Ultimate Frisbee vs. Soccer
Scott
more physically demanding, soccer or frisbee. I just wanted to hear
some Ultimate players feedback on what you think. I dont want any
hate mail or angry responses, this is a friendly arguement. It would
be nice to hear from someone who has played soccer at a high level,
ideally for a division 1 college program and who has also played
frisbee for a competitive team. I would like each person who responds
to take the time to consider how much time they put into frisbee each
week. I currently put 20 hours of weights and conditioning into
soccer per week just to give you an idea of an average soccer players
week. Once again, I respect frisbee as a sport and dont want anyone
responding just to bash my opinion. Thanks
Mike Gerics
> be nice to hear from someone who has played soccer at a high level,
> ideally for a division 1 college program and who has also played
> frisbee for a competitive team.
---Both soccer and ultimate require a great deal of running, cutting,
chasing, defending....diving, hitting the ground, getting back up....running
some more.
The difference in terms of "physically demanding".......becomes apparent
when, in each sport, the athlete "gets the piece of equipment used in each
sport in one's possession"
In Ultimate, when an athlete gets the disc...they can stand there with it
for 10 seconds without fear of the opponent taking it away from them.
In Soccer, the exact opposite is true. If you hold the soccer ball for 10
seconds...you are gonna have 3 different opponents physically assaulting you
in order to force you to relinquish the ball.
The Soccer player will have to shield the ball from opponents trying to
slide tackle and force you off the ball....
The difference in the two sports...becomes most apparent when the athlete
HAS either the ball-or-disc in their possession.
It's easy to stand and hold a disc for 10 seconds....
It is tiring and physically demanding to attempt to maintain possession of a
soccer ball for those same 10 seconds.
How you train for each...could be the same...
artyw
I would imagine it depends on much substitution in allowed in soccer.
In some leagues, soccer players are effectively playing "savage". That
has to be brutal...
JT
Back in the day, actually back when i was playing college and more
time, i easily averaged 20 hours a week playing ultimate, working out,
etc...Was it as demanding as top level soccer? Can't answer that one.
JT
Becca
Scott- I work with a soccer player. Trust me...he isn't putting in 20
hours of weights in every week. Maybe 20 hours per week at the bars
but definitely not in the gym/on the track/on the field. I think you
overstate the case. When you refer to your training level do you mean
the average college level D1 soccer player or the average college club
player?
Here's my favorite story on training for ulti vs. soccer
When I was in college we recruited a girl from our school's club
women's soccer team. As a freshman, she had tried out for the
school's cross country team. She was simply too slow and didn't make
the cut. So she played club soccer.
Our school (Bradley University) had a fairly decent CLUB (not D1) team
(without tryouts, etc.) and they won most of their tournaments. We
recruited her second semeseter. She played for us for three years.
And she began to work on not only running for long periods but also
running faster. Eventually, she began to train for the Chicago
marathon her junior year. She ran it (coincidentally running miles
21-26 with a 40 yrs. old co-ed ulti woman she knew) and finished in
the top 300. Senior year, the cross country coach sought her out and
she made the team on partial scholarship (she's a rock star so she was
already on full academic including a stipend - they gave her books).
Is that every ultimate player? Nope.
To play spring league right now (i.e. the equivalent of co-rec soccer)
- as a female (i.e. more likely to end up playing savage) - I train
between 9 and 12 hours per week (not including playing time). To
avoid injury and improve my game, I would like to be putting in
between 15 and 20 hours (somewhere around 20-30 mpw on the road). But
right now I work full time, and go to school part time (8 credit hrs.)
and I'm working to start an ultimate team at my college. Soooo...that
will just have to wait
~b
Frank Kearney
> when, in each sport, the athlete "gets the piece of equipment used in each
> sport in one's possession"
True, possesing the 'object' is tougher in soccer.
But Ultimate's tougher in that you're never really away from the play -
always involved. Soccer usually gives you some time off when the ball is in
an area where you're not supposed to do a whole lot. Like when you're a
defender and the ball is being played way in the opponent's end. Even
midfielders get to rest/jog pretty often. Ultimate keeps you going almost
non-stop. Another big difference is that size and weight help you out more
in soccer than they do in ultimate. Shielding the ball, vying for control,
tackling, etc.
As far as conditioning goes, I'm sure there are ultimate players that train
more than 20 hours a week - and soccer players that train less. Kind of
irrelevant to the argument.
Frank
Dave
Prescription, 4th ed.
Gross Energy Expenditure for Conditioning Exercises, Sports, and
Recreational Activies
METs Description
3.0 Frisbee, playing, general
8.0 Frisbee, ultimate
10.0 Soccer, competetive
7.0 Soccer, casual, general
Based on this I would say playing competetive soccer is slightly more
demanding than ultimate.
scott...@att.net (Scott) wrote in message news:<b4ff3c11.04033...@posting.google.com>...
Josh
level of play (professional, HS, College, juniors, etc) so I'll just
concentrate on the professional level/elite players level. In
traveling soccer as a teenager you go to weekend long tournaments, but
in HS you just play 1 game for example.
