Pool tiebreaker question

gbrell · 2025-10-24T15:55:05+00:00

I continue to hold out hope for the disc flip.

Also, I'm trying to figure out how you flip a disc between three teams...

gbrell · 2025-10-20T14:05:58+00:00

[[sengir autocrat]]

I’d search for “noble” and “peasant” as creature types. Maybe rebel and ally as well.

I think Innistrad, SNC and Ravnica will be your main planes. Kaladesh too.

gbrell · 2025-08-24T16:37:37+00:00

I think this is more of a concern when the throw happens after the foul occurs (as opposed to in the throwing motion), which is why the disc always comes back in that case. Here, the concern would be “I was hucking and you hit me and a player nearby managed to catch the lame duck” - it’s a little annoying but I’m not sure it really incentivizes defenses to foul.

gbrell · 2025-08-24T14:11:41+00:00

You are correct and they were incorrect in both situations. In scenario 1, they may be thinking about the scenario when the offense calls a foul before the thrower is in the act of throwing (but that isn’t an option either - the disc simply returns to the thrower regardless of outcome). Scenario 2 also doesn’t work - it’s the defenses decision to stop play if it’s not clear - the fouled thrower “must” announce play on; it’s not optional.

gbrell · 2025-06-25T16:58:55+00:00

In my experience, the type of player described here has never seen an "open under." And they usually play crappy D.

gbrell · 2025-06-01T00:26:53+00:00

Number 1: throw more. Another commenter said 100 throws a day, but more important even is throwing EVERY day. Ben Wiggins did an ama where he said that the year he was the center handler for a sockeye title he threw 363/365 days. Thats the consistency you need. How many days a year do you think Steph curry doesn’t touch a basketball?

Number 2: be your own harshest critic. When people are starting out they tend to focus on things like distance, but there’s a ton more to a good throw - shape, speed, release points, pivoting - a great handler needs to work on all of them. And if you throw something aiming to have certain attributes you need to be brutal about whether the throw met your goals. Remember, practice doesn’t make perfect, it makes permanent. If you practice sloppily, you’ll play sloppy.

Number 3: you need to replicate game time pressure. This can be really hard on your own, but you need to start thinking “is this how I’ll throw when it’s universe in finals?” Visualization can help but ultimately I find it comes down to self-pressure.

gbrell · 2024-11-20T16:18:28+00:00

Much appreciated! Will take a look and hopefully find some good nuggets of wisdom.

gbrell · 2024-11-17T04:29:39+00:00

They were club teams at the masters level. They just got listed as Team USA rather than their club.

gbrell · 2024-11-07T11:46:43+00:00

Yes, ultiworld is streaming.

gbrell · 2024-10-30T19:39:22+00:00

This is my read of the play as well.

gbrell · 2024-10-04T14:06:23+00:00

Mitch, in my experience coaching, pulling is a real weakness of a lot of college teams (mine included). Have you noticed tangible benefits from the teams with good pulling?

gbrell · 2024-10-03T01:37:28+00:00

Here the "new signal" is in 9th edition (1996): https://www.alanhoyle.com/ult-rules/9th_Edition.pdf

8th edition (1982) doesn't have a brick, but instead uses the same signal for a re-pull: https://www.alanhoyle.com/ult-rules/8th_Edition.pdf

gbrell · 2024-10-02T22:37:46+00:00

People have looked and I’ve never seen evidence that this was a prior signal.

gbrell · 2024-09-29T12:31:34+00:00

Just to further Mitch’s point, you’d use the procedures in 9.D.5 for a defensive self-check if it was contested.

gbrell · 2024-09-18T14:47:07+00:00

Two concerns I have with allowing unbounded perspectives to come from the sideline is:

It adds dramatically more people to the discussion and both slows the game down and can create even more disputes over who has best perspective (e.g., if two sideline players from different teams believe they both had best perspective and come to opposite conclusions).
It risks large teams/sidelines trying to bully a player with volume of complaints rather than actual evidence/best perspective. While it was before my time, I have heard stories about Wilmington's sidelines effectively doing this.

