the sideline and see if the O will bite.
3. Vulnerable to quick short game. A few good give and gos, handler motion coming from behind the cup–catching passes with momentum to head through the cup–can quickly shred this zone.
   Control by: It’s essential that the middle (or upfield cup in a trap) be ready to pounce on short quick crashes to fight this, or you have some other strategy for making these passes something less than 100%. I wouldn’t recommend this as a regular course of action (as it becomes predictable and exploitable), but a smart mark can occasionally jump in the way in time to discourage or, if lucky, D one of these short dishes. Just be careful of the reach-around foul.

   The mark can also be leveraged with the cup as the disc moves, at some points shading more straight-up and at others shifting more no-dump (with the cup shifting appropriately) to keep the handlers from getting comfortable, predictable gaps, but doing this should be a conscious decision and action your D has rehearsed before game-time to do effectively.

4. A swing or a break to upfield from the trap leaves a lot of defenders out of position, especially if the disc gets all the way to the far sideline or is followed by another pass upfield.
   Control by: It’s imperative that the defense really focus on preventing the long passes–whether that’s a short dump followed by a swing or a single long, quick strike, and similarly the trap needs to lock down on upfield options with priority on preventing passes to the middle of the field. If you have to choose between two, and give up one, choose the bigger threat to the middle and give up the containable short to the sideline.

   If the disc does get past the cup the D shifts into transition mode (whether they’re going to man or not)–I will get to covering this eventually, as it deserves its own post.

Lines of Communication

• Wings to each other. Depending on how comfortable your backfield is, your wings can be very dynamic with where on the field they roam–doing more of a “true man” or switching more actively. In either case, it’s imperitive that both wings be communicating what they see–”she’s coming [your way],” left shoulder,” or “one sneaking [deep on the] far side[line]“, drop off onto her, etc. A good offense will likely force you to make decisions and switch; proactive communication is the best way to be aware of and minimize the threat from this.

• Wings to short deeps. Same as the wings talk with each other, wings and short deeps should be talking too. It can even go so far as to have the wings and short deeps switch roles should the situation call for it–depends on how comfortable your team is working together.
• Short deeps to each other.
• Short deeps to the cup. Heads-up on the crashes. Keep the holes plugged.
• Cup to itself/team. Same deal. The all-important “trap” call should also come from the cup, generally speaking–usually the middle, as her setting the mark is the most essential transition to nail.
• Sidelines to wings for heads-up information (“[She's behind you,] drop!”).
• Sidelines to the upfields in a trap. A trap lends itself very well to sideline talk, so long as your team is moving to follow it. The upfield in the trap is one of the harder positions to play, so reminders of what to take away (“stay right,” “CRASH!”) are a huge help.

This zone benefits a lot from having an experienced line (with zones and with each other). Almost every position on the field has an inherent flexibility to respond to threats as needed, and the potential for shifting roles–between wings and short deeps, in the cup during and after a trap–is large as well. Taking advantage of this flexibility takes experience and practice, but with enough of it you can prepare a line of 7 that will be VERY tough to beat.

If you’re running a team with a lot of depth you could do well to dedicate some of your bottom-roster players who don’t get a lot of PT towards becoming a game-changing zone line (/cup/backfield tandem). Conversely, a team without a lot of depth can similarly build chemistry on a good zone set out of necessity.

Outside of your “standard” 3-3-1 set, a 1-3 is probably the most popular zone out there. It has some variations, but the basics include the following:

Personnel

• One “rabbit” or “puke” or, simply, “perma-mark.” Pretty self-explanatory. Doesn’t need to be a point-blocker (though bonus points if he is), just good at forcing bad throws in marker drill-type situations. Speed and stamina are helpful too.

• Three in the front wall, who, much as their name implies, prevent throws from going through them and instead force passes over or around–like the puke, they chase the disc and are generally in the way of any upfield passes. Your other quick guys go here–tall can be a plus for making over-the-tops hard, but short can be good for closing gaps.
• Three in the back wall, usually subdivided into two wings and one deep. The bigger, more menacing, and athletic they are, the better.

In terms of experience, this zone demands a competent deep (most zones do, but front-loading here makes it particularly important). Having a good “field general” type in the middle of the front wall is a plus too.

Setup

Here’s a look at a general X’s and O’s setup of a mid-field and sideline trap setup running a 1-3. Generally I’m against doing this for zones as diagrams always overgeneralize, but it’s hard to give a clear picture otherwise:

On the left, you can see a midfield setup (defense in blue, offense attacking upwards). The disc is being pushed to the backhand side of the field (the mark is attempting to stop dumps to the flick-side handler).

The front wall is very tight, and the arrows (indicating general movement priorities for each position at that particular point) specify only looking to stop throws through. It’s important not to get too greedy here and instead be content to force the disc to a sideline, where the zone really gets into its groove.

