|
|
Post by Spike Town on Aug 14, 2016 11:36:21 GMT -5
Sometimes it seems like the US runs the pipe over the middles left shoulder and sometimes they run more to the gap. I'm amazed watching Sander and Russell detonate on balls through the back row. I can't hear on the telecast but is it purely an audible in transition or is it a set play? Or is it based on where Micah and the middles are in their pattern?
|
|
|
|
Post by ocmyhome on Aug 14, 2016 11:59:19 GMT -5
Would it be accurate to say the US runs the most BICs than any other tournament team? I remember Speraw running it back at his days @ UCI and thinking how ahead of the curve he was with that play...
|
|
|
|
Post by SuperSpike on Aug 14, 2016 14:44:10 GMT -5
Not sure but I think it's based on middles/Micah.
|
|
|
|
Post by Northern lights on Aug 14, 2016 14:54:38 GMT -5
Would it be accurate to say the US runs the most BICs than any other tournament team? I remember Speraw running it back at his days @ UCI and thinking how ahead of the curve he was with that play... It's newer and cooler, but I do not think it's better. Just takes your middles out of your offence. Anyone have a stat on hitting efficiency off a 3 pass, when the setter chooses middle vs. when the setter chooses pipe or bic? |
|
|
|
Post by volleyfan24 on Aug 14, 2016 15:04:47 GMT -5
Would it be accurate to say the US runs the most BICs than any other tournament team? I remember Speraw running it back at his days @ UCI and thinking how ahead of the curve he was with that play... It's newer and cooler, but I do not think it's better. Just takes your middles out of your offence. Anyone have a stat on hitting efficiency off a 3 pass, when the setter chooses middle vs. when the setter chooses pipe or bic? They seem to be really efficient with this attack. I like it cause it seems to keep the other teams defense off balance but I wonder as well if there is any info showing that attack is more efficient than setting a 31. I don't like this attack comes at the expense of our middles. They lose a swing and are less part of the offense. Plus with Holt in the front there's no reason to not just let him rip it. |
|
|
|
Post by sammyd on Aug 14, 2016 15:36:07 GMT -5
It's a different weapon. If Holt and Lee get established and the opposite middle blockers are not committing but are doing a quick read, the Bic can frustrate them to no end because they can't do what is comfortable. Involving our middles more would allow for more open net swings from the Bic and force pin blockers to be preoccupied with helping on the middle attack.
|
|
|
|
Post by akbar on Aug 14, 2016 20:47:07 GMT -5
It has been incredibly successful.
|
|
|
|
Post by Gorflorg Orshforg on Aug 14, 2016 20:53:12 GMT -5
It's newer and cooler, but I do not think it's better. Just takes your middles out of your offence. Anyone have a stat on hitting efficiency off a 3 pass, when the setter chooses middle vs. when the setter chooses pipe or bic? They seem to be really efficient with this attack. I like it cause it seems to keep the other teams defense off balance but I wonder as well if there is any info showing that attack is more efficient than setting a 31. I don't like this attack comes at the expense of our middles. They lose a swing and are less part of the offense. Plus with Holt in the front there's no reason to not just let him rip it. The bic is the most effective set at the men's international level. The gap (31) is nowhere near as effective. The quick is slightly less effective. This has been studied extensively. |
|
|
|
Post by volleyfan24 on Aug 14, 2016 22:37:45 GMT -5
They seem to be really efficient with this attack. I like it cause it seems to keep the other teams defense off balance but I wonder as well if there is any info showing that attack is more efficient than setting a 31. I don't like this attack comes at the expense of our middles. They lose a swing and are less part of the offense. Plus with Holt in the front there's no reason to not just let him rip it. The bic is the most effective set at the men's international level. The gap (31) is nowhere near as effective. The quick is slightly less effective. This has been studied extensively. Where and by who? Show me the stats. Just cause I like that kind of thing. Not doubting just wondering. |
|
|
|
Post by Gorflorg Orshforg on Aug 14, 2016 23:14:38 GMT -5
The bic is the most effective set at the men's international level. The gap (31) is nowhere near as effective. The quick is slightly less effective. This has been studied extensively. Where and by who? Show me the stats. Just cause I like that kind of thing. Not doubting just wondering. Sure thing. Here's something from GMS, which is all I could find on the first page of google, but I've seen and heard about a number of international studies, by Americans and by other nationals, that have similar results. I'll try to track a couple down for you. |
|
|
|
Post by neccbias on Aug 15, 2016 14:24:05 GMT -5
Sometimes it seems like the US runs the pipe over the middles left shoulder and sometimes they run more to the gap. I'm amazed watching Sander and Russell detonate on balls through the back row. I can't hear on the telecast but is it purely an audible in transition or is it a set play? Or is it based on where Micah and the middles are in their pattern? The bic is generally run just off the left shoulder of the middle attacker so that the OH can broad jump all the way to the net without landing on the middle. When the MB runs a 31 the OH generally runs "center" which is pretty self explanatory. The US Olympic team probably runs some more variations off this but Micah definitely coordinates with the back row OH as well as the MB before the play to make sure Sander or Russel doesn't end up riding on Holt or Lee's shoulders. |
|
|
|
Post by itsallrelative on Aug 15, 2016 14:38:34 GMT -5
They seem to be really efficient with this attack. I like it cause it seems to keep the other teams defense off balance but I wonder as well if there is any info showing that attack is more efficient than setting a 31. I don't like this attack comes at the expense of our middles. They lose a swing and are less part of the offense. Plus with Holt in the front there's no reason to not just let him rip it. The bic is the most effective set at the men's international level. The gap (31) is nowhere near as effective. The quick is slightly less effective. This has been studied extensively. isn't a disadvantage of the 31 that you "drag" a commit blocking middle out towards the Go? Has the right side attacked become quicker, at least in system? |
|
|
|
Post by 5280volleyball on Aug 15, 2016 17:32:42 GMT -5
Speraw wants 40 percent of the sets going to the middle, including the bic. Russell and Sander have been unstoppable on that play, so I'd run the heck out of it too.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 15, 2016 20:03:12 GMT -5
They seem to be really efficient with this attack. I like it cause it seems to keep the other teams defense off balance but I wonder as well if there is any info showing that attack is more efficient than setting a 31. I don't like this attack comes at the expense of our middles. They lose a swing and are less part of the offense. Plus with Holt in the front there's no reason to not just let him rip it. The bic is the most effective set at the men's international level. The gap (31) is nowhere near as effective. The quick is slightly less effective. This has been studied extensively. Nowhere near as effective? That's not what the link you just provided says. 55% vs 52%. |
|
