Monday, April 9, 2018

3 on 2 is Better Than 3 on 3

After writing 66 tactical blog posts, I've learned a lot about running a small melee practice.  One conclusion that I've come to is that a 3 on 2 practice is way more useful than a 3 on 3.

Why?

3 on 3's tend to turn into 3 one on one's.  This is especially problematic if you are a new fighter, or a seasoned tourney fighter who's done 1000s of reps training yourself for 1 on 1 fighting.  The 3 on 2, on the other hand, sets you up for a very obvious need to come up with a plan to win.  The larger team absolutely needs to learn how to win while taking no casualties and to win quickly, while the smaller team needs to learn how to survive and try to make the best of a bad situation.

On a side note, I used to be a high school basketball coach.  Every practice we ran 3 on 2 and 2 on 1 drills as do many basketball programs.  It is uncommon for a program to run 3 on 3 drills.


New Perspectives

This is probably the 4th time I've written about the 3 on 2 because I'm constantly learning more about it.  Now, tactics will certainly vary depending on the level of experience of the fighters.  A lot of kingdoms spend a lot of time trying to get their fighters to stick together because there is safety in numbers, so what you are about to read may be counter productive for what I call "kingdom fighters" (fighters who don't train for melee with a household and intend to fight with the kingdom at big wars).   More often than not, when fighting a 3 on 2, both teams need to split, and I'll explain why.  Keep in mind as you read through the explanation, I'm merely trying to present an analysis of why it works.  This isn't conjecture, but rather a review of what I've learned through many, many repetitions of this drill. 


2 on 1 and 45's

Many should be well aware after a little bit of experience that they key to beating a single opponent with two fighters is to attack at 45 degree angles. 



This isn't really any different for a 3 on 2 advantage.  The left fighter tries to get to a 45 degree attack angle on the opponents' right fighter, and the right fighter does the same on the opponents' left fighter.  The center fighter then attempts a 45 degree attack angle on either one from the inside.





Now consider the 2 on 1 from the singe fighter's perspective.  What he wants to do is position himself around one of the fighters in order to take the other fighter out of the fight and turn it into a 1 on 1.





Again, the same for a 2 on 3.  Essentially by splitting out wide, both fighters can attempt to take the middle fighter out of the fight.


Ultimately, if both teams know what they are doing, the fight will break up into a 2 on 1 on one side of the field, and a 1 on 1on the other side.  This is caused by the team of 2 splitting and then the center fighter on the team of 3 committing to one side or the other.



Disadvantages to Moving as a Unit

What is often taught is to move together as a unit and to attempt to throw your unit at the flank of the opponents' unit.  Again, this may be the best strategy given the abilities of your team, but I'd like to outline the weakness in this approach.  In either case, the team that moves as a unit leaves a glaring weakness on their trailing side that it easy to double up on.




Of course, both of these counters require the receiving team to know how to react to a unit charge.  Most of them don't, which is one of the reasons the unit charging on the oblique is as effective as it is.  For what it is worth, I have tried this maneuver several times and have lost many times to a much weaker opponent.


Thoughts About Who to Double Up On

We did a lot of 3 on 2s last Friday night and, with that group of people, ultimately we went for a strategy of doubling up on the weakest fighter.  This may seem counter intuitive in that you might think you'd want to match your 2 fighters against their best and 1 fighter against their worst in order to present a balanced attack.  My line of thinking was that we don't need to win the 1 on 1, only survive it.  If we double up on the weaker fighter, that should ensure the quickest kill.  If the single fighter simply goes into full defense mode, he shouldn't have to last longer than a few seconds before help arrives.

Again, this all depends on who the fighters are.