Note the amount of ground the backfield has to cover. The idea is that anything to the middle of the field will be a floaty over-the-top throw, giving a wing time to make the D, good blades notwithstanding. This set is best used in windy conditions to make over-the-tops riskier, but you can pull a wing in closer to the wall to apply more pressure on shorts and force the long over the top. Deep throws by nature take time, so any long throw will give time for the wing and/or deep to get on the receiver and hopefully prevent the catch. These positions generally demand good athletes to be successful against teams that will try the over the tops and long throws. You want to be able to get the D on these throws or, barring that, intimidate enough to discourage those throws in the first place.

On the right is a sideline trap. There are a couple important changes to note here. First, the far (weak-side) wing shifts roles from a deep-ish defender to a behind-the-wall defender full-time; he also is looking very strongly to get a D on the far handler should a good pass go up in that direction (generally a floaty hammer).

Your deep and near (strong-side) wing can do a couple things depending on what the O is doing; the near wing can pinch in to help out with the front wall, leaving the deep to roaming coverage (best in high wind, where the cross-field hammer isn’t viable); or he can drop back a bit more and focus on preventing an up-the-line shot beyond 10ish yards (typically manning up on whoever’s there), giving the deep a bit more help in the backfield.

The magic of this setup happens in the trap on the sideline, when the front wall and puke can work together to prevent an easy reset backwards or towards mid-field. The front wall still focuses on staying tight, preventing throws through the middle. The trap set–the front wall and puke–work together, shifting around to cut off as much of the backfield and cross-field as the offense is looking to use. Here there’s a dump almost directly behind, so the cup has shifted over enough that there’s a sliver on the up-field side–in this situation, a throw further towards the sideline is generally a positive outcome, as it usually allows for a still more effective trap. Were the dump only horizontal, the wall + puke could shift upfield a bit more, allowing for more pressure on up-the-line passes.

The one exception to this nothing-through, nothing-to-the-dump approach is the right guy (non-upfield) in the front wall here. Should he so choose, he can set up such that there’s a sliver of a gap in the wall–not so much as to be an open invitation to throw to that cross-field handler, but enough that, as the stall count gets higher and the mark prevents the easy backfield dump, the handler might risk a throw. This position in the front wall (or cup in similar traps) is commonly referred to as the “glory position,” as baiting this throw presents a great chance to get a layout D (and the accompanying glory, fame, and increased desirability to that hot, single player watching on the sidelines). Also note that the far wing is another potential D source on this pass–it’s one of the juiciest baits you’ll see on an ultimate field.

One additional point applies to both setups–the middle of the front wall, in addition to keeping the wall tight, is the primary “crash-stopper”– that is, when someone behind the wall comes close to the disc for the easy bailout dump (or a handler in the backfield comes up to do the same), the middle will come directly in to the thrower to stop a throw. In theory, this is a slightly shady, vaguely double-team-y practice as you’re essentially playing the thrower instead of the other man, but in practice the best defensive option almost always winds up being getting between the thrower and receiver to cut off that space, and pretty irregardless of where the receiver comes from a defender’s best option is to come straight in.

General Goals

1. To bait long, risky throws. These tend to come in three general flavors:
   • Long/floaty over-the-tops–think hammers and blades
   • Long hucks
   • Cross-field throws to the far handler (from a sideline trap)
2. To overwhelm a handler or cutter in a sideline trap. A tight wall and active mark can make a large field suddenly feel very small, especially if the player with the disc isn’t comfortable with over-the-top throws or breaks. Even if he is, any combination of weather, overconfidence, or underestimation of the backfield defenders can lead to #1. This defense lives and dies on the sideline.
3. To make resets difficult. This goal can vary depending on how much you leverage your mark, but with good communication (more on that in a bit) and a quick mark it often becomes a game of pick-your-poison; either an easy pass to what will become a sideline trap (#2) or a greater effort in order to simply dump it going the other way or backwards (or a risky over-the-top, which is goal #1).

Risks

Every zone takes away something(s) while giving something else, and this set is no exception. Throws that kill this D, followed by how to control for them:

1. Any throw through the wall to mid-field. With so many players around the disc, anything that gets beyond becomes quick fodder for give-and-gos up the field, while the wall does its best just to get set up again. I’ll address what the backfield can do to contain in a later post, as it’s pretty broadly applicable.

   Control by: Keeping the wall tight, even as the disc is being swung from handler to handler.

2. (Good) blades. Wings should be able to get to most of the floaty hammers, but a good fast blade (or other quick over-the-top) can gain big yards in a hurry.

   Control by: Throwing this set only in windy conditions, or against teams you know have poor over-the-tops. This can be augmented with a tall wall, forcing higher passes with more hangtime.

3. Good deep game. While to some extent, a goal of the 1-3 is to bait these long throws, you have to have the personnel deep to control those deep shots.

   Control by: You need appropriate amounts of field savvy and athleticism to manage this, as the backfield defenders are usually outnumbered. What works for you against one team might not against another; gauge their throwers and receivers when deciding whether to throw this set.

4. Quick cross-field dump + swings. Nothing is more demoralizing to this set to have a sideline trap begun and then lose it on a quick swing to the other side before you can even get set. What’s more, the ensuing out-of-position wall leaves massive holes for throws to the mid-field (#1), not to mention uncontested deep looks (#3).

   Control by:

   • This one starts with the mark. Though the mark often has to hurry after the disc, an easy trap to fall into is over-running on the mark, allowing for a quick break; when the disc gets to a sideline, hustle up ’til 5 or so yards out, and then slowly ease in, sealing off the easy dump options as you do. There’s a lot of value to a dump playing a few yards off in a trap situation, preventing quick breaks and forcing the floatier around/over-the-top throws.
   • Outside of the mark, the front wall (and to some extent, the wings) play a role in containing flow past the wall (#1) as the disc is swung–this can mean “flaring out” as a front wall and manning up on players in the backfield for a short time, and this certainly also means good hustle to get over and get in the way (but remember not to create holes by out-running the other parts of the wall). It is significantly easier to manage this cross-field motion if the disc is first forced backwards or to an intermediary dump before it is passed all the way across the field, as this gives the defense extra time to anticipate and adjust.

     The field sense to stop flow during and after the swing takes time and experience to develop, and an experienced front wall can do wonders here. The front wall (or the cup in other sets) should always be looking around as the disc is moving and be proactively taking away those options–I’ve found this one of the hardest skills to teach zone rookies.

Additional concerns include marker fatigue over a point or (especially) tournament (generally speaking, designate one member of the wall to switch in if necessary to help with this) and the biggie:

Communication

I can’t stress this enough, for any kind of defensive set. This begs for its own post (and will get one eventually), but the general lines of communication include the following in a 1-3-3:

• Sidelines to the back wall. The deep, in talking to his wings, can occasionally lose track of a sneaky cutter working behind him–it’s on the sidelines to catch the villain in the act and alert the local authorities. Sidelines can similarly provide “shoulder” cues to the wings or otherwise alert them to impending threats in their coverage zone.

• Deep to wings (and vice-versa). Especially in mid-field situations, where the numbers advantage of the O is more obvious, a good back wall will communicate with who’s taking who as players move. A great deep will be alerting the wings in front of him to players coming into and out of their zones and what threats to pounce on. Failure to communicate here leads to quick, easy, embarrassing goals.
• Wings to the middle of the front wall. Specifically, “crash!” when a player tries to come through the wall. Generally, “left shoulder/right shoulder” if a popper is lurking just behind the wall, so they have a sense of where to expect attempts to pass through (but remember, stay tight).
• The middle of the front wall to the two sides. Generally, “tighter!” Is always applicable. However, some situations will dictate a looser wall is appropriate–for instance, the wall is too close and poppers too far, allowing for easy short over-the-tops with wings unable to stop it; care should be taken to retract when a team again shifts to crashing and attempting to go through, however.
• Sideline to the mark. He needs to know where the handler he’s supposedly preventing throws to is moving. Develop an easy system to communicate this. Brevity is the soul of wit, and the backbone of good on-field communication.

Zone D is hard (hell, ALL D is hard). As Josh Mullen mentions, a set can work wonders against one team and look silly against the next. Always keep your general goals in mind; if you’re forcing your opponent into the situations you want and they’re still beating you, tip your cap and try again (maybe they got lucky) or make adjustments. If you’re taking them out of their flow and buying your subs more time to rest but they still score, realize that the true payoffs might not be apparent until later in the game.

Don’t fret about losing one battle, so long as it’s working in the big picture of the war.

Anybody have anything else to add? I’m sure there are angles I’m missing here, and I’m more than happy to update the post with relevant info.

UPDATE: Some great stuff in the comments.

Man D is hard. There’s more than one way to dictate, and the utility of each depends on the situation and your opponent. A good defender needs to be conscious of when it is appropriate to use which kind of style–here, I’ve phrased it in terms of spacing (and I’ve mused on spacing a bit before), but there’s certainly a lot more depth to it.

