I put this together for my league, but thought it could be useful to others in these socially distant times. This is unedited and points out things I noticed throughout a single watch. That means some things I mention may be controversial, trivial, or flat-out incorrect. I did my best to make notes on both offense and defense, and to ask questions at both a beginner and advanced level, so you can think about a variety of aspects of the game. If nothing else, I hope you can use these notes to draw your attention to one or two things to watch for each jam.

Paris in white (12 seed), Santa Cruz (5 seed) in blue. Skater pronouns taken from the playoffs information booklet provided by WFTDA.

1st half

J2: White does a star pass that is not legal, and the pivot has to go back instead of escaping the pack. Why wasn’t it a legal pass?

J3: Watch how tightly blue “sucks back” on the white jammer when she tries to move from the inside line to the outside line. They are giving white jammer NO room to reset and try something else.

J4: Can you figure out blue jammer’s penalty before the announcers say it? Hint: if you miss the penalty itself, watch the jam ref’s hand signal.

What does white do to take advantage of the power jam? Does it work?

White jammer steps out with about 15 seconds left in the jam. Why isn’t this a track cut?

J5: Note how quickly and often Paris passes the star. What are some ways they set up to do this consistently?

J6: Blue hits out white jammer on her first scoring pass and then things go awry for them. What happened?

J7: Both teams get into a tripod formation right before the jam-start whistle. What do you make of this tactic?

I *think* blue jammer gets away with a track cut in turn 1 during her scoring pass, right before the jam is called. Agree or disagree?

J9: Blue jammer gets out fairly quickly/easily. What was a weakness in their formation/what could they have done differently?

J10: BEAUTIFUL penalty kill by white. Why is the white defense so effective against the blue jammer in this jam?

J11: How does white make the most of a pack disadvantage (one or two blockers in the box)?

Why is this a good time for Paris to call a time out?

J12: What is the blue goat doing? What could she do to be more effective? NB: The same blocker (blue 93) gets goated twice in this jam.

J13: Why is passive offense a good choice for blue getting their jammer through on the initial pass?

Blue switches to a more active offense on the power jam. How does white respond?

J14: How does white defense react to blue’s offense right off the line?

J15: Interesting that blue has only two blockers, and one drops back to play O pretty quickly, breaking the bridge and putting blue pivot out of play. Why do you think she did this?

White jammer makes it through her first scoring pass barely touched by blue blockers. What could blue have done to make the most of the two blockers they had on the track?

This is a good time for blue to call a time out.

J16: Why does high roller start this jam in the box?

What does white do to get their jammer out quickly?

J17: Why does blue go back behind white to catch white jammer on her scoring pass?

J18: Why does white go for the quick call-off?

This is a REALLY good time for blue to call a time out.

J19: Blue is starting this jam with only two blockers. What do they do to be somewhat effective in this scenario?

J20: White tries to play active O on the power jam and it’s not terribly effective. Why?

NB: I hate whatever is on white 22’s helmet in the exact spot a star would be. This is probably not confusing in-person but it’s cause eye-strain for ol’ Gramma Scar.

J21: Blue defense does a nice job of using the white wall when white jammer comes around on her scoring pass.

Blue doesn’t do many star passes in this game, and here’s one of those spots when it might have been a good idea, but they do sweep as a wall and get their jammer out. It ends up working out well for them, because the jam goes two minutes, and it’s not ideal to have a pivot with the star for that long.

Half time: Always interesting to speculate whether an increase in blue penalties let white make up some ground, or if white making up ground led to an increase in blue penalties.

Second Half

J1: No lead for a full 30s. Without knowing either of these teams well, I’d speculate they put out their “power packs” to start the half.

J2: Really nice 1-on-1 O by blue to get their jammer out around the outside.

J3: Fabulous track awareness by white jammer re-entering the track when blue runs her back to turn 4.

What advantage does white get by goating a blue blocker?

Why does blue jammer take the star off before re-entering the track? Note that she does not pass it to her pivot.

J4: White has a power start. What does white do to play offense at jam start? How effective is it?

What does blue do to help their jammer once white jammer goes to the box?

J5: Blue again starts with only two blockers, but blue jammer gets lead. What do the blue blockers do to be so effective (besides, obviously, being immensely good at derby)?

