Another Derby #1: Classic Roller Derby

Chapter 3

The Pack Start Formation

We’re starting the history component of this series with the game that started it all, so it only makes sense that the first derby concept going under the microscope here is the beginning of a derby bout itself:

The start of a jam.

Before the modern game came to life, all major forms of roller derby utilized rolling jam starts. This meant that all players from both teams were made to start rolling around the track at a moderate pace, while in pack formation, before a jam could begin.

Once a classic game of roller derby got going, the pack and its players never stopped rolling around the track during general play. Everyone was constantly circulating around the track, even as substitutions were being made between jams. Before the demands of television, they didn’t even stop rolling for the men/women changeover between periods, creating a situation where up to 20 players were on the track at once as teammates “tagged” their partners in, a tradition that dated back to the transcontinental skating marathons.

Exchanging positions between jams or periods resembled the controlled chaos of a short track speedskating team relay race. Back then, there were only a few extra players available to skate for a team in a period, so substitutions were light. The only thing that changed during the downtime was the helmets (positions) between players already circulating.

For modern derby as it is now, implementing a rolling start would be impractical and chaotic. There would likely be substitution gridlock as players left the track and new players entered it, leaving no definitive nucleus for players to congregate to. It would be more confusing would be worth it for the skaters, referees, and the fans at this moment in derby’s new history. Standing starts can to do the job just fine—or at least, they will once the WFTDA fixes things with their jam start rules.

However, there is one aspect of the old start sequence that modern derby would be wise to take a closer look at.

Back then, packs were required to line up in equal position between teams before a jam could begin, with the pivots at the front, the blockers in the middle, the jammers at the rear, and both teams pretty much equally distributed throughout the pack.

This requirement existed to make sure both teams had the same fair chance of getting a jammer out from the back of the pack first, giving neither team a pre-jam positional advantage. (After the play started, players were free to move within the pack as they liked, obviously.)

Contrast this with modern derby jam starts. Once a jam ends, blockers participating in the next jam are free to line up within the designated start area without restriction. It’s pretty much first come, first served, with no rules dictating mandatory formation, other than WFTDA flat track rules giving pivots exclusive access to the oft-neglected pivot line.

In casual play, this would be fine. However, this take-what-you-can get mentality before a play begins may cause a competitive imbalance if there are two equally-matched teams who will to squeeze every little bit of advantage that they can out of the rules.

Many effective roller derby strategies in WFTDA and RDCL play seem to give a team holding the rear of the pack a natural advantage over those holding the front. This has been demonstrated in practice a countless number of times and is not something I need to further pound into the ground here.

Even if it were just a perceived advantage instead of an actual one, it’s still something both teams may want to position themselves for. If they believed one location in the pack to be more advantageous than the other, whether that be the back, the front, the inside, the outside, or anywhere else; and both teams wanted to occupy that location at the same time, the only way to make it completely fair to both teams would be to give them both an equal opportunity to claim it before a jam begins.

However, the modern game doesn’t allow for this owing to the different positions of team benches relative to the starting lines on the track.

A) The classic rolling start. Teams are equally distributed in the pack, giving neither team an advantage (or disadvantage) and ensuring a fair start for both teams. B) In WFTDA play, if both teams want to start with a rear wall, one team will never be able to get it owing to the other team’s bench being closer to the jammer line. C) If WFTDA rules were changed to make the front of the pack advantageous, at least both pivots could be at the front. However, one team would still have a moderate (and unequal) positional advantage with the rest of their blockers. D) With benches in the infield, RDCL banked track play almost eliminates this issue, but there may be situations where bench positioning–not team play–still gives a team a small pre-jam advantage.

In an attempt to balance out this discrepancy, it is customary for teams in contemporary play to switch benches at halftime. This gives both squads an equal amount of time on either bench, and therefore making it so they have roughly—but not always—an equal amount of jams nearer both start lines.

This doesn’t quite balance things out 50/50, however. Game situations, score differentials and time remaining have a big impact on strategy. Teams aren’t as desperate for points or mindful of clock management in the first half as they are in the second half, for example.

In a close game, if a team’s best game-closing strategies require a rear wall completely behind the other team, only one team is ever going to have the chance to get it during second-half crunch time: The team with the bench nearer the jammer line. The fact that the other team got to sit in front of the jammer line during the first half won’t help them at that point in the game.[1]

There may be room for improvement. Although the classic rolling jam start is impractical, the element of fairness and equal position within it is a good base to work from.

