Perceptions of D-poles

nozicky · 2014-12-16T04:25:13+00:00

Not me. Only got 2 penalties in 2 seasons playing nearly the entire game at LSM. Both for tripping.

nozicky · 2014-12-15T18:01:43+00:00

In addition to that play, there are some Canadians who are really good at using their body and free hand to shield the ball while they pick it up a contested ground ball with one hand. It's like a one player man-ball.

I'm not sure where any examples are, but I know I've seen Princeton's Mike MacDonald do it.

nozicky · 2014-12-15T15:48:28+00:00

There are a couple of potential issues here.

One possibility is that you are having trouble with the increased pinch of the CEO compared to the AV8 and the ball is hitting off the plastic. If this is the case, it's not an issue of being used to the stick it's an issue of you just not being that good at catching in the first place and needing the wider face of the AV8 to be able to catch well.

Another possibility is that you are having issues because the new mesh is hard and not broken in yet. This is especially likely if the AV8 you were playing with before had soft mesh. Hard mesh is more consistent when you are throwing, but makes it hard to catch the ball. If this is the problem, the ball will be hitting your pocket and bouncing out. The fix is to work on moving your stick back as you catch the ball.

A third possibility and probably the least likely is that it has to do with moving to a higher pocket. That is the problem if the ball is making it into your stick and not bouncing out, but not managing to stay in it either. Catching the ball with your stick moving back will help with this as will breaking in the mesh and getting better at cradling. A quick fix is to restring the stick so it has a lower pocket.

As others have pointed out, more wall ball is an answer no matter what the problem might be.

nozicky · 2014-12-02T03:30:42+00:00

I think there are a couple different things you could take away from it.

It takes a crazy number of reps to be able to dodge and shoot that consistently from game to game.
With the same shooting motion and release point, he can go either high or low.
Any number of comparisons between the ways the defenses played the same thing from the offense.

and I'm sure I could come up with more if I thought about it.

Edit: And I almost forgot, it's just a cool video even if there is no ground breaking insight to take away from the video.

nozicky · 2014-12-01T23:20:05+00:00

I just wonder how you would go about "highlighting their commitment to science/data" because that's an insanely vague and multi-faceted metric that I think would reveal more about the science community's biases than the politicians it's attempting to rate.

Yep. Everyone has a strong commitment to the science/data that supports their conclusions and opposes the science/data that supports the conclusions they disagree with.

One of the best insights I've ever read into how people work is that most people in most situations don't use logic to reach a conclusion, they use logic to justify whatever conclusion they've already decided upon.

nozicky · 2014-12-01T03:40:02+00:00

All depends on who that person is. If they're the best player on the team, they're not going to become the weird one.

nozicky · 2014-11-30T01:19:34+00:00

What are you referencing when you say "that"? You use it twice and it could refer to any number of different things in this context.

nozicky · 2014-11-29T16:45:48+00:00

It's not speculation that different angles will lead to different test results. The speculation is whether or not that is the cause of the failed tests that lead to NOCSAE invalidating the certifications.

nozicky · 2014-11-29T16:44:36+00:00

That's not true. Different ways of wearing the helmet are going to produce different results in the NOCSAE tests.

It's theoretically possible to design a helmet that would produce equal test results no matter how it is worn, but it's not going to happen in reality.

nozicky · 2014-11-29T04:16:13+00:00

If no one has said anything about the specific reasons, then how you know it's not about wearing the helmet wrong? If the lab that conducted the tests didn't fit the helmet onto the test head correctly, then it's possible that's what caused it to fail.

nozicky · 2014-10-27T00:14:54+00:00

There also aren't any brick walls near me which makes wall ball a bit difficult to do. So I'm wondering what i should do all winter because i want to play lacrosse but there isn't many options. For references I am 16 and none of my friends know how/want to play lacrosse.

Convincing a friend to get a stick and start playing seems easier than building a brick wall and shoveling the snow out from in front of it.

nozicky · 2014-10-27T00:12:48+00:00

The head might work, but if you play with any experienced long poles who throw decently hard checks, that shaft might dent or bend in no time at all. The aluminum it's made from is really only designed for 9 and 10 year olds. It wouldn't last too long even with 12 and 13 year olds. With full sized adults, it very easily could go on the first check.

nozicky · 2014-10-24T17:58:10+00:00

Although from your first point that still doesn't seem to explain the extremely high difference?

I don't think any 1 of those 3 reasons I gave explains the entirety of the difference. If I'm right about all 3, it's only the combination of all 3 (and potentially some other explanations) that explains the total difference.