In Ultimate players need to be physically fit enough to compete for 2
full days of games, but can sub in and out between points. In Soccer
at the professional level players very rarely sub and the game has few
stoppages of play. Soccer players must be able to maintain speed,
endurance, strength, etc for a continuous 90 minutes. Ultimate
players on the other hand might only need to be able to maintain
speed, endurance, strength etc for bursts of 5-10 minutes (1 point)
after which they can recoup for 5-10 minutes before going in the game
again...BUT they have to do it over and over again for 2 days.
In short they are different and it is difficult to say which one you
have to in better shape for.
Honestly I think Ultimate requires a lot more endurance for players
who are on teams that do not have 30-40 people. When you take a team
of 10-12 people to a tournament and play 2 days straight you'll burn a
lot more calories than what would occur from 90 minutes of continuous
running. Plus an "average joe" could play soccer for 90 minutes and
probably survive the next day. If they played 2 days of ultimate
without some conditioning they wouldn't be able to walk the next day.
I've played both sports and that's my opinion, but then again it is
just an opinion.
Josh
scott...@att.net (Scott) wrote in message news:<b4ff3c11.04033...@posting.google.com>...
emms
From my personal experience, the amount of physical exertion that goes
into an ultimate tournament clearly exceeds that of a soccer
tournament. Both sports produce amazing fitness results if taken
seriously, but I would give the edge to ultimate. Finding someone who
has played soccer at a divison 1 colege level and ultimate at a high
level may be difficult. Usually at such high levels of competition
it's one sport or the other. Unless you do nothing else with your
days.
emms
JV
i have very little problem with what you said. in high school i
played juniors with a couple of guys who played soccer. while this is
high school we had one of the top teams in the state in the 2nd
highest classification. both told me ultimate worked your quads and
hampstrings much harder while soccer was more demanding on your lower
leg. as far as who puts more time in away from practice i have no
problem saying i believe soccer players on a whole put in far more
effort than ultimate players.
the main difference i think believe the two is soccer players prepare
themselves for something like 2 2-3 hour games a week (8-9 per month)
and ultimate players prepare for 8-9 games one weekend out of a month
(yes, i know many teams play more). each tournament weekend is one of
the most physically demanding activities around. all soccer players i
known that play ultimate agree with this as well.
so when comparing the 2 please keep in mind you cant really do it
fairly either way in my opinion.
btw, i put in 6-7 hours a week when no tournaments are involved, and
20-25 hours during tournament weeks, including tournaments
scott...@att.net (Scott) wrote in message news:<b4ff3c11.04033...@posting.google.com>...
T
> be nice to hear from someone who has played soccer at a high level,
> ideally for a division 1 college program and who has also played
> frisbee for a competitive team. I would like each person who responds
Dave Snoke played division 1 varsity soccer, and last Fall played in
semis at club nationals. You listening, Snoke?
> to take the time to consider how much time they put into frisbee each
> week. I currently put 20 hours of weights and conditioning into
> soccer per week just to give you an idea of an average soccer players
> week.
I don't think the amount of time you put in is relevant to the argument.
You could put 20 hours a week into foosball, but that doesn't make it
more physically demanding. The highest level of soccer players can
put in more time than ultimate players b/c of the benfits you can get
for playing soccer that don't exist for ultimate (scholarships, salary,
women if you go to Colorado...)
I don't play soccer so I can't help any more than that.
T
Derrell Durrett
>From Vivian H. Heyward, 2002, Advanced Fitness Assessment and Exercise
>Prescription, 4th ed.
>
>Gross Energy Expenditure for Conditioning Exercises, Sports, and
>Recreational Activies
>
>METs Description
>
>3.0 Frisbee, playing, general
>8.0 Frisbee, ultimate
>10.0 Soccer, competetive
>7.0 Soccer, casual, general
>
>Based on this I would say playing competetive soccer is slightly more
>demanding than ultimate.
>
>
>
Right. So can you share with us how 'competitive' the ultimate was?
It's possible to argue that she's missing the distinction between
'casual' ultimate and 'competitive' ultimate, based on what's written
here....
Derrell
>
>scott...@att.net (Scott) wrote in message news:<b4ff3c11.04033...@posting.google.com>...
>
>
>>I am currently having an arguement with my friend about which sport is
>>more physically demanding, soccer or frisbee. I just wanted to hear
>>some Ultimate players feedback on what you think. I dont want any
>>hate mail or angry responses, this is a friendly arguement. It would
>>be nice to hear from someone who has played soccer at a high level,
>>ideally for a division 1 college program and who has also played
>>frisbee for a competitive team. I would like each person who responds
>>to take the time to consider how much time they put into frisbee each
>>week. I currently put 20 hours of weights and conditioning into
>>soccer per week just to give you an idea of an average soccer players
>>week. Once again, I respect frisbee as a sport and dont want anyone
>>responding just to bash my opinion. Thanks
>>
>>
--
Derrell
Lickety Split XUC
Boulder/Denver
Remove bits about .processed meats and .death from e-mail to reply
Dave
Prescription
Gross Energy Expenditure for Conditioning Exercises, Sports, and
Recreational Activities:
METs Description
3.0 Frisbee, playing, general
8.0 Frisbee, ultimate
10.0 Soccer, competetive
7.0 Soccer, casual, general
METs measure exercise intensity. 1 MET is considered resting.
