Short Sided Round Robin Format for Basketball and Soccer

The computer age has bestowed some unforeseen blessings on the sports world. Math whizzes are now using the personal computer to track game results to a level never before possible, and sports are the better for it. The book "Moneyball" chronicled the way Billy Beane, general manager of the Oakland Athletics used obscure statistical analyses to scout and deal for talent. Now, a variation of this method has spilt over into basketball with a number of NBA teams using statistics in a similar manner. These methods were described in a recent sports Illustratedarticle titled Measure of Success. Described as simply as possible, these statisticianstrack how well a team does when a player is on the floor, versus how well they do when theyarent.

These measures disregard a players contribution as represented by their scoring, rebounding and assists totals,and simply asks, "Does the team do better or worse when this player is on the floor?" They also in many casescontradict the conventional wisdom concerning the relative worth of certain players. Jason Collins, a fifth-year center for the Nets of little renown gets ranked as the fourth best defensive center in the league. Conversely, high-scoring Michael Redd of the Milwaukee Bucks issuch a disaster on defense that his teams tend to lose with him on the floor, and win while he is on the bench.

While amateur coaches are sure to find these analyses interesting, is there any way in which theycan employ these metrics for their own use? Amateur coaches might be able to get team assistantsto gather the data needed to maintain these stats, but there is a much better way these conceptscan be applied.

Virtually all teams rely heavily on scrimmage play as part of their practice routine. By adoptingwhat I call a roster Round Robin format during scrimmage play, coaches can get a much clearerpicture of how and when individual players perform better than others. The format simply requiresthat sides be set to 3v3, 4v4, or 5v5, depending on available players. players are issuedreversible jerseys, and score is kept for each side. Stages are set to 3 or 4 minutes, and atthe end of each stage, a team score is recorded, with each player earning points for themselves on the basis of their team result. Two players are then directed to exchange sides by flipping their reversible jersey, and a new stage is played. This pattern is continued until all possibleroster combinations have been used.

For a 3v3 contest, this would equate to 10 possible combinations, thus requiring a 30 to 40 minutegame. Each player earns a plus/minus score across all stages. As everyone plays under all rostercombinations and points can only be earned on the basis of team results, an individuals resultreflects their team contribution across all stages. In order to maintain game continuity andensure rapid roster rotations, the roster rotations are predetermined and printed on a grid usedfor scoring.

Some may notice that the one thing seemingly not taken into account in this format is positionplay. A roster rotation schedule that disregards position play will likely result in some oddlybalanced sides think 5 guards versus 5 forwards and centers that wouldnt reflect anythingresembling a real-game matchup. This difficulty can, however, be overcome by taking positionsinto account when devising the roster rotations. For a 4v4 game, with players restricted toeither a center/forward or guard position, there would be 9 different roster combinations required.For a full-sided game, a center position could be added, but 18 stages would be required. With three minute stages, this would be a 54 minute scrimmage game. Coaches may wish to splitthis size of scrimmage across multiple practices.

Would the results from any particular scrimmage mean much? For one game, probably not, as we allknow the ball can bounce funny for a time. But if this format were used on a regular basis, theresults should reveal which players are contributing the most to their team. These results willeither confirm or deny a coachs sense of who his best players are, but there are two even biggerbenefits that can come from the use of this format. First, as players come to understand thisas the new measure of their play, they will be more receptive to a coachs instruction on teamplay. As well, players will intuitively respond to the demands of the game, and adjust their playaccordingly. Simply put, the ability to measure team play translates to a better ability to teachand learn it.

The second benefit may be even more important. A system that clearly and demonstrably measuresa player on the basis of their team contribution fosters team chemistry better than any other.The talented offensive player who lets down on defense can be brought to the table when the impactof his lackluster defense can be shown. Players who are frustrated because they think theyshould be playing more can either makes their case in the round robin practice, or be showntheyre not there yet. Regardless of the case, team chemistry is advanced.

The only real barriers to this practice format are logistical. Running this practice formatrequires pre-numbered reversible jerseys, and scoring/rotation grid sheets.

Yoga Teacher Training Yoga Apparel Yoga Certification Yoga

Woodland Verses Links Golf Courses - Which One Wins?

many people believe that the word 'links' refers to the way the end of one golf hole defines the beginning of the next - rather like the links of a chain. This is not so but it actually comes from the old English word 'hlinc' meaning a stretch of flat ground along the seashore. And that is exactly what it is like. Sea on one side, land on the other (often the houses on the edge of the town form the boundary). It is a naturally occurring terrain usually on a well drained sandy soil.

The parkland course on the other hand is 'purpose built' and is often much more hilly and varied in terrain than the links course. Also, the presence of trees offers a different kind of hazard from those found on a links. Each course has its own type of problems and challenges but the links course probably calls for rather more 'invention' or 'adaptation' in the way the shots are played.

Parkland courses are usually set in an area not infrequently wooded to some degree and often with heather, gorse, sand bunkers and sometimes water in the form of ponds or lakes. However, the main difference between links and parkland is that the latter is much more obviously manufactured. This is not said by way of criticism since inland courses by definition have to be manufactured. The quality of the course though is more to do with the skill of the designer and how much this "manufactured-ness" shows. The optimum use of the space available and the incorporation of existing natural features - woods, trees, water, ups and downs - are where the architect can bring his creative powers to bear.

A links course on the other hand is usually a much more rugged proposition. It's a completely natural setting - too 'natural' for some people - where the wind from the sea plays a much more prominent part in the game. The nature of the terrain forces you to adapt your shots to the prevailing conditions and the lie of the land. One great advantage though is that being on sandy soil it does tend to drain well and very quickly so the surface remains firm and playable all year round.

Nevertheless it is no place for the complaint 'It's not fair'. life isn't fair on a links and you have to brace yourself for that. You could hit a perfect drive straight up the fairway only to have it finish up on a hanging lie with three huge bunkers between you and the green two hundred yards away.

The distances on your scorecard will be accurate but useless. I have played at Turnberry where one of the par threes is an eight iron in the morning but a three wood in the afternoon - and it was nothing to do with the port at lunch.

Playing out of the rough is a different game; the whins and other grasses can twist your clubhead and make the ball behave in quite a different way when trying to chip on to the green from the rough. Don't expect to play to your handicap on your first visit to a links course - even in sunshine and no (apparent) wind. You need to be able to 'read' the elements and this comes only from experience. Why do you think so many canny golfers chip and run from so far off the green?

Unlike the parkland course where the course is manufactured, the links course demands that the shot is manufactured.

But all in all it's a great challenge - never the same from one day to the next. One compensation however for these difficulties is that you will not encounter many trees. Which brings us back to parkland golf.

Essentially, unlike the natural design of the links, this is down to the skill of the architect. Everybody accepts that golf courses are 'constructed' but the trick is to make them look as natural as possible and, in the case of some of the great inland courses, it works! It requires a number of criteria to be fulfilled: first and foremost it must be a challenge to the world's best - and must be accepted as such. It must have variety - every hole must be individual but the 'whole' must have a personality. It must be fair and not just playable by top championship players and, lastly, it must be aesthetically pleasing. Such a course would be Sunningdale - a club blessed with two of the great courses where every hole is a world unto itself. So whether your preference is for links or parkland I hope you manage to get the round you've dreamed about on the course of your choice.

Good golfing!

Peter has been playing golf for over 5 decades, when he is not writing about playing golf he is writing about it. You can access online golf lessons and pick up valuable tips by visiting his website.

Cdlesson Yoga Videos Gratis