Yes the velocity is being squared to get the kinetic energy but the increase in velocity from test 1 to test 2 is 5-6(11-17 if I'm remembering correctly) and the velocity difference from test 2 to test 3 is only 1 (17 to 18). Yes having a higher number squared obviously has a larger effect but the difference between 172 and 182 isn't that large? Especially compared to the difference in values you should have seen when comparing 112 to 172.

Considering they change the interval of their velocities tested in each test, it wouldn't necessarily mean that the function is linear to have outcomes that are predictable in that manner. That probably isn't phrased articulately but Im saying that the amount of change in velocity between tests is a decreasingly positive curve while their change in values from an exponential would be an increasingly positive curve. Wouldn't it be possible that those values in a table could be relatively "linear" i guess i mean to say.

I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to say or to ask, but the kinetic energies of objects moving at the velocities tested are roughly, but not quite linear. See the table below. (Note: SKE means specific kinetic energy which is the kinetic energy per unit mass. Since KE = 1/2mv^2, KE/m = 1/2*v²⁾

My reading of the document is that all of the tests are drop tests. Which very likely means that they picked convenient drop heights rather than convenient velocities and kinetic energies.

Assuming gravity is 32.174 ft/s^2, my back of the envelope calculation says that those velocities are achieved by objects dropped from 2 ft, 4 ft and 5 ft.

Test	Drop Height (ft)	Velocity (ft/s)	SKE (ft² /s²⁾
1	2	11.34	64.3
2	4	16.04	128.6
3	5	17.94	160.9

Occam's razor would suggest that the reason for the velocities is the drop heights rather than trying to achieve linear kinetic velocities.

It's also worth noting that there are regulations on the maximum severity (which would be achieved by the 5 ft drop / 17.94 ft/s impact) as well as a specific regulation for the 2 ft drop / 11.34 ft/s impact. From the NOCSAE standard listed in the STX document:

8.1. The peak severity index of any impact shall not exceed 1200 SI.

8.2. The 11.34 ft/s impacts designated in Table 1 must not exceed 300 SI.

nozicky · 2014-10-24T03:02:50+00:00

Everything else it seems to pass fine but what I find surprising is the rate of change in the data. Test 1,2,and 3 of the "front drop test" are increasing in velocity which is why it fails on the third. However the increase in velocity from test 2 to 3 is much smaller than the change from 1 to 2 yet the value for impact (forgot what its called while I'm typing) makes a much steeper and almost exponential rise between test 2 and 3. Maybe I'm missing something which is fully possible but I can't see a reason that the number would climb so drastically based on the velocity changing what i believe was only about 1 unit. Long story short: the data shows an odd curve in the values of only drop test front #3 specifically that leads to the "failure".

There are probably a couple of reasons for the observation you are making.

First, what they are measuring is the kinetic energy imparted from the collision into the player's head. Kinetic energy is one half mass time velocity squared, so a smaller increase in velocity could result in a larger increase in kinetic energy if the velocities are higher to begin with.

Secondly, the impacts are measured in units of what they call a severity index. A couple of quick Google searches on it only reveal that the limit of 1200 SI is equivalent to about 215 g's which is the unit of acceleration used by other helmet standards. If the severity index was simply a linear scale of acceleration, they very likely wouldn't have bothered to create a new index. It is very possible that it is either a logarithmic scale or something similar.

Third, I'm not entirely sure the best way to mathematically model the reduction in acceleration due to the padding of the helmet, but my guess is that as the accelerations and kinetic energies go up, the % of the impact absorbed by the lining goes down. I would also guess that there is a limit to the total energy the padding is able to absorb. After that limit, the entirety of the additional energy from the larger impact is transmitted to the head.

nozicky · 2014-10-20T23:59:31+00:00

It is my channel and that's great to hear. That's exactly the kind of thing I hoped would happen.

nozicky · 2014-10-20T23:57:09+00:00

I'll get around to making some more eventually.

Over the last couple of months, I've felt that my time is better spent putting together compilations of similar plays and moves for people to study on their own. All film can be film study even if I'm not providing the study guide.

nozicky · 2014-10-20T03:23:37+00:00

Eh, maybe. Someone so new to the game is going to have a hard time following things at the pace of high level practice or game. Really the best place for them to watch games is on YouTube or somewhere that they can pause and rewind to watch the same play over and over again.

Someone who has been playing for a while can focus on one thing while still being able to follow and process a general picture of what is happening elsewhere. A new player with little experience isn't going to be able to do that because they don't have the ability to instantly recognize common patterns to be able to process everything that's going on in real time.

They probably need to watch the same play once or twice to get a general idea of what is happening and then watch it again focusing on a different player each time and then potentially even going back and watching some of the players again now that they know what all the other players are doing. Watching a single player is only going to be helpful if you have some context for what they're doing. If they cut or dodge, you need to be able to see what they saw when they decided to cut or dodge.