According to this, soccer is slightly more physically demanding than
ultimate.
scott...@att.net (Scott) wrote in message news:<b4ff3c11.04033...@posting.google.com>...
bil
i have not lost a game in the last year.
any other questions?
go here:
Monkey Arms
Good discussion topic...
Having never played at the highest levels of either sport, I cannot
comment on the differences at those levels. However, at a highly
competitive level (college ultimate, D1 Amateur Soccer), I have to
draw my comparison to the styles in which the games are played. In
soccer, there is a constant motion, usually only a jog, but a constant
motion nonetheless for 45minutes at a time, with a mix of running and
all out sprinting in between. In ultimate, you have the opportunity
to rest, either in the stack, or on the line between points, or when
you have the disc, and you can even call a timeout. However, in
ultimate, almost all movement is a sprint either to the disc, into
space, or down the field, much more than any one person would sprint
in the same amount of time on the soccer pitch. So really, both
sports have different type of phyisical demand. Time is also a
factor, in soccer you run 45+/- minutes, twice. In ultimate, I've
seen some points last almost that long! But in the end, I feel that a
soccer player will travel more distance (10,000+ yards/game on
average) and expel more energy in 90 min. than an ultimate player will
in the same time frame.
And another thought for the wind...I can go out and play 5 games of
ultimate in a day, turn around and do it again on Sunday. I find it
difficult to play one soccer game a day on back to back days. So my
opinion is that soccer is more physically demanding.
-Monkey Arms
Nicholas Dent
It's really hard to compare soccer to frisbee because so many more
people play soccer. At the highest level of competition soccer
players train harder, there's a much smaller percentage that make it
there, and there's more competition. Plus, then it's your job to play
soccer.
That said, you can train pretty hard for ultimate. It depends on who
you are and how driven you are. There are differences in the sport,
but there are no sports for which the training is easy. Pool is
probably less physically demanding and more skill-driven than
ultimate; running middle distance is all about training.
Frisbee is more anaerobic than soccer so speed and explosiveness are
of a higher priority - there's less subbing in soccer but you only
play one game per day. . . You get people playing high level frisbee
who aren't fast but are amazing throwers, but it's rare to find
someone who just has an incredible shot playing high-level soccer.
Makes a pretty good case for soccer being more physically demanding to
play at the highest level.
Nick
scott...@att.net (Scott) wrote in message news:<b4ff3c11.04033...@posting.google.com>...
Eduardo
Yes you are correct. Professional soccer allows for 3 substitutions in
the entire match. So essentially 8 players are playing savage.
As a player of both sports, i want to elaborate on the above. Soccer
is more demanding when a player has the ball. Ultimate however
involves a near constant brisk jog to either position yourself for a
cut or to stay with your man. Marking in ultimate may also be easier.
In soccer when your man has the ball, you are trying as hard as you
possibly can to take it away. In ultimate, you do have to shift your
feet to prevent the break, etc, but it is for 10 seconds max and you
also have to work much less than in soccer. When neither you nor your
man has the ball in soccer, you are either jogging slowly or even
walking for 75% of the time when the ball is not in your immidiate
area of the field. In the end the sports are pretty similar, although
I think soccer requires greater stamina because of the "savage"
situation.
Soccer also require much more physical contact, something not usually
taken into consideration. From experience however, it is VERY tiring
to be pushed and bumped for 90 minutes of play.
Soccer competition schedule is MUCH more forgiving than ultimate. A
team will very rarely play a game two days in a row, whereas in
ultimate 4 games in one day is quite common in tournament play.
Thats my two cents,
Ed
p.bowen
> soccer per week just to give you an idea of an average soccer players
> week. Once again, I respect frisbee as a sport and dont want anyone
> responding just to bash my opinion. Thanks
yeah, but do you visualize? i hear that's where it's at. right dikeman?
Mike F
substitutions and the amount of time running versus amount of time
standing around, I think frisbee is slightly more demanding. In
soccer, you don't really spend as much time cutting or faking or
juking your defender. That is usually something that you'd only do if
you have the ball. And even then, you should probably pass it instead
of trying to get around somebody.
However, frisbee requires a great deal more mental concentration,
which in a way is physically demanding. That is, when you're tired in
soccer, it doesn't quite affect your ability to kick the ball as much
as being tired in frisbee affects your ability to read the disc, make
decent clean throws, or catch the frisbee. Frisbee requires more
hand-eye coordination, and that in itself can be fairly taxing.
And finally, laying out for a d or a catch is definitely more
demanding than slide tackling. Throwing your body to the ground
headfirst while trying to catch or block a moving disc is a lot harder
and requires more energy than a slide tackle at an opponent who has
the ball. Other difficult moves may include greatest attempts or
skying, but those occur probably at the same frequency as jumping for
a head ball or attempting a bicycle kick.
scott...@att.net (Scott) wrote in message news:<b4ff3c11.04033...@posting.google.com>...
