.png)
So Should You Start Your Setter in Zone 1?
Why Start the Setter in Zone 1?
It’s a common strategy to start the setter in zone 1, or sometimes in zone 2 if receiving first. The reasoning behind this strategy is so your team has three front row attackers for maximum attacking options. I once read that a team will rotate an average of 15 rotations or 2.5 full rotations for a 25 point set and 9 rotations or 1.5 full rotations for a 15 point set. This means you can have 9 rotations out of 15 with three front row attackers and 6 rotations out of 9 in a fifth set. You want three front row attackers for the most rotations because the data indicates that back row hitting is not that effective. You also want a high hitting percentage because it is closely associated to success in volleyball (click here for my valid performance indicator studies in the women’s and men’s volleyball). So the logic is there but it is this actually the most effective starting rotation in practice?
How To Measure the Most Effective Starting Rotation
The best way to measure the most effective starting rotation is to measure the point scoring effectiveness in each rotation. Point scoring performance indicators have shown to be highly associated with success in volleyball, even better than the hitting percentage. The performance indicator I will use to measure the point scoring effectiveness is the Points Efficiency Percentage (read more on this performance indicator on this link). This performance indicator measures the ability to score points while taking into account errors and total point scoring attemtps. It is calculated as points won takeaway points lost divide by total point scoring attempts. It is essentially the same calculation as the hitting percentage so the number it produces should be viewed in a similar way but lower since it’s more difficult to score points via serve and block. I will use the terms “zone” and “position” interchangeably and they refer to the location of the setter at the start of a rally. Each rotation includes both sideout (receiving first) and break point (serving first) phases.
What is the Most Effective Rotation in the Women’s Super League?
Below is a diagram showing the points efficiency pct. and total point scoring attempts by rotation for all teams in the Women’s Super League 2019-20 combined. The data shows the setter in zone 1 is the most efficient point scoring rotation (14.3% points efficiency pct.). . So if you start the setter in zone 1, you have the additional benefit that the second best rotation is the next rotation in zone 6 (13.1%). An alternative starting rotation is to start your setter in zone 3. This is because you have your best four rotations first and your two worst rotations (zone 5 and 4) are last. A possible reason why zone 5 and 4 are the two worst point scoring rotations could be because the setter has longer distance to transition from the left side of the court on reception. However, this is only one situation out of all many, such as all the point scoring opportunities in the transitional attack and you also have the break point phase too (service first).
Zone 1 has the most point scoring attempts (4901) and it decreases with every rotation with zone 2 having the least point scoring attempts (3304). This is an indication that most teams have generally started the setter at position 1.
What About Individual Teams?
Because the league data suggests starting the setter in zone 1 is the best starting rotation, it doesn’t necessarily mean it should be applied to all teams. This is because each team will have their own specific strengths and weaknesses that the league data averages out. So I wanted to look at individual teams.
Women’s Super League 2019-20 Teams
Below is the point efficiency pct. for the Women’s Super League teams by rotation with a suggested best starting rotation in a bolded black box. The best starting rotation is based upon if the rotation is their most effective point scoring rotation (e.g. Cambridge & ARU, Malory Eagles UEL), or if they have their best 2 (e.g. London Inter Orcas) or 3 point scoring rotations first (e.g. Polonia SideOut London, Bristol) and/ or if they have their worst point scoring rotation last (e.g. Durham Palatinates and Tendring Ladies). From my suggestions, only two teams should start in rotation 1 while four teams should start in rotation 2. Although the league data shows the worst point scoring rotations are 4 and 5, Tendring’s best rotation is actually 5.
City University London Women’s Team
I also wanted to look at my own team that I coach – City University London (CUL) (see 2019-20 coaching reflection). I tend to start my rotation based on having my best attacker in zone 4. My best attacker has usually been my middle player – Micol San Flippo for the past two seasons and Sofia Quaglia three seasons ago (see link) – so this meant I usually started the setter in zone 5. The data below indicates this was actually my worst or second worst point scoring rotation for the past two seasons. I should have instead started my setter in zone 3 as it was my best point scoring rotation. This is a definite change I would need to make for next season.
So Should You Start Your Setter in Zone 1?
If you are basing your decision solely on your most effective rotation(s) and not on any other factors (e.g. you are not worried about attacker-blocker match ups), then I would say starting your setter in zone 1 is a good starting point. This is especially the case at the beginning of the season when you will invariably have new players and you don’t know how they will affect your best point scoring rotations. However, as the season unfolds and more match data rolls in, I would base the decision more and more on what the stats indicates as each team will have their own specific strengths and weaknesses that you want to exploit. For example, zone 2 would have been the suggested starting rotation for 4 out of the 9 Super League teams. For City University London, zone 3 would have been an ideal starting rotation. I would also recommend having an alternative starting rotation if things are not going your way.
Comments