Consider that flat track teams playing under WFTDA rules can distribute their blockers anywhere within the 30 feet between the jam start lines. This makes for some intriguing possibilities:

Where do you line up your blockers in relation to the other team’s blockers? Do you keep your team together horizontally for maximum blocking strength, or do you distribute them vertically for more options? Do you put your best blocker at the rear to help your own jammer, or do you put her at the front to act as a last line of defense?

Personally, I grew to fall in love with this facet of the rules, because it helps to differentiate the flat-track game from other versions of the sport. However, the subtleties of it got thrown out the window once everyone decided lining up eight-astern on the jammer line was the way to go.

This will be fixed at some point in the WFTDA’s rules revision future, obviously. However, a potential solution to it, artificially corralling blockers into a tight starting box as in RDCL banked track rules, may take this bit of strategy away from the game.

There is a potential compromise, and we can take an element of the classic formation start rules to discover it.

Rules-based formations are not new to sports. In football (gridiron), the team on offense is free to line up in any formation they would like within the rules designated for pre-snap play. That is, seven players must be on the line of scrimmage–no more, no less–only one player in the backfield may be in motion at one time, and any shift in formation must pause for one second before the ball is snapped.

This setup allows the offense to show different looks and implement different pre-snap strategies in an attempt to deceive the defense, while at the same time giving the defense a fair chance to defend against surprise pre-play trickery, knowing that the offense is relatively limited in what it can do before the play begins.

In roller derby, teams are on offense and defense at the same time. If we were to apply the fairness of the football pre-snap formation to a roller derby pre-jam formation, we can give both teams the opportunity to implement positional strategies against their opponents while at the same time giving both teams a fair chance to position themselves against the other team, regardless of bench positioning.

This can be achieved by mandating some blockers line up in a rigid formation, allow other blockers to line up as they please against the other team for strategical purposes.

In football, line-of-scrimmage rules bind the offense before a play begins, although they still have flexibility to show different looks within those rules. (Can you imagine what football would be like if  formation rules didn’t exist?) Roller derby can implement a similar system, such as requiring the two pivots and a blocker from each team to start on the pivot line by rule (for fairness) but still allow the other four blockers to line up where they please (for strategy). Here are some examples of this hybrid theory.

A setup that requires half the pack to line up in a strict formation would ensure a team is never potentially disadvantaged due to an unlucky bench position at the wrong time of the game, because both teams would need to line up at least half of their blockers at the pivot line. This wouldn’t take away from positioning players freely, as they can position their “wide receivers” where they please around the locked-in formation.

This could also make blocker and pivot penalties a bit more significant, giving a team fewer formation options to work with at a jam start. Between-jam substitutions would also be made less chaotic, negating most of the need to sprint to a position amongst players and referees letting their guard down as the previous jam ends.

Making the game more fan-friendly is another potential benefit of this system. If the referees see that all players are in their starting positions and are ready for play, they can begin the jam right away without needing to wait for the full 30-second jam reset time to wind down.[2] This format could therefore put more action in the game, squeezing more jams into 60 minutes—and giving more derby to the paying fans.

Most importantly, a rule-based jam start formation absolutely guarantees that a team that wants to get a particular position within the pack after the jam starts, must fight for that position by blocking, evading, whipping, and otherwise using teamwork to fight through the other team earn that positioning with effort, not luck out by having a conveniently located bench position.

For a team sport to be completely fair, both teams need to start from an equal same base. That’s why basketball tip-offs happen at center court, hockey face-offs are at center ice, a football team has a 50/50 chance to start the game with the ball, and why the score at the beginning of every game is 0-0[3]. No team is closer to an advantage before the game begins and the players are released to do battle with each other.

Having a fair start in roller derby is especially critical, considering the nature of the simultaneous offense-defense nature of the sport. The original rules of derby had the fair and equal jam start put into them from its purely legitimate beginnings for this very reason. Both teams having the same opportunity from the get-go is what makes a sports fair and intriguing all the same, and roller derby would do well to have a truly fair and equal start built in to it.