Jimmy McGee
points in trying to examine a comparison between soccer (from a
Division I level) and Ultimate (from a top tier College level)
A. The major argument hurting soccer players on a general scale as far
as athletic ability required, is the lack of upper body coordination
required. One of the great qualities of a sport like ultimate, or
tennis, or basketball, is the full body coordination required to play
it successfully. Now nobody try to argue that you use your hands in
soccer, to like push people around or throw the ball in once a game.
Clearly we are in different fields of use here. Also its irrelevant to
argue you use your legs and feet MORE in soccer. Clearly that is the
case, but does not overcome the lack of upper body use. So in the end,
I would say Ultimate "requires" a higher level of "complete"
athleticism than does a sport like soccer. Although...
B. As I have mentioned in posts before, Ultimate is JUST starting to
get real athletes to participate. Yes Mike G, I know the idea is
shocking, but on the grand scale of things, right now college ultimate
is nowhere near drawing the quality of athleticism you can find in
almost any D-I player in a major sport. Just think about growing up,
like most of us I played soccer as a youth. Think about the GREATEST
soccer player you knew, pretty damn good right? But think about
whether they managed to play D-I. I grew up in a town forged on soccer
ability, in my 4 years in high school our teams (men and women) won 7
combined state championships and were nationally ranked. Even from
those exceptional athletes, I only know a handful who went on to play
D-I. I'm just sayin, as of right now us Ultimate players, are not
nearly as athletic as virtually anyone playing D-I soccer, or almost
any (major) sport right now. Considering this fact, and incorporating
the idea that the true athletes with Ultimate applicable skills are
becoming basketball guards, or football corner backs, or playing
tennis, or soccer, or volleyball. I know it has been pointed out
before, but if ultimate players were good enough (generalization, I am
sure there are specific instances that disprove) they would be playing
a "real" sport and not ultimate. Which in the end disproves A. But in
the future, when kids like Kobe Bryant, or Freddy Adu, grow up playing
Ultimate, point A becomes relevant. Until then, I far respect a D-I
soccer rather than an Ultimate player who made the semis at Nationals.
Now I KNOW people put way more than 20 hours a week into Ultimate,
especially in college. And I would love to see stats on how far an
average Ultimate player runs in one game vs a soccer player... not
counting a 5 games a day tournament. But I still think there is a
tremendous athleticism gap between any D-I sport and those who come
stumbling onto a frisbee field as freshman.
argue on
Shit Dick
scott...@att.net (Scott) wrote in message news:<b4ff3c11.04033...@posting.google.com>...
Fetch
it just ends as a circular argument, so from that you can say they are
pretty damn close. But for fun here are some thoughts that may or may
not help you.
It seems that when I go back to play soccer I feel faster than
everyone else and then when I go play soccer for a while and play
ultimate the same is true. That probably has something to do with
being rejuvenated.
In soccer, having played forward my entire life with a little halfback
here and there it seemed like I just ran when pressuring the
defense,[forward] but it was at my own free will. Yes the coach liked
it and it's a great way to get a turnover and a quick goal if you can
force the defense to make a mistake, but it wasn't truly mandatory, as
compared to the fullbacks where it is completely mandatory to play
defense as the offense comes down the field.
In ultimate it is imperative to stay tight on your man and not get
burnt deep or on the in cut and usually both. It seems that the times
you are in you are running harder but for a shorter period of time,
which is essentially sprint training. In soccer your ball handling
skills can make up for how slow you are where that is true to ultimate
but not quite as much. In soccer you dribble the ball down the field
and you might take a shot on goal or you may be too fatigued too.
Taking a power shot on goal on target after sprinting 50 yards slide
tackling then bumping shoulders and then sprinting back up field with
the ball and shooting can be very hard.
Soccer players I would guess are better in the weight room doing
things such as leg press and Olympic lifts compared to ultimate
players which can run maybe slightly longer but have more difficulties
with the deep muscle tissue. The proof of this is seeing how a new
ultimate player coming from soccer usually has more strength towards
the end of the game. These anabolic movements are harder I think for
an ultimate player. It doesn't have to be limited to soccer players
either. If you look at a college x-country runner, and put him in
soccer, he has more difficulties handling the uneven weight of a push
or pull of the jersey because he is only an efficient runner, and
likely not as strong on the squats. (Even though runners today are
extremely strong, I'm not disn' runners at all)
Then there is the simple fact that everyone is different and their
body chemistry is and body strength to weight ratio is completely
different. In soccer I like being heavier and ultimate being lighter.
There are exceptions to everything.
That's enough rambling for one week.
fetch
RoBot
play Regionals level Ultimate, my stand is that Ultimate is way more
demanding. Think about position on the field. If I am a back in soccer
and I took an overhead shot of where I move on the field, it is pretty
limited. There is also all that "downtime" when the ball is in another
zone on the field. Yes, I am moving covering opponents, trying to be a
threat, etc, but I am still pretty limited in the field space I actually
cover and if I'm smart I don't have to move too much. If I took that
same overhead shot of where I move on the Ultimate field, sheesh! I'm
all over! I don't get that downtime because my guy could take me
anywhere on D and on O I may either come back for a dump or go deep. I'm
not saying a soccer player can't be a rover, but in general they are
required to stay in position and rarely deviate. Maybe this is true in
Ulti too, but I can be a far greater threat in Ultimate if I don't stick
to one position on the field. That make sense?
judd
> It would
> > be nice to hear from someone who has played soccer at a high level,
> > ideally for a division 1 college program and who has also played
> > frisbee for a competitive team.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> ---Both soccer and ultimate require a great deal of running, cutting,
> chasing, defending....diving, hitting the ground, getting back up....running
> some more.