White has two in the box and takes a time out. At this point, who would you predict is going to win, and why?

J6: OOF, blue was late on the call-off and white picked up more points.

J7: Again, blue starts with only two blockers, and white takes out one of them at the front of the pack. Watch for the blue jammer doing jussst enough blocking that white jammer isn’t able to sneak around the outside.

During the blue power jam, white is expecting blue to sweep from the inside, so they set up their formation right on the inside line. How does blue jammer attempt to adapt?

Why does blue speed up as white jammer comes out of the box?

J8: White does a nice job stopping the blue piot from coming back for the pass.

J9: Interesting that Paris sets up in such a loose formation. They don’t have a big lead, but I’d judge them to be in control of this game right now.

Why does blue wait a few seconds before calling it off?

J10: White jammer takes a big hit to the outside on her initial and her blockers take out everyone trying to do a run-back so she can come in at the front of the pack.

Why does blue jammer get an illegal contact penalty on her first scoring pass?

J11: Over a minute and a half before there is a lead jammer. What are BOTH defenses doing really well here? What would you do if you were the jammer?

J12: Watch blue jammer on the outside line. Blink and you’ll miss it. Her blockers set her up really nicely for that.

J13: Why isn’t the white star pass legal?

J14: This jam is bad for Paris because the pivot is in the box. The jammer can’t get out, and passing the star isn’t an option.

Is it smart for Paris to use their last time out here? Why or why not?

J15: Huge jam for white even though blue got lead. What did white do well to make that happen?

J16: If you were white jammer, how would you feel about white’s offense during the power jam?

J17: Blue jammer’s track cut is a heartbreaker — she comes in jusssst in front of the white blocker, but I can’t make out the gesture she makes, and I’m actually surprised she didn’t get the insub from this angle.

This is a very smart time out from blue. Why?

J18: Beautiful footwork by white jammer, but also amazing awareness of both the clock and exactly which points she’d picked up.

FINAL THOUGHTS: Great game, lots of excitement and impressive play from both teams. Kudos to Paris for pulling off the upset, but Santa Cruz certainly showed why they are a playoffs-level team.

As always, great work from the officials, announcers, and other volunteers. Also, hat tip to Iron Octopus for inspiring this with their 2016 analysis series.

Feel free to leave good or bad feedback below. I’m finding myself with a lot of time on my hands these days, and I’ll do another guide if folks find this useful.

Yarn: Red Heart Super Saver (worsted weight)

Hook: I/9 (5.5mm)

This is a beginner-level project. The only stitches used are a sc (single crochet) and a sc dec (single crochet decrease), and the whole thing is worked in the round. I do recommend a stich marker (a piece of yarn in a contrasting color will work). It starts with a magic ring, pulled tight to minimize the hole at the top.

Round 0: Begin with 6sc in a magic ring. (6 total sc)

Round 1: 2 sc in each sc (12 sc)

Round 2: [sc in first sc, 2 sc in next sc], repeat around (18 sc)

Round 3: [sc in first 2 sc, 2 sc in third sc], repeat around (24 sc)

Round 4: [sc in first 3 sc, 2 sc in fourth sc], repeat around (30 sc)

Round 5: [sc in first 4 sc, 2 sc in fifth sc], repeat around (36 sc)

Round 6: [sc in first 5 sc, 2 sc in sixth sc], repeat around (42 sc)

Round 7: [sc in first 6 sc, 2 sc in seventh sc], repeat around (48 sc)

Round 8: [sc in first 7 sc, 2 sc in eighth sc], repeat around (54 sc)

Round 9: [sc in first 8 sc, 2 sc in ninth sc], repeat around (60 sc)

Round 10: [sc in first 9 sc, 2 sc in tenth sc], repeat around (66 sc)

Round 11: [sc in first 10 sc, 2 sc in eleventh sc], repeat around (72 sc)

Round 12: sc in each sc (72 sc)

Rounds 13–23: repeat round 12 (72 sc)

Round 24: [sc in first 2 sc, sc dec in next two], repeat around (54 sc)

Round 25: sc in each sc (54 sc)

Tie off, weave in ends, and decorate! The theme possibilities are endless.

And this, friends, is why my teammates call me “Grandma Scar.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFFu1kY_h0E

https://rollerderbyathletics.com/27-laps-test/

Unfortunately, when the topic comes up in coaching discussions, it seems that many trainers think that more conditioning and sheer repetition is the way to power through this. To quote someone in the FB group for trainers and coaches, “27in5 is possibly THE most simple thing in mins. Skate to a certain speed and stay there. There really isnt [sic] much to it.” I don’t think that’s particularly encouraging or helpful to a skater who is stuck at 23 or 24 laps.

And why would it be? If a skater can’t do a plow stop, for example, we don’t tell them to just keep doing it incorrectly and assume they will suddenly know what to do (in fact, repetition of the wrong thing can lead to bad muscle memory). So why do we make that assumption for the 27 in 5?

To really help a skater struggling with 27 in 5, you have to diagnose what they are really doing wrong.

The first thing I look at is whether a skater struggles with speed or with endurance. Are they able to skate 10–11 second laps, but fade out in the second half? Or are they consistent, but not fast enough? I am always surprised when a skater is working on their 27-in-5 but has no idea what their splits look like. Virtually every smartphone in existence will let you track times lap by lap.

In doing this, it’s very possible you’ll find some skaters who just need to improve their fitness. Sometimes it’s cardio, sometimes it’s core strength, sometimes it’s legs. If a skater looks good in minutes one and two, but fades out, they are ripe for off-skates exercises that will help them improve.

That said, the vast majority of skaters I encounter who struggle with 27 in 5 cannot do a 10-second lap*. Telling them to do more laps is like telling them to keep doing an incorrect plow stop: not going to fix the problem. The underlying issue is almost always a form error that can be corrected and drilled by a smart trainer. Yes, skaters need to develop cardio endurance and the muscle strength to stay low, but they also need to be taught which edges to use on their underpush, how far to “step out” of the crossover, how far they can lean into the turn without falling, etc. Ultimately, all these things will improve stride efficiency so skaters should be able to get around the track in 6–8 crossovers.

Again, I’m not trying to reinvent the wheel, so I’ll give you some more links, and trainers should incorporate form drills into their practices separate from drilling sheer endurance (as an added bonus, good edge work and breaking down each stride will help with dozens of other derby skills your skaters also need to learn along the way).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YgtPAQG4vII

https://medium.com/@ironoctopusfit/build-your-basics-the-mfing-crossover-part-1-67dcada1b0af

In my own derby life, I struggled for ten months to do 27 in 5, and even when I finally got it, I would totally exhaust myself in order to come in under time. About six months after I passed, Tempest Fugit, a transfer from a bigger league with formal speed training watched me skate and told me I was stepping out of my underpush too far to the left, instead of hip-width apart. This meant that I wasn’t able to get a strong push with my right foot. It took me about five minutes to fix this, and the 27 in 5 has not scared me since.

So ultimately, that’s why I’m writing this article: I hate seeing people struggle when they don’t need to. As I mentioned in part 1, the 27 in 5 takes mental endurance and dedication; that’s a feature, not a bug, but real coaching that gives people the tools to improve is as important as sheer grit. I hope I’ve given you some things to ponder, and you can help make 27 in 5 less of a struggle.

*yes, I know it’s an 11-second pace, but most people vary at least a second or two in their lap speeds throughout, so 10 is a good benchmark for speed.

I’ve heard many arguments against the 27 in 5. Back in 2014, when I was struggling with it and watching my friends pass MSRs and get to play before I did, I made most of the arguments myself:

“We never skate for five straight minutes in a jam.”

“The pack speed is much slower than 11 seconds per lap.”

“Stopping and stability are much more important if I’m going to be a blocker.”

A few seasons later, having long since passed the skill, played in bouts where we only had 9 skaters, and become one of the main trainers on my team, I’m more convinced than ever of its importance for one reason and one reason alone: the 27 in 5 demonstrates that a skater can remain in control when they are tired.

This is important in roller derby. Really important. Watch any game where a team is playing short and you’ll see them get sloppier and commit more penalties as they fatigue. Considering that most penalties exist to keep the game safe, that means safety is suffering when people are tired.

The same is true when people are mentally exhausted. Losing big? Already taken a lot of penalties? Getting constantly stuck in the pack as a jammer? This is when skaters start to get desperate and do things that are unsafe. My training life partner, Apocalypse Meow, taught me that 27 in 5 is a test of mental endurance as much as physical.

