Difference between revisions of "Extreme formations"

From Hattrick
Jump to navigationJump to search
(rev)
 
(33 intermediate revisions by 19 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''Extreme formations''' are those [[formations]] that cannot retain [[routine]] from match to match. As a result, [[confusion]] events with these formations is quite common. The formations are considered to be extreme because they usually abandon one part of the field.
+
{{interwiki/Extreme formations}}
 +
'''Extreme formations''' were [[line-up]]s that abandon one part of the field.
  
The three most common Extreme formations are:
+
As a result of season 42 [[match engine]] changes, this concept became obsolete.
  
*[[2-5-3]]
+
=A change in the rules=
*[[5-2-3]]
+
The old rule was that these line-ups could not retain [[formation experience|routine]] from match to match up. Naturally, wihout a high [[experience]] level, [[confusion]] events were quite common.
*[[5-5-0]]
 
  
These three formations, and only these (considering formations with 11 players), will not sacrifice training for the week as long as they are played with at most three players at each position. In addition, any formation with at least nine players can be played while not losing training as long as they are played with at most three players at each position
+
After 2010 reform, only three line-ups can still be played, and now also gain routine:
 +
* [[5-5-0]]
 +
* [[5-2-3]]
 +
* [[2-5-3]]
  
The squad using these formations must have a high [[experience]] level to counteract the confusion created by using a formation that is virtually new to the team, even if you use it every week, since it is impossible to raise the experience level of the formation. 
+
Other more unusual and drastic formations not listed above, occasionally used particularly by [[national team]]s, are no longer possible after the ban on more than three central defenders, inner midfielders, or forwards.  
Those listed above are the most common, but there are numerous other extreme lineups which have been used over the years such as [[2-6-2]] and [[2-7-1]]. Please beware however that there is no way to play any other Extreme formation than these three and still keep your weekly training.
 
  
[[Category: Game Concepts]]
+
==2-6-2==
[[Category: Formations]]
+
The 2-6-2 wasn't used very much, because [[training]] is lost. It was a risky strategy where a [[manager]] wants to boost the [[midfield]] [[rating]].
 +
 
 +
When playing 2-6-2 very [[experience|experienced]] players are needed to prevent confusion. As you can achieve almost identical results with [[3-5-2]] and [[Offensive]] [[Central Defender]]s without confusion this tactic isn't recommended to the club teams unless the manager is certain what he is doing.
 +
 
 +
Normally this tactic was used only national teams, who can't suffer the training loss since they do not train players. But there were also [[club]]s that used this line-up in a very important match; they chose to to lose training for a good result.
 +
 
 +
{{Line-up|
 +
title = Formation A |
 +
gk = GK |
 +
wb_right = E.IM |
 +
cd_right = CD |
 +
cd_left = E.IM |
 +
wb_left = WBD |
 +
w_right = WO |
 +
im_right = IMO |
 +
im_left = IMO |
 +
w_left = WO |
 +
f_right = FO |
 +
f_left = FO |
 +
}}
 +
 
 +
This is an example of 2-6-2 where is tried to dominate the midfield and also boost the attack ratings as much as possible. The defense will be very poor but a better midfield reduces the number of chances that the opponent will get. And with nice attack ratings the team will possibly score a lot of goals.
 +
 
 +
{{Line-up|
 +
title = Formation B |
 +
gk = GK |
 +
wb_right = E.IM |
 +
cd_right = CDO |
 +
cd_left = CDO |
 +
wb_left = E.IM |
 +
w_right = WTM |
 +
im_right = IM |
 +
im_left = IM |
 +
w_left = WTM |
 +
f_right = FO |
 +
f_left = FO |
 +
}}
 +
 