~ ~ ~ Continue to Chapter 4 ~ ~ ~

Chapter 3 Footnotes:

[ 1 ] Save your hockey analogies: The “long change” in the second period of a hockey game, where team benches are further away from their defensive zone, is in no way similar to a derby team needing to deal with a bench position further away from a start line. It affects both teams equally in hockey; the only time it may not for one is when the other team has the puck. There is no puck (or ball) in derby; both teams are on offense. If it were the same, bench positioning (and corresponding game strategy) would effect both teams equally.It doesn’t always, as the London-Philly game at the 2011 WFTDA East Regional demonstrated. Return

[ 2 ] RDCL banked track games already do this, truncating the reset period whenever possible. If a similar quick-start system was implemented in WFTDA play, a team could still take off the full 30 seconds for strategical reasons with this pack start format by keeping their pivot away from their starting spot (such as a step forward of the pivot line), delaying the start for as long as they stay out of position. (A team with their pivot in the penalty box would lose this ability, making their penalty still more relevant.) This would be similar to how the play clock and timing rules work in football. Also as in football, a derby team might counter between-jam time wasting by using their timeouts strategically, so it’s still totally fair. Return

[ 3 ] The ultimate Roller Derby Drinking Game loophole: You must take a drink when the score of a game is a palindrome. Every future game that has yet to start is currently tied at 0-0, a palindrome score. (Kiss your liver goodbye.) Return

Pages: 1 2 3 4

11 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by FobWatchHero on 30 April 2012 at 1:37 pm

    As always, Windyman, your articles are well written, researched, and thought out. However, I’m a little confused as to your intent. In your introductory post, you say that other sports have “volumes upon volumes of knowledge to refer to when teaching the basics, crafting strategies, and refining rules to play by.” I think it is a worthy and noble goal to begin something like that for derby, and I applaud your attempt. But then, in chapters 3 and 4 you spend a considerable amount of time editorializing various rules.

    Now, I’m not saying your points aren’t valid, nor am I saying you shouldn’t express them. I think you have a lot of good things to say about modern derby rules and changes to them, and I’m glad your opinions are gaining traction in the derby community.

    If you’re looking to begin a repository of derby knowledge, though, I think it would be beneficial to keep the “history and concepts” separate from your opinions of them. I find your personal interjections distract from the interesting and valuable information you’re giving. Allow the reader to absorb the information free from bias, and perhaps reserve a final installment in the series for the purpose of suggesting changes.

    Of course, this is your blog, and that’s just one guy’s opinion, so I won’t be offended if you choose to ignore it. I’ll most likely keep reading, regardless!

    Reply

    • I make no apologies for injecting my opinion into places that I feel it may help make a point or where I feel some criticism is necessary to drive something home. (That is the ultimate purpose of this blog, after all.) Some people may not like that. I get it.

      But it’s part of the whole thing about perspective. If they can understand where I’m coming from, such as you do, then that’s part of the process and I’m cool with that even if they disagree with me. If they can’t (or choose not to) then that’s a problem with them, not with me or my opinions.

      There are going to be other opinionated chapters of this series, and I’m not going to try to hide that. Though I’d like to try slant more neutral when everything is all said and done, some of the topics I’m going to be covering will basically be a direct challenge to the status-quo in modern roller derby, flat and banked. It’s tricky to basically say, “you’re doing this wrong,” without coming off at least a little bit biased, even if I back it up.

      When I get to those parts, however, I will try to keep your view of things in mind. Thanks for the honest feedback!

      Reply

  2. Posted by pwhastin on 1 May 2012 at 10:37 am

    It actually seems like letting the pivot score as stated above would virtually eliminate the pack issues we see today. The only time that the strategy of a stopped pack would be useful is if both the pivot and the Jammer were in the box at the same time. This would be a sort of a Super Power Jam. In all other scenarios, holding the pack back without the effort of holding the other team back would make very little sense as there would always be a scoring threat. No effort slow derby seems to be the result of having no scoring threat on the floor for one team. Having a scoring Pivot would reduce the frequency of this tremendously. There would still be power jams when the offense of one team was reduced by a Pivot or Jammer in the box, but they would still be an offensive threat.

    I disagree with forced location at the start. It seems that the same goal could be achieved with teams having a priority enforced by the pack ref. The team that last scored would have the right to take the inside spot on either the jammer line or the pivot line and the other team would have the right to take any spot directly next to in front of or behind that player. They teams would have the right to take alternating positions if they wanted to. This would allow for the strategy differences without creating an undue advantage.

    Reply

  3. Posted by Chris Jones on 2 May 2012 at 10:13 am

    I thought the pivot discussion was the most interesting part of this article. I too have wondered why the WFTDA rules single out a pivot from the other blockers; there just doesn’t seem to be that much they can do. But now knowing the history–that basically pivots could break from the pack as a jammer once the other jammer is out–the WFTDA pivot rules IMO look like the fragments of a half-remembered game–people kind of remember seeing pivots always at the front of the pack and sometimes could break away, but no one seemed to remember why.