>
> The difference in terms of "physically demanding".......becomes apparent
> when, in each sport, the athlete "gets the piece of equipment used in each
> sport in one's possession"
What you wrote is very true, but with Ultimate, you exert the utmost
of energy when you don't have the disc. By the difference of the
structures and rules of each sport, Ultimate players don't have to "do
much" when they are in possession, but outside of that time they are
anything but still. With a huge soccer field, soccer players can't
begin to keep the same pace as Ultimate players running back and
forth. Some of the soccer players on the field don't do much when
they don't have the ball; as you implied, when they do have
posssession, they have to exert much more energy than any other time.
What would the average time of possession be? It's probably a few
seconds at best. What frequency does the average player have the
ball? Obviously in Ultimate you rarely hold onto the disc for a full
ten seconds; it's frequently half that or less, and rarely would
anyone wait a few more seconds so they don't have to run again.
Usually that time of possession is based on the level of EFFORT that
the cutters are putting forth. I'll bet that when the ball is on the
other side of the field, some soccer players remain relatively calm
for similar stints of time. As long as the competition is high and
the subs are a plenty, the level of exertion in Ultimate is as far as
you wanna take it. (people are free to sprint faster when they don't
have something to control like a ball) Not to mention the intelligent
soccer player is looking to pass out of situations just as much as he
is willing to take on defenders and work hard at retaining individual
possession. I've watched a decent amount of pro soccer, and there are
plenty of occasions when the offense has the ball, there is not much
of a "feeding frenzy" of defenders. Those intense battles for the
ball come and go... but there's plenty of uneventful ball control
through passing, more boring in my opinion than Ulty's dumps and
swings.
Scott
> scott...@att.net (Scott) wrote in message news:<b4ff3c11.04033...@posting.google.com>...
> > I am currently having an arguement with my friend about which sport is
> > more physically demanding, soccer or frisbee. I just wanted to hear
> > some Ultimate players feedback on what you think. I dont want any
> > be nice to hear from someone who has played soccer at a high level,
> > ideally for a division 1 college program and who has also played
> > to take the time to consider how much time they put into frisbee each
> > week. I currently put 20 hours of weights and conditioning into
> > soccer per week just to give you an idea of an average soccer players
> > week. Once again, I respect frisbee as a sport and dont want anyone
> > responding just to bash my opinion. Thanks
>
B-
I think its unfair to say that I dont put in the amount of hours i say
I do. Without a doubt i put in at least those 20 hours a week. We
practice 2x a day except for Fri, sat, and sun. We usually have a
game on Saturday. No Club soccer team comes close to a descent D1
program.
Scott
Scott
I dont think "juking your defender" is necessairly as hard as passing
a ball before going against a defender. As soon as you get rid of the
ball you are expected to move to make yourself open again. If you
just stand there as you more or less insinuated you arent a good
player.
I agree with you when you say laying out is more demanding than slide
tackling. Diving head first is harder then sliding feet first
anyday... but what about taking a slide tackle. Come 60 minutes into
a game taking a hard hard kick to the calf or ankle is probably a
little rougher on the body.
no problem saying heading= skying, bicycle attempts rarely happen, no
where close to once a game so that might support your arguement a
little more.
My biggest problem with your arguement is that you think ultimate
requires more mental concentration.
In an ultimate game you are going to be tired toward the end of the
game so naturally basic skills like throwing a disc is going to be a
little tougher. Same applies for a soccer game though, when youre
tired at the end of a game playing the ball, a simple task, is a
little tougher.
Beyond that though, in ultimate there are very few defences that you
have to learn and deal with. Man-to-man mostly and occasionally a
zone. In soccer there are countless numbers of formations that change
throughout the game depending on the score, venue, field condition, or
team you are playing. When you are attacking the goal with the ball
you have to keep in mind what the other teams formation is, where your
teammates are, what kind of defence the other team is playing (thats
different from formation--- example the other team could be playing a
3-5-2 zone or a 3-5-2 man to man), what your numbers are behind you in
case you give up the ball so that you arent counter attacked, which
foot is dominate in your forwards, how fast the other teams defenders
are, and a number of other things that you really dont have to worrry
about in ultimate.
Frisbee does require more hand eye coordination but soccer requires
more foot-eye coordination.
TO address some other peoples arguements about soccer on TV...