 +
In this line-up the sole goal is to boost the midfield as much as possible, in order to receive as much chances as possible and prevent the opponent to get any chances. All 4 [[Inner Midfielder|inner midfielders]], the two [[winger|wingers]] AND the two [[offensive]] [[Central Defender|central defenders]] are selected on their [[Playmaking]] and [[Stamina]], thus the midfield rating will be maximised. The [[Forward|forwards]] will get a lot of chances and they will have to knock some in because the [[defence]] is actually formed by just a [[goalkeeper]], so if the opponent has a chance it will probably go in.
 +
 
 +
==2-7-1==
 +
The 2-7-1 (also known as the "Montgomery Formation") was a very midfield-heavy line-up, using at least 5 inner midfielders. It was usually undesirable for clubs because fielding more than three inner midfielders it caused training loss. National teams sometimes used this formation to gain a superior midfield, but it certainly caused confusion as it was impossible to gain routine.
 +
 
 +
{{Line-up|
 +
title = Formation A |
 +
gk = GK |
 +
wb_right = WBO |
 +
cd_right = E.IM |
 +
cd_left = CD |
 +
wb_left = E.IM |
 +
w_right = WTM |
 +
im_right = IM |
 +
im_left = IM |
 +
w_left = WTM |
 +
f_right = E.IM |
 +
f_left = FO |
 +
}}
 +
 
 +
Perhaps the best-known use of this formation was in [[Canada]]'s match against [[Sverige|Sweden]] in the final of [[World Cup III|WC 3]].  Canada lost 4-0 on that day, but were only down 1-0 at the half.
 +
 
 +
 
 +
[[category: Match concepts]]

Latest revision as of 02:09, 31 July 2020

INTERWIKI

· English · Français · Magyar ·

Extreme formations were line-ups that abandon one part of the field.

As a result of season 42 match engine changes, this concept became obsolete.

A change in the rules

The old rule was that these line-ups could not retain routine from match to match up. Naturally, wihout a high experience level, confusion events were quite common.

After 2010 reform, only three line-ups can still be played, and now also gain routine:

Other more unusual and drastic formations not listed above, occasionally used particularly by national teams, are no longer possible after the ban on more than three central defenders, inner midfielders, or forwards.

2-6-2

The 2-6-2 wasn't used very much, because training is lost. It was a risky strategy where a manager wants to boost the midfield rating.

When playing 2-6-2 very experienced players are needed to prevent confusion. As you can achieve almost identical results with 3-5-2 and Offensive Central Defenders without confusion this tactic isn't recommended to the club teams unless the manager is certain what he is doing.

Normally this tactic was used only national teams, who can't suffer the training loss since they do not train players. But there were also clubs that used this line-up in a very important match; they chose to to lose training for a good result.


Formation A
GK
E.IM CD E.IM WBD
WO IMO IMO WO
FO FO


This is an example of 2-6-2 where is tried to dominate the midfield and also boost the attack ratings as much as possible. The defense will be very poor but a better midfield reduces the number of chances that the opponent will get. And with nice attack ratings the team will possibly score a lot of goals.


Formation B
GK
E.IM CDO CDO E.IM
WTM IM IM WTM
FO FO


In this line-up the sole goal is to boost the midfield as much as possible, in order to receive as much chances as possible and prevent the opponent to get any chances. All 4 inner midfielders, the two wingers AND the two offensive central defenders are selected on their Playmaking and Stamina, thus the midfield rating will be maximised. The forwards will get a lot of chances and they will have to knock some in because the defence is actually formed by just a goalkeeper, so if the opponent has a chance it will probably go in.

2-7-1

The 2-7-1 (also known as the "Montgomery Formation") was a very midfield-heavy line-up, using at least 5 inner midfielders. It was usually undesirable for clubs because fielding more than three inner midfielders it caused training loss. National teams sometimes used this formation to gain a superior midfield, but it certainly caused confusion as it was impossible to gain routine.


Formation A
GK
WBO E.IM CD E.IM
WTM IM IM WTM
E.IM FO


Perhaps the best-known use of this formation was in Canada's match against Sweden in the final of WC 3. Canada lost 4-0 on that day, but were only down 1-0 at the half.