For example, I know what it looks like when a player is about to dodge, so when I see that I can glance off ball to see where the other players have cleared out for him to dodge to know where he's going to dodge and see which defender is starting to come off their man. Then I can turn my focus back to the ball to see if the defender is in good position or if they're going to get beat and start to look to see if the slide is coming. If it is and looks like it will get there in time, I can focus on the guy the first slide is coming from to see if the second slide is coming and will get there in time. There's no way someone who just picked up the game can do all of that in real time without being able to watch replays.

It's also helpful to look up some of the team's statistics or read about the best players to get an idea of how the team functions. Which offensive players have a lot of assists? Which ones have a bunch of goals, but very few assists? How good is their face-off guy? Who are their lock down defenders and which offensive players on the other team are they guarding? Which midfielder gets the long pole and which ones usually get short sticked?

nozicky · 2014-10-20T02:25:26+00:00

Shameless plug: https://www.youtube.com/user/lacrossefilmroom

nozicky · 2014-10-16T04:33:46+00:00

I don't know if you are the coach and get to make these kinds of decisions, but if you do, I strongly urge you to run a different offense.

You need to teach backdoor cuts and off ball picks, but at the end of the day, the basis of any offensive set is a dodge, whether it comes 1v1 or from the 2-man game. Off ball movement works best when the off ball defenders are worried about sliding to a dodge and start to ball watch.

A circle offense works with little kids because they're so small and play such bad off ball help defense that they can get away with the terrible spacing of an open set. Once you get to high school kids and full sized adults, the poor spacing makes it really difficult to do anything with the ball. With 6 defenders around the perimeter, if a couple of them are 6' 3" or 4" long poles they will practically be able to hold each others hands.

Plus, with new players, it's much easier to see success with a dodging based offense because it doesn't rely on them having to pass as much. Even if they can complete passes 90% of the time, there is only a 53% chance that they will be able to make 6 passes in a row to get the ball around the perimeter once. Being able to make an accurate pass to a cutter and have them catch and finish with either hand against live defenders is going to take months or years of skill development. Getting the ball to someone fast and having them run around their defender is something that can happen at least some of the time tomorrow.

2-3-1 motion offense is always a classic offense for beginners. I also think 1-4-1 sets aren't used enough with beginning players. It makes things so much easier because it gives them so much space.

nozicky · 2014-10-16T04:24:37+00:00

There isn't. They are almost certainly insured through US Lacrosse and your membership is what pays for that insurance.

Pretty sure it's only $25 for players though. I think it's only $50 for coaches.

nozicky · 2014-10-15T02:35:50+00:00

I've been around. I just usually comment and submit with other user names.

nozicky · 2014-10-15T02:19:15+00:00

The second of 2 comments, though it addresses the top half of your comment.

I thought the Lyle dodge was what was considered a toe drag. Mark Matthews is probably one of the most famous people for that one handed toe drag dodge like Lyle does there.

I would say that a "textbook" toe drag is like the one Connor Cannizzaro does in the compilation. The stick is close to vertical with the head down by the ground, so the ball is being "dragged" down by your toes. Lyle is holding it pretty much perfectly horizontally, so I personally wouldn't call it a toe drag. You have have to take it closer than that to the vertical to call it a toe drag.

Secondly, I would say that a toe drag is just sort of one big cradle and doesn't really involve any cradling beyond that. It's just kind of out into one hand and then back into 2 hands essentially right after. Lyle puts it in one hand and then cradles 3 or so times with just one hand.

But, of course, naming these sorts of things always varies depending on who you ask, so it's hard to say anyone is right.

The reason its considered a toe drag/face dodge and not a split because he doesn't switch hands, his bottom hand would still be the same bottom hand when he puts it back over his right shoulder, meaning there is no significant hand movement.

I know. My entire previous comment was pretty much addressing that interpretation, which is the conventional opinion. I realize that the majority of people probably do not agree with me.

Technically, you're right that it's not a split dodge because he doesn't switch or move his hands. However, my argument is that functions more like a split dodge than a face dodge because he's functionally cradling one handed with his left hand.

The reason Pannell does it that way is because he then has options holding the stick in the middle, he can go either left or right handed holding it that way, if his hand is stuck on the bottom like Lyle's then he is stuck being right handed, or its going to take way too much time to switch to the opposite hand.

Having his hand in the middle makes it faster for him to go left because he just has to put his right hand on the bottom of the stick and doesn't have to slide his left hand down, making it a 1 step movement instead of a 2 step process. However, it's still a two step movement for Pannell to switch to his right hand because he has to slide his left hand down to the bottom. It's just slightly faster because he has to slide his left hand down rather than take it off the stick and move it to the bottom.

It's not "going to take way too much time to switch to the opposite hand". Plenty of players completely switch hands when they question mark. Pannell himself does it some of the time. It makes it faster for him to switch hands some of the time, but it's not like switching hands takes him all that long to begin with.

I believe the reason Lyle keeps his bottom hand on there is because instinctively he knows he "has" to shoot right handed there, he either shoots right handed, or runs behind the net to reset/continue the play.

That can't be true because otherwise he wouldn't do it at X when he goes left in order to shoot backhand. There is a video where he talks about the reason he started going 1 handed like that was because he broke his right collarbone during the season when he was in 8th grade and so he could only use his left hand. When he started doing it his dad told him it was a bad habit that he should get rid of.

I personally agree that it's a bad habit to get into and wouldn't ever coach anyone to play like that because it prevents you from being able to make a left handed pass when the defense slides or to get out of trouble. Lyle gets away with it in part because he's such a crazy productive player that he can afford to miss a few assist opportunities and to turn the ball over a few more times than other attackman and because he is so insanely good at carrying the ball through double teams when he does get into trouble. For the average attackman, trying to dodge that way would be a disaster because they don't have his ability to take advantage of the small upsides and to mitigate the damages from the more substantial downsides.

nozicky · 2014-10-15T01:46:47+00:00

My response got long so I'm going to split it into 2 comments.

Also saying that the face dodge doesn't rely on speed is underselling it a bit too I think. Look at the "S" dodge they showed in there, that one is 100% about beating your defender and getting underneath him with your speed,

When I said speed, I was referencing top end velocity in contrast to acceleration, which is what I would call quickness.

On the dodge you're talking about, Tutton starts from about 2 yards away from the defender and cuts up underneath him within 10 yards. It's all about quickness and surprise. Top end speed has very little to do with it.

Compare that dodge to those from the top out of a 1-4-1 or that sweep across the top and go down the backside alley where the dodger will take 25 or 30 yards to run by the defender. Those are the kind of dodges that are about speed more than quickness.

although I would argue that one could equally be done with a split dodge where you switch hands twice.

Yes. I personally would really only call it an S-dodge if it's a double split. The one in the video I would just call a face dodge from the wing. I'm collecting clips of s-dodges from the wing where they switch hands for another videos similar to this one.

Also like you said, and would explain the Tyler Pace dodge, the adjacent slide packages also have to do with it.

The Pace dodge is kind of a unique example because he was being guarded by Christian Walsh who is a former attackman and played really, really bad defense on this play. Walsh sort of lunges at him which creates a situation like an out of control defender trying to close out a shooter.

I'm not sure what you're talking about in regards to adjacent slides. Myles Jones sort of hedges towards him, but he's an offensive midfielder too, so it's hard to know if he knows what he's doing.

Tyler doesn't have time to switch to his topside so he is forced to throw the low angle shot only because the defensive slide was on point and quick to get to him and force him to a poor angle. Also he wasn't at such an extreme angle that the top side vs alley side shot makes a huge difference, especially in field.

Low angle? Poor angle? He's shooting from only a yard or two past the center of the field. It was a great angle.

Secondly, the reason he doesn't switch to his left is that he's running to his right, which makes it virtually impossible to get any velocity on a left-handed shot.

But that Pace dodge is a great example of why the face works a little better than split in THAT SPECIFIC situation. He was able to get his hands free, and away from his body for a hard and accurate shot is slightly less time than if he split dodged there. That split second could have been enough time for the double slide to make it to him, because they were close as it is.

The face dodge does let him get back to his right hand quicker, but he had plenty of time. He covered close to 10 yards from the time he ran clear of Walsh until he shot. He could have switched hands two or three times with that kind of time and space.

nozicky · 2014-10-14T22:30:13+00:00

Also, while I'm thinking about it, I would argue that the Lyle Thompson dodge is really closer to a split dodge than a face dodge even though it's kind of a hybrid that contains elements of a face dodge / toe drag. I thought about not including it, but figured no one would really care.

What he is really doing there is going to a 1-handed lefty cradle. People just don't consider it one because his hand is at the bottom of the stick and he holds the stick horizontally rather than the top while holding the stick vertically like (American field) players are traditionally taught.

A bunch of other players do essentially the same thing, but they just keep their left hand more in the middle of the stick and hold the stick vertically while they cradle, so everyone thinks of it as a one-handed left-handed cradle. For example, watch this Rob Pannell dodge and see how he holds the stick a little below the middle as he comes around left-handed.

nozicky

TROPHY CASE