Imagine watching an ultimate game on TV. Outside the view of the
camera you wont see all the cuts and runs that teammates off the
frisbe are making. Likewise in soccer, when you are watching the man
on the ball you dont see the 60yrd overlapping run a back makes in an
attempt to get open. Professional soccer players seem to have a lot
of time on the ball because defenders can't press as hard as in
amature soccer. If a pro defender gets as close as an amature
defender does he will be easily beaten. At that high of a level the
footskills of the players are amazing and taking a ball off them is
very hard work for one player to. What you probably didnt see on TV
was that defender blocking 2 pass lanes and forcing the attacker into
another defender. The biggest difference between a pro and an amature
is the level at which they understand the game.
Gregory C. Lewin
>
> In Ultimate players need to be physically fit enough to compete for 2
> full days of games, but can sub in and out between points. In Soccer
> at the professional level players very rarely sub and the game has few
> stoppages of play. Soccer players must be able to maintain speed,
> endurance, strength, etc for a continuous 90 minutes. Ultimate
> players on the other hand might only need to be able to maintain
> speed, endurance, strength etc for bursts of 5-10 minutes (1 point)
> after which they can recoup for 5-10 minutes before going in the game
> again...BUT they have to do it over and over again for 2 days.
Interestingly, the subbing in competitive _indoor_ soccer is much more
like ultimate, in that you usually run your ass off for a few minutes,
come out huffing and puffing while another string goes in and then go
and do it all over again. I haven't played either indoor or outdoor
since high school, but I found the indoor regimen, like ultimate, to be
much more physically demanding. Throw in 3-4 games a day for a two day
tourney and ultimate wins hands down.
Greg
Becca
You said the average soccer player puts in 20 hours per week. I think
that you are looking at a distinct sub-set of all soccer players. I
think the average soccer player (i.e. not you - you are not average -
you are above average if not exceptional hence playing D1) puts in far
less than 20 hours per week.
Without a doubt i put in at least those 20 hours a week. We
> practice 2x a day except for Fri, sat, and sun. We usually have a
> game on Saturday.
Not arguing about the time you put in ... just whether this is the
time the "average" soccer player puts in. I don't think it is.
As has been well stated by others, I don't think there is much in
ultimate comprable to playing D1. Maybe the very tippy, top tier of
college "programs" -teams that win year after year after year (UCSB &
Carleton). But even that only likely compares to Sectional/Division
level teams in D1 (not National Champs).
No Club soccer team comes close to a descent D1
> program.
Think about it this way. All ultimate is "club" level...(btw Is the
D1 program going down hill? descent = down, decent = adequate, good)
Look at the resources that are going into supporting D1 sports. Huge,
huge difference about $ that goes to D1 sports and $ that goes to club
sports.
The $20/meal per diem + free transportation + free room when traveling
(4 people per double occupancy room - something college ulti players
can't even fathom) + free warm-ups + free sweats + free suit/cap +
prime pool time + on-site & on-call trainers for D1 swimming
vs.
our club soccer program (that happened to be run/coached by the
Director of Athletics and the Intramural Director) that got $500 per
year.
And you aren't even looking at scholarships, etc.
Are you going to be able to attract better players and give them
better opportunities to train w/ more $. Sure - why have Boosters
otherwise?
Does that make the whole field more competitive? I think so...
Is Div 1 the way for ultimate? I don't know. I think the whole
alumni supported scholarship program (like CU) seems more ideal to me.
soccerdave
I have recently played D1 soccer and play on top tier teams in both
the college level and club level. I agree with a lot of what has been
said about the two sports. Obviously there are differences in the
type of running for both sports. One thing that hasnt been mentioned
is differences within each sport depending on what style of play your
team goes for. Some soccer teams play a more aggresive style, and
some play a more controlled, slow paced game. Some ultimate teams
value the disc and slowly work it up the field, while some gun it
deep. Just as with defense, while some teams try to force turnovers,
and some try to contain, and let the other team make a mistake. All
of these factor in to how "physically demanding" the sport is.
At the highest levels I would have to say soccer is more physically
demanding, although not by much. In ultimate, you do get to sub in
and out as needed (unless you do not have a deep team I suppose),
whereas in soccer, you likely are playing the entire 90 minutes.
Scott makes a very good point about how in soccer, you appear to be
resting, but in high levels, you are always on your toes, and do not
get much of a rest...just as in ultimate, on TV it looks like you
arent doing much some of the time, but you are really always moving.
There is nothing in soccer that compares to a full ultimate tournament
endurance wise. Before ultimate, nutrition and hydration were not
nearly as important. Ultimate definately puts a beating on your body.
I'd say soccer requires more muscle fitness and total core strength,
and ultimate requires more of an all around fitness.
The mental aspect is equal for both sports. Being tired in ultimate
is no different than in soccer....both make it harder to do execute
simple skills. I disagree with Scott saying multiple formations for
soccer is more complicated than ultimate. There are several different
formations for soccer, but they are very simple to figure out, just as
different forces in ultimate are simple to figure out. There is
plenty of variety in each, neither sport is harder than the other to
figure out.
Injury wise, I have to say ultimate is tougher on the body. This
seems odd because ultimate is "non-contact". In soccer, you know you
are gonna get pushed and kicked. Minor injuries are going to happen,
and you expect them. The number of dislocated shoulders and messed up
knees from ultimate is way higher though. The absolute disregard of
ones body on the ultimate field when laying out for a disc is greater
than that of a soccer player slide tackling or doing a diving header.