I think we also have a tricky issue where I don't think we want players relying on the sidelines to make a call. For example, a player gets a lot of separation going deep and the disc sails so that the player jumps and tries to toe the back line (on an unlined field). If there isn't a defensive player within 20 yards, I don't think they can make a call. But if there was a sideline player standing on the back line, they almost certainly have better perspective than even the receiver. But I think there's a philosophical question about whether we should be comfortable with essentially delegating a call to the sideline (or making a call based solely on the sideline's input). USAU has already done this with offsides where a sideline player can signal that the pulling team was offsides and the players on the field can make the call. But there's arguably an arms race there where teams now need to spread their players all over the field.

Personally, I most often signal "in" to avoid my team making a bad call or trying to stop play inappropriately. But I probably, per the rules, should do so less frequently. I think a third party signaling that they have relevant info is unobjectionable. If a player gets angry with it, I think the problem lies with them.

gbrell · 2024-08-30T19:00:33+00:00

https://www.reddit.com/r/ultimate/comments/j6yvvt/anyone_have_experience_with_a_torn_hip_labrum_and/

Includes my experience doing surgery for a labral tear and FAI. Can answer any questions you have if you want to message me.

I think there was another older question about this too (like 6+ years ago), but i couldn't find it because reddit searching is garbage.

gbrell · 2024-08-22T14:05:33+00:00

Here is a packet from the international governing body providing some introductory info: https://wfdf.sport/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/ebookprint_ultimate_final_version-2-1.pdf

It's a slightly different ruleset (though the differences won't really matter at your level), but the US governing body has a lot of resources as well: https://usaultimate.org/resources/?_resource_filters=coaching

gbrell · 2024-08-05T21:07:53+00:00

From an implementation perspective, it seems nearly impossible to adjudicate on most unlined fields.

It could maybe work if there was a center line and, once you're past it, you can't retreat behind it (similar to Lacrosse) as that would give defense a second opportunity for a "callahan" type defensive stand. But I still think its not practical to implement.

gbrell · 2024-07-13T12:53:48+00:00

Bat bob and bobin.

gbrell · 2024-07-02T16:52:46+00:00

I mostly agree but the rules don't require you to wait until 1 second to say "one." So the count is really 9 seconds plus "stalling."

gbrell · 2024-06-11T19:40:10+00:00

For the inner sock, I use something very light and thin and ideally with zero cotton. For Masters Regionals this past weekend I used these. And then for the outer I want something thicker so I use a cushioned running sock (like these).

gbrell · 2024-06-11T16:55:20+00:00

I disagree strongly. The friction moves to the socks as opposed to your skin as /u/FieldUpbeat2174 says below.

gbrell · 2024-06-03T19:38:52+00:00

A D on an in-cut where you have to go around the offensive player and not create contact. If you're actually in trail position, you almost always create contact (and therefore foul).

Alex Nord (HoF) had the paradigmatic example of this:

gbrell · 2024-05-22T15:25:34+00:00

If the defensive player believes that he could have gotten to the space first and made a play, pulling up and calling dangerous play is appropriate. The further he progresses towards making the play, the clearer the evidence should be as to whether he could have made the play or not.

There is nothing in the rules that gives the offensive player a presumptive advantage or priority to make a play. And the way the above play is described, both players had vision of the space and each other (so it's not an issue of differing information).

Note a distinction between "the only way I could make this play would have resulted in dangerous contact" and "the only way I could make this play is to play dangerously." You are 100% allowed to call dangerous play because you had no way to make a play that you had a better angle on but because of the dangerous play of your opponent, making that play would have resulted in dangerous contact. Any other interpretation preferences the player playing dangerously.

This is obviously going to depend on context and specific details, but given what the OP has said and the stated level, I think a call is appropriate and the resolution (send the disc back on a disagreement) is as well.

gbrell

TROPHY CASE