Bic v. Pipe

[baywatcher]

Sorry to show ignorance, but can somebody explain the difference between a bic and a pipe? I understand both are back row attacks. Also, does the serve receive position of a back row player restrict, as a practical, not legal, matter, the type of back row attack that player can do.

[mikesmith]

The word "Bic" is a shortened and condensed form of the words, "Back Row Quick." It is a really fast back row set usually based off of the setters position, when the setter sets the ball. Just like a quick set would be.

A "Pipe" is a back row set that is hit from a position directly in between (15 feet from either sideline) the sidelines of the court. The "Pipe" is higher than a "Bic" and does not change it's location based on the setter.

The answer to the second question is yes, but that depends on a variety of different factors. Pass, the setter's location, the quickness of the player receiving serve... I'd need a for instance to give you an exact answer.

[baywatcher]

Thanks. Grandson of BarcelonaBob was saying Lawson of Stanford could hit out of the back in 2 of 3 rotations. I'll assume that's actually 5 of 6 rotations while he's in the back, not being able to switch over while receiving serve at least once.

[vbc1]

mikesmith, there needs to be some clarification on your statement. You are correct in the fact that Bic is derived from 'back row quick'. And yes, it is a faster tempo set (between 2-3rd step of attacker). However, the reality of the set is this: The Bic is usually a 'fixed point' set (regardless of the where the setter is at, it is always at the same location). The sets that are based off of where the setter is at are known as 'floating point' sets, and are usually called 30's (behind where a MB would hit a 31) or a 40 (set right over the back of the setter's shoulder). That way, everyone is on the same page on your team. Everything else you mentioned is right on the money

[mikesmith]

vbc1,

I think these days, it's based on wherever you want the "bic" to be based on, team by team. Although, the origination of the "bic" as interpreted by the team I played for was a designed "x" play. Because we ran a front row "1" quick set (our version was approx 1' away from the setter), for the majority of middle blocker attacks, whether in sideout or transition, our "bic" was off of the setter just like our "1" was. That way, whether the ball was passed perfectly or not, the "bic" set was always to look like an "x" play off of the setter's location. We did have a couple "fixed" fast or quick back row sets, but we called them by other names.

It seems like it's simply a team by team thing, so I think we are both right. Some teams, when referring to the "bic" mean a quick pipe, some mean off of the setter, some teams may refer to the "bic" as something different.

[vbc1]

mikesmith, yes, you are correct. It is based on team by team basis. I should have clarified that

[thumpvb]

You both made correct statements about the bic but it is a little more involved too.

The bic is the fast tempo backrow attack that works best off the perfect pass. The closer you run the set to the setter the faster the tempo gets. Now as the pass pushes the setter out of system there is a corresponding diminishing returns on the set because opposing blockers begin to ignore the quick tempo middle option hitting a bic against a set block is not the highest percentage play out there. Some teams set the quick tempo attack into what they percieve as gaps so for example if the middle hitter was running a 31 the gap between a fronting middle blocker will be towards the middle of the court. If the middle is running a front one the gap between the fronting middle and the outside blocker would be just outside of that. Most teams have assigned different names to those sets as it helps the OH to position himself a little better for the attack, and from a scouting standpoint it more accurately describes a set location so you can scheme to stop it.

The pipe set is what you usually will see in extreme out of system first swing or transition situations. It is a higher set typically middle of the court that gives the hitter a little more time to see the block and make a smart aggressive swing.

[vbc1]

thump, if i were running a clinic, that is how i would put it. it is very easy for us coaches to just put this into motion, but i (along with mikesmith i am sure) did not want to get in too deep with the technicalities of it all.. well put

[baywatcher]

Thank you. Actually, I like the technical explanations much more than the sophmoric bickering that dominates this site sometimes. I suspect that many differences comes from phrasing.

Since bic refers to back row quick, I believe a closer condensation would be berk, an English slang word for idiot. On my team the code word for a bic, or berk, will be Dufus. If you hear that you know what's coming.

[bunnywailer]

May 1, 2010 0:06:16 GMT -5 baywatcher said:

Thanks. Grandson of BarcelonaBob was saying Lawson of Stanford could hit out of the back in 2 of 3 rotations. I'll assume that's actually 5 of 6 rotations while he's in the back, not being able to switch over while receiving serve at least once.

Every player on the court is only backrow for 3 out of the 6 rotations in volleyball.

As the L2, Lawson is backrow in rotations 1,5, and 6. In rotations 2,3, and 4 he is a frontrow player and would be attacking at the left pin.

[vbc1]

not gonna lie: even though i know this is lighthearted banter, i am digging the fact that the only people on here are coaches, or in some past playing experience capacity and knows the game well. This thread could actually be fun compared to all the gossip threads (yes, we are all guilty of joining in once in a while when we are bored.. its ok)...

[southernspiker]

thank you fro the clarification...which set is more effective?

[lonewolf]

May 3, 2010 18:54:22 GMT -5 southernspiker said:

thank you fro the clarification...which set is more effective?

If they are both properly run, the Bic would be more effective as there is less time for the block to react (espescially if it is correctly accompanied by attackers moving to other zones at a fast tempo). It also allows less time for the back court to make any adjustments for better positioning.

The effectiveness can be shown by how much the plays (along with the Red) are being used by the women's teams in some of the top international leagues championships recently; and with the efficiency that they are scoring from the plays.

[ucsdfan]

May 3, 2010 18:54:22 GMT -5 southernspiker said:

thank you fro the clarification...which set is more effective?

I think the effectiveness depends on the setter. We had a 6'1" setter my freshman year who could set a perfect bic. His was very effective because the angle of his hands didn't give anything away and from the defensive side it was hard to read. The best setter I've seen running it was Thorton at UCI a few years back. He had great hands and was a good height to disguise the set well. I don't think I've seen too many bics from UCI since he left. A well disguised bic is pretty unstoppable.

[notsocal2]

OK experts - this is a quiz/question. What was PSU running so effectively a few years back w/ Andersen? Any specific version of "bic" - and outside of his height/talent - what made it work?

Follow on question - more to ucsdfan, but chime in. Are you referring to the Thornton to Jablonsky "bic" - and how did this vary from the PSU Murray version?

No tricks boys & girls - just looking for a little debate & bantor - not an arguement. I think the explanations above on this are really good. And just to add my 2 cents - the most effective I've seen of these are literally - as they said in the "old days" sort of a one and a half - at the correct angle past that M-hitter - with the guy flying out of the back as the blocker are coming down - or are simply confused and - especially as the setter has 4 clear options on a great pass or free ball - and the outside blockers "stuck".

Great play the past years - that has come into play due to the great athleticism of the players.