There is no clear cut answer, both are extremely competative at high
levels. Thats why I play both!
~snoke
Gambler
> have to learn and deal with. Man-to-man mostly and occasionally a
> zone. In soccer there are countless numbers of formations that change
> throughout the game depending on the score, venue, field condition, or
> team you are playing. When you are attacking the goal with the ball
> you have to keep in mind what the other teams formation is, where your
> teammates are, what kind of defence the other team is playing (thats
> different from formation--- example the other team could be playing a
> 3-5-2 zone or a 3-5-2 man to man), what your numbers are behind you in
> case you give up the ball so that you arent counter attacked, which
> foot is dominate in your forwards, how fast the other teams defenders
> are, and a number of other things that you really dont have to worrry
> about in ultimate.
I really don't care which is more physically challenging, ultimate or
soccer. However, when making your comparison, please don't make
untrue statements about the mental side of ultimate, because the
mental game in ultimate is quite demanding.
To reduce defense in ultimate to "man-to-man" or "zone" is absurd.
Any team that has only 2 types of D is not likely to be very effective
against a top team. Instead, good ultimate teams have a dozen
different types of defenses (at least) which they use depending on the
weather conditions, the strengths and weaknesses of the other team and
their own team, what point in the game it is, where the momentum of
the game is, etc. Not to mention the fact that a team can change
their D in the middle of a point or possession in order to adapt to
what the offense is doing or change the angles and take away different
looks.
On offense, ultimate players have to constantly evaluate the field and
calculate the advantage of throwing certain throws over others.
Assessing the risk and benefit of certain throws is a huge part of
what the thrower has to think about while also faking out their mark
and concentrating enough to execute the throw they do choose. That
assesment often has to take into consideration your current field
position, the speed of a cutter vs. their defender, how easy a
specific throw is against the mark you're facing, how the wind will
affect any throw, whether another defender is poaching and has a bid
on the disc, and which throw benefits your offensive structure most
for the next pass. That isn't even getting into all the plays that
teams create and expect each player to learn, memorize, and be able to
improvize off of.
My point is basically, ultimate is quite mentally demanding at the top
level and to say otherwise is naive.
judd
The absolute disregard of
> ones body on the ultimate field when laying out for a disc is greater
> than that of a soccer player slide tackling or doing a diving header.
If you're a goalie, you probably know what laying out is about. And,
laying out isn't something everyone does, but is about the craziest
thing physically one can do. A bicycle kick is more spectacular, at
least visually, and awesome; I don't see how they fail to break their
necks doing that. 'Course, whenever I rarely see it happen, I'm not
paying attention to how the player is landing.
Garrett Dyer
>If you're a goalie, you probably know what laying out is about.
I played goalie in high school and that laying out is worlds different
than a layout in ultimate. In defending a net, you may get one or two
strides before leaping, and if properly done, you land on your side
with your arm lessening the impact. In chasing a disc, you're rarely
taking less than 3 steps before extending yourself, and if properly
done, you're landing on the most vulnerable areas of your body. It's
the ones that happen at a full sprint that are what separate layouts
in this sport from soccer's. So I'd have to disagree that soccer
goalies have that skill simply because they land on the ground
routinely.
judd
It's
> the ones that happen at a full sprint that are what separate layouts
> in this sport from soccer's.
I agree with this. But sometimes don't the goalies lay out with both
arms extended, leaving their ribs exposed? Still, not as bad as full
sprint- laying out, but pretty extreme.
Alan Hoyle
> I agree with this. But sometimes don't the goalies lay out with both
> arms extended, leaving their ribs exposed? Still, not as bad as full
> sprint- laying out, but pretty extreme.
My impression is that goalies are trained to use the ball to help
cushion their fall. Never having been trained as a goalie, I can't
vouch for the accuracy of this statement.
-alan
--
Alan Hoyle - al...@unc.edu - http://www.alanhoyle.com/
"I don't want the world, I just want your half." -TMBG
Get Horizontal, Play Ultimate.
Peter Washington
Actually, the goalie layout is much more likely to result in injury
than a full-sprint layout. A full-sprint layout results in the least
jarring impact, if done right, because you slide when you hit the
ground rather than just doing a belly- (or rib-) flop. Try this later
on today: go out to your favorite soft, plush grassy field, jump up in
the air, splay all your limbs out while tilting your body into a
horizontal position, and land on your ribcage. Hurts, doesn't it?
Now compare/contrast that with diving for a loose ball on a cold, hard
wood floor. No big deal.
I've thrice bruised, cracked and/or broken ribs laying out (never
bothered to find out which.) All three times it was a pretty
low-(horizontal-direction)-speed impact with the ground.
Or, think of it this way. How do airplanes land? What do you think
would happen if they just cut the engines and fell?
OK, so airplanes generate lift by moving forward, while most human
bodies do not. So that wasn't a very good example. Unfortunately I
don't know much about projectile physics. So someone who does should
explain what I'm talking about, or point out why I'm so wrong. It
would seem, based on experience, that when you lay out forward while
running fast, and thus have a very "shallow" angle of impact with the
ground, the force of impact is absorbed much better than when the
angle of impact is steeper (which would result from a lower-speed
layout, because you'd lose your forward momentum in midair and just
fall straight down.) Am I fooling myself, or is there a simple
explanation in basic billiard-ball-type physics that I'm too dumb to
be able to think of?
Travis Finucane
"Peter Washington" <p...@uclink.berkeley.edu> wrote in message
news:39f90a65.0404...@posting.google.com...
<snip>
> I've thrice bruised, cracked and/or broken ribs laying out (never
> bothered to find out which.) All three times it was a pretty
> low-(horizontal-direction)-speed impact with the ground.
>
<snip>
>
> OK, so airplanes generate lift by moving forward, while most human
> bodies do not. So that wasn't a very good example. Unfortunately I
> don't know much about projectile physics. So someone who does should
> explain what I'm talking about, or point out why I'm so wrong. It
> would seem, based on experience, that when you lay out forward while
> running fast, and thus have a very "shallow" angle of impact with the
> ground, the force of impact is absorbed much better than when the
> angle of impact is steeper (which would result from a lower-speed
> layout, because you'd lose your forward momentum in midair and just
> fall straight down.) Am I fooling myself, or is there a simple
> explanation in basic billiard-ball-type physics?
I think when you lay out at a full sprint you generally start pretty low,
like from a crouch. When you leap up to the side and flop down, you are up
higher.
The "shallow angle of impact" you describe is a combination of your vertical
falling speed with your horizontal sprinting speed. You hit the ground
downward just as fast in from a nonmoving crouch as you do when you are
sprinting. The horizontal impact doesn't hurt you much, because the grass
slows you to a halt. The vertical impact is spread over your whole body so
it doesn't hurt so much either. When you cracked your ribs you were probably
twisted or bent in some fashion to expose a smaller area of your body to
greater impact.
Fortunat might be better at mechanickle engineering than he is at coaching
grammar, so he could probably draw up some vectors if that would help
convince you.
judd
> On 6 Apr 2004 07:22:21 -0700, judd wrote:
>
> > I agree with this. But sometimes don't the goalies lay out with both
> > arms extended, leaving their ribs exposed? Still, not as bad as full
> > sprint- laying out, but pretty extreme.
>
> My impression is that goalies are trained to use the ball to help
> cushion their fall. Never having been trained as a goalie, I can't
> vouch for the accuracy of this statement.
>
> -alan
Wow, so maybe wearing some kind of rubber vest in Ultimate is the
answer. Who said Ultimate doesn't have anything to promote?!?!
judd
> My impression is that goalies are trained to use the ball to help
> cushion their fall. Never having been trained as a goalie, I can't
> vouch for the accuracy of this statement.
Just checking back on this thread, I forgot the obvious follow up to
that statement, assuming it is true: what if they miss the ball?
Whoops!
Garrett Dyer
>Just checking back on this thread, I forgot the obvious follow up to
>that statement, assuming it is true: what if they miss the ball?
It's one of those things that's hard to describe, but essentially it's
very similar to the way your body weight is distributed when you lay
out in ultimate. You sort of curl your lower body up toward your
upper body as you land on your side, so the brunt of the impact is
lessened. Check out a highlight reel sometime...they show some of
those from European games occasionally on cable and goalies are shown
flying through the air constantly.
But the gist of it is that there's no way that you can jump up in the
air like goalies do and basically splat yourself on the ground. They
have a way of dissipating the impact too.
rahulaj...@gmail.com
See I want to know what are the similarities of soccer and ultimate.
I love both the sports and play it a lot. I respect the sports and please answer My questions as fast as possible. Internet cannot have every thing you know
Regards,
Michael
bill.a...@gmail.com
Mondays and Wednesdays: Weight Room, agility 30 minute, lifting 1 hour. Total 90 minutes.
Tuesdays and Thursdays: 2+ hour practice with a game at the end
Saturday: 3 hour practice
Sunday: 2+ hour practice with a game at the end.
All in all, I remember these 3 years wit Ultimate being very demanding. And of course, I would practice my throws in my free time (about 5 hours a week easily) just as I'm sure soccer player practice their ball handling. I will give more credit to soccer players that most players are playing the entire game where as in Ultimate, every point means a new line. But, I would say that Ultimate players exert more energy per minute playing (5 minutes of Ultimate requires more energy than 5 minutes of Soccer). So it is really hard to compare.
I did live with a D-1 soccer player in college and he came to a few Ultimate practices with the team. He definitely was physically able to compete, and noticeably stood out as a competent player, but he mentioned several times that he was "going to throw up" due to the intensity. But I'm sure I would say the same thing playing soccer. :)
aziff.c...@gmail.com
aziff.c...@gmail.com
aziff.c...@gmail.com
aziff.c...@gmail.com
teacu...@gmail.com
teacu...@gmail.com
teacu...@gmail.com
teacu...@gmail.com
Oh, speaking of ultimate, with its max 90 minute games, and tournaments with 3-4 games a day. You do not see that in soccer. In high school and college tournaments are like that. Not in soccer.