My views on the utility of various spacings (please chime in with your own):

Playing close (>I’m talking one step away at most–more like a half-step or right up on your man):

• Pros: you’re in a position to use your body to dictate your man in the direction you want him to go. By planting yourself so close, you block one immediate option–I can set up right behind you deep, for example, and in so doing prevent you from any quick continuation cuts running there–as soon as you turn to go I’m right there, and you have to go around or go the other way to get anything. In many ways, this simplifies your man’s initial set of options, making it a little easier to read and respond to the field situation.
• Cons: close range is easy to deke. If you commit as a defender to taking away the one direction you’re bodying, you can do it, but more commonly a defender is also to pounce on a cut in the other direction, and a good cutter can use your acceleration against you with a one- or two-step cut there. Alternatively, the chop-step-at-you-go-the-other-way cut tends to get defenders in this position on their heels.

Be wary of biting too hard and really hold your ground here–the real trick to success at this distance is learning when to gear up for the D going the other way and when to hold your position and keep dictating instead. Incidentally, this is the sort of man D I think you see a lot of high-level teams preach–good, intense body D.

Playing mid-range (2-3 steps off):

• Pros: you put yourself in a position to easily respond to motion in your direction. If your woman is faster than you, the extra time to respond can be key in shutting her down in at least one direction. This also puts you in a good position, relatively speaking, to clog the lane/be in a position to help on D. If a team has no breakside flow and a suspect deep game, playing mid-range on the open-side in is a sure way to force your opponent to work hard to move the disc. Generally speaking, playing at this distance makes you far less susceptible to getting juked and deked (but be wary of letting her get to close-range on you).
• Cons: you put yourself at an immediate disadvantage in all directions other than the one you choose to take away. If a team uses the break side, you’re likely to only have a shot at setting a mark on the continue, or d’ing up longer, risker breaks. If a team can huck and you’re fronting by this margin (and have no deep help) you’ll want to be a good bit faster than your man to catch up to the long stuff.

This can work pretty well in the context of an intelligent team defense, especially if it uses switches with a last back to maintain pressure on both long and short throws. The main duty in ensuring a setup like that works, however, falls on the mark and handler D to keep the disc from moving to the break side.

It’s also worth noting that this style of D is probably your best bet in muddy/slippery conditions, as a smaller margin tends to force quick responses and slips. In such conditions intelligence and good team D tends to win out over athleticism.

Playing long-range (more than 3ish steps off):

• Pros: This is basically poaching range. Lending your presence to help your teammates–as deep help, looking for opportunities to poach the lane, or otherwise getting in the way of players that are making a play–can do a lot to frustrate an offense.
• Cons: This is basically poaching range. If your man can actually do something, or you’re playing a team that has learned to recognize and exploit poaches, you’re more likely to wind up getting burned than rewarded for this kind of play. A single easy move to the break side of the field (or worse, a wide-open huck) can break down an entire defense, so be wary of how your opponent responds to you here.

This is really only advisable either when your opponent is so far out of the play as to be generally irrelevant to scoring, enough of a liability with the disc as to be a better potential D for your side, or when your opponent is so dominating in one way (generally deep) that you’re willing to completely concede anything else to stop it.

Incidentally, if you wind up at this range during a point chasing your man, it’s worth looking around to see if you can help elsewhere for a second, instead of blindly following (alternatively, beeline to where you can stop them next). Assessing where the real threats are and responding to them is the essence of good team D.

Short-mid range (~1-2 steps):

• Pros: this is a range in which I’d say most high-level defenders stay, especially in horizontal/spread offenses where there’s less assurance of help and clearer indications of your woman’s priority. Generally speaking, you’re attempting to combine the capability to dictate with your body of short range with some of the cushion to respond of mid-range. All it takes is one step in your direction to turn this into short range, and within the span of that extra step you can generally shift to continue dictating in your preferred direction using your body as an obstacle. (be wary of fouling).
• Cons: it’s very difficult to consistently play D at this range–you have a little more time to respond to your man, but as soon as this becomes a short-range situation you’re susceptible to the jukes and dekes (if you’re really on edge you’re susceptible to jukes and dekes before it even gets that close). Keeping this sort of margin is likely the most tiring way to play D, as you have to constantly adjust as your man moves.

For success here, it’s essential to a) know your goal, as far as where you want to dictate and b) be constantly moving under control, remaining conscious of your body position, so you can continue to work towards a). Typically this is a margin you take when you know your woman is a primary cut and she’s moving to set up, potentially relaxing into a larger margin when she’s out of harm’s way (or attempting to establish a more stagnant close-up body).

As a defender, you want to be capable of playing D at all of these ranges as the situation varies within a given point, between points, between games. Learn when you need to ratchet up the intensity, when you can back off to conserve, when you can look to help. Learn how your cutter responds to different spacing in different situations, and don’t let him get comfortable.

I know there are readers with more to say about this, so please leave comments!

Learn it, do it, own it.

Want to be an elite ultimate player? Learn how to play good handler defense.