Yes, five minutes is a long time to skate at a brisk pace. No, there is not a direct analogue in gameplay. But considering the majority of MSRs are skills that take under four seconds to complete, the 27 in 5 is the best test we have of how a skater responds to extended physical and mental exertion.

But Scaaaaaar, it’s not fair that it is so much harder for bigger skaters.

I know, our bodies, like all objects in the universe, are governed by the laws of physics (because we skate laps in a circular path, we have to accelerate in a direction perpendicular to our established trajectory — more weight on your body means you need more force to do this). I weigh over 200lbs., and believe me, it frustrated me to no end to see tiny skaters get 22+ laps on their first try while I had been working for months to grind out 20.

But as B3NT, my favorite skating official, pointed out to me, I have an advantage on many, many other skills on the MSRs. Stopping someone by plowing in front of them? Great, I’m bigger than they are. Leaning someone out? Great, I’m bigger than they are. Giving someone a whip? Great, I’m bigger than they are. See the pattern?

Everyone has a skill that is tough for them and they have to work at it in spite of their frustration. I don’t believe in “gatekeeping,” and I wouldn’t advocate for making MSRs harder than they really need to be, but how a skater approaches the 27 in 5 tells me a lot about how they will approach skating on the team. Do they struggle, but work hard and make regular (if slow) improvement? Or do they make excuses and skip out on endurance nights? If it’s the latter, passing MSRs is not going to magically transform them into a skater who gives 110% at practices and maintains a positive attitude when really challenged.

This is not to say that I expect a skater to make it past the 27 in 5 milestone all on their own. I cringe when I see trainer discussions where the only advice is “get lower” or “do more cardio.” The 27 in 5, like all other skills, requires solid coaching, including precise feedback and adjustment. In a future post, I will address how trainers should support skaters trying to master the 27 in 5 along with some tips on how I got there. But in the meantime, jump into the comments and tell me if you think I’ve gotten it alllllll wrong.

Post Script: For those wondering, I started skating in August, 2014, and could do 14 laps in 5 minutes the first time I tried. The first time I timed the full 27, it took me 7:30, in November, 2014. I passed the 27 in 5 in May, 2015.

And yet.

Once I got past the abject terror of my first few scrimmages, I realized the only thing worse than the 6th-season player next to me on the jammer line was that same 6th-season player in the opposing pack. Even if I didn’t get lead (and back then, I really didn’t), I was more likely to get out and force the call-off against a top skater than against someone closer to my level, simply because a top skater jamming lowered the average skill level of the pack.

It certainly isn’t a revelation that it’s harder to get through a stronger pack. But when I listen to my teammates, play in mash-ups, follow derby Facebook/Twitter/whathaveyou, I constantly hear skaters judging their success in a game by how often they were lead jammer. Heck, even high-level derby broadcasts focus on lead % as a jammer-by-jammer statistic. At the same time, I rarely, if ever, hear a blocker brag about keeping the opposing blocker from getting lead.

But no jammer has ever gotten lead on her own. Sure, sometimes a jammer is left hanging with no offensive help, but the blockers playing defense are buying her the time she needs to get through the pack. In short, lead jammer percentage measures the effectiveness of a 5-skater combination, not the effectiveness of a single person who happens to be wearing the star.

Why does this matter? For starters, you can’t just compare lead % across jammers to determine who is the most effective. I discussed the dangers of comparing skater stats in an earlier post, and this is another caveat along those lines. A jammer who is always put into the game with a weak pack may have artificially low stats, regardless of her skill, and it would be a mistake to evaluate her on stats alone. The opposite holds true for a jammer who has a strong pack holding the other jammer and playing great offense. The combination of jammer and pack may be strong or weak, but attributing success or failure to a single player will distort future coaching decisions.

There’s also the trade-off I discussed at the top of this post: any time you use someone as a jammer, you are not using them as a blocker. For teams like mine (i.e. small, mixed-level), there may be a lot of overlap between your best jammers and best blockers. If lead percentage is viewed as something a single person does, jamming will become the priority for your most experienced skaters, at your pack’s expense. It’s critical to view lead percentage as a team statistic and position players accordingly if you want to maximize team success.

Finally, there’s simply the issue of morale and feelings of self-accomplishment. Blockers deserve to celebrