Good read (as per usual)! I really like the Identity angle because I think that is a great way to increase engagement, tap into co-design, and make things pleasantly frustrating by removing some of the personal aspect of failures.
I am thinking about basketball and how you could create 2 v 1 or 3 v 2 transition situations. Perhaps you involve athletes to create set "identities" for the ball handler on the offensive side - scorer, playmaker, etc. Or you could let players experiment with favorite professionals (e.g., be Luka or Kelsey Plum). If you go the pro route, it might be fun to include what each of those pros "has in their bag" so to speak. Prior to a rep, the offensive group could huddle american football style to decide who would have the ball and what identity they were going to take for this attempt. They would lock in that choice. The defensive players could also huddle and come up with their plan. Maybe they also have identities for how their team approaches transition defense (e.g., stop the 3, force a long shot, etc.). After each rep, perhaps you could have the offense and defense huddle back up to try to guess what the other side was trying to achieve in the previous effort. If they locked in choices on a small white board, you could do the reveal game show style even. You could figure out a way to assign points based on the actual scores/stops and ability to correctly assess what the other side was trying to achieve. Similar to the previous comment, you could create different challenge levels by adjusting the terms (1v1, 2v1, 3v2), making it a live start vs a set start, adding/subtracting number of identities in the mix, etc.
This is obviously half-baked (at best), but I am hoping you can see where I am going. On the one hand, it takes away some live decision-making (or at least turns it from a free for all to a check down sort of scenario), but also may help athletes better attune to the key information. I think it would also be interesting for players to see how they may be able to still succeed against a defense that has "guessed correctly" because they are paying attention to the cues that allow them to adjust if need be.
Brilliant Dave and hope all is well with you. I really like using the identity of players also, gets the players really engaged in my experience and love the piece around guessing the strategies the other team were tyring to do 👏
Thanks for sharing the video game comparison. Coach like a video game creator!
For basketball:
1. Put the defense in a more disadvantage situation, further from the basket, so the offense has more time to make a better decision on whether to keep attacking, score, or pass. Or, tell the defenders they must play with their hands behind their back.
2. Co-Design: The players get to decide where on the court they want to start the activity. They decide what score they want to play to.
3. Gradually give the offense less and less of an advantage to start the activity. Even give a dribble limit or shot clock.
4. There will always be defender trying to stop them which will force them to find different solutions that are game like.
Great questions Phil. I would try to maintain two pieces of information when shooting. Position/distance from goal and the position of opposing gk and/or defender. So the attacking player can co design the location of defender relative to where they receive the ball. This can be a 2v1 or 1v1 depending on what skill you want to invite.
I like how games incrementally increase the challenge point. So maybe you have levels- starting with a 3v1, then 2v1 then a 1v1 (+gk). As players are successful they move up a level and down a level.
I really like how you incorporated the levels in here and I think players really engage well with these. The co-design with the attacking player is also really nice here, great job 👏
Good read (as per usual)! I really like the Identity angle because I think that is a great way to increase engagement, tap into co-design, and make things pleasantly frustrating by removing some of the personal aspect of failures.
I am thinking about basketball and how you could create 2 v 1 or 3 v 2 transition situations. Perhaps you involve athletes to create set "identities" for the ball handler on the offensive side - scorer, playmaker, etc. Or you could let players experiment with favorite professionals (e.g., be Luka or Kelsey Plum). If you go the pro route, it might be fun to include what each of those pros "has in their bag" so to speak. Prior to a rep, the offensive group could huddle american football style to decide who would have the ball and what identity they were going to take for this attempt. They would lock in that choice. The defensive players could also huddle and come up with their plan. Maybe they also have identities for how their team approaches transition defense (e.g., stop the 3, force a long shot, etc.). After each rep, perhaps you could have the offense and defense huddle back up to try to guess what the other side was trying to achieve in the previous effort. If they locked in choices on a small white board, you could do the reveal game show style even. You could figure out a way to assign points based on the actual scores/stops and ability to correctly assess what the other side was trying to achieve. Similar to the previous comment, you could create different challenge levels by adjusting the terms (1v1, 2v1, 3v2), making it a live start vs a set start, adding/subtracting number of identities in the mix, etc.
This is obviously half-baked (at best), but I am hoping you can see where I am going. On the one hand, it takes away some live decision-making (or at least turns it from a free for all to a check down sort of scenario), but also may help athletes better attune to the key information. I think it would also be interesting for players to see how they may be able to still succeed against a defense that has "guessed correctly" because they are paying attention to the cues that allow them to adjust if need be.
Brilliant Dave and hope all is well with you. I really like using the identity of players also, gets the players really engaged in my experience and love the piece around guessing the strategies the other team were tyring to do 👏
Thanks for sharing the video game comparison. Coach like a video game creator!
For basketball:
1. Put the defense in a more disadvantage situation, further from the basket, so the offense has more time to make a better decision on whether to keep attacking, score, or pass. Or, tell the defenders they must play with their hands behind their back.
2. Co-Design: The players get to decide where on the court they want to start the activity. They decide what score they want to play to.
3. Gradually give the offense less and less of an advantage to start the activity. Even give a dribble limit or shot clock.
4. There will always be defender trying to stop them which will force them to find different solutions that are game like.
Really like what you came up with here Robby. Particularly like how you implemented the co-design piece in here
Great questions Phil. I would try to maintain two pieces of information when shooting. Position/distance from goal and the position of opposing gk and/or defender. So the attacking player can co design the location of defender relative to where they receive the ball. This can be a 2v1 or 1v1 depending on what skill you want to invite.
I like how games incrementally increase the challenge point. So maybe you have levels- starting with a 3v1, then 2v1 then a 1v1 (+gk). As players are successful they move up a level and down a level.
I really like how you incorporated the levels in here and I think players really engage well with these. The co-design with the attacking player is also really nice here, great job 👏