    The star-pass rule in particular illustrates this point. It allows the pivot to become a jammer (like in the old rules), and routinely I hear this strategy described as “desperate” or “thrilling”, somewhat akin to pulling the goalie in hockey. But objectively, the rule doesn’t really convey much of an advantage because the jammer must be near the pivot anyway to perform a star-pass, i.e. she has to go thru the same blocking regimen the jammer would anyway, plus deal with the logistics of passing the helmet cover–which as the recent Windy-Rose bout shows isn’t as simple as it seems. Frankly–outside of the minor deception value–I don’t understand why teams use this strategy; if you think your pivot is a better jammer, why not simply start with her as jammer? The only way this rule would be useful is if the “star-pass” were a virtual one–like in the older rules that allow the pivot to break once the opposing jammer is free, regardless of her own jammer’s position in the pack. This might also be the reason the pivot on a star-pass can never be lead jammer; under the old rules she’d only become jammer after the opponent has gone in front of her.

    This is where IMO this series can be very valuable to the RD community, because the older rules were play-tested over a long period of time in front of large audiences. Rules for the modern game didn’t arise out of thin air; they are based on imperfect memories from watching the older bouts. Perhaps some of the gameplay problems we’re seeing now are a result of those built-in imperfections…

    Reply

    • I don’t understand why teams use this strategy; if you think your pivot is a better jammer, why not simply start with her as jammer?

      There are three legit reasons that I could think of that a star pass is a smart idea in WFTDA play:

      1. A jam goes the full two minutes, but a jammer is gassed and may find it more efficient to pass the star off to the pivot, who would have fresher legs;

      2. A jammer finds themselves with three minors and passes the star to avoid the chance of getting a 4th minor while jamming; and

      3. A jammer sent to the box at the end of the last jam comes back onto the track during the next jam and wants to have the regularly-scheduled jammer have the star in the current jam, or to avoid #1 or #2 from happening (again).

      But even in these cases, the “strategy” of the star pass is the result of flawed rules that make them viable. #1 wouldn’t happen if there was always a true lead jammer that could call off the jam defensively. #2 wouldn’t be necessary if there were no minors (which is happening for the 2012 rules, thankfully). #3 wouldn’t happen if every jam started with a jammer (and pivot), as has historically been the case.

      Power jams are a different beast, however. I deliberately avoided talking about this in this first part; I’m saving that for part 3.

      Reply

  4. Posted by Skater Guy on 8 May 2012 at 8:15 am

    Having played in games both with and without a real pivot, I’d have to say derby with a meaningfull pivot makes for a far more strategy-filled and exciting game than one without it.

    Could you imagine an NFL game if before each snap the quarterback had to call out which single player would be allowed to catch a pass or be handed off to?

    By having two real scoring threats out there each time, teams have to work on controlling the front and the back of the pack at all times, and by having two active jammers battling for points almost every jam it cuts lopsidded scores way the heck down.

    Reply

  5. Posted by Candykitten on 22 May 2012 at 12:14 am

    Anyone ever think how this impacts referees? Or don’t you care about them?

    Reply

  6. This section on Pivot is the most interesting part of your article, and the most important to me. In summing up, you say: “If you’re going to just keep them (pivots) as a special blocker, then make them truly special with actual gameplay abilities that regular blockers don’t have.”
    You are right on the money. Otherwise, why even have a Pivot?
    Perhaps when one team gets lead jammer, the opposing team’s Pivot becomes the center of the pack, and the pack is defined as only those blockers from both teams who are within 10 or 20 feet of the defending Pivot? This would make the Pivot the captain of the defense, just as the Jammer is the leader on offense.
    Maybe it wouldn’t work, I don’t know. But you are clearly on the right track here.
    Thanks for more great writing & insight. You’re a big help to a lot of us out here who are working to help roller derby make the transition into a true professional sport.
    Please keep up the good work!

    Reply

  7. Posted by mos deathly on 29 July 2012 at 9:27 am

    We love having our Pivots break over at M.A.D.E. It creates such an exciting dynamic to the game. You have to not only stop the opposing teams Jammer, but also hold their Pivot back. And we have the same penalty system as Classic Derby, except we are out on our 6th infraction (not the 8th).

    Reply

  8. […] number 1 was retired permanently. If you love derby, you should be interested in learning about where it has been and in helping it grow. There are a lot of mixed feelings about this and you shouldn’t be […]

    Reply

  9. […] decent summary of Roller Derby history can be found from the The Roller Derby Origin Story and Roller Derby Notes, but here are a few key points related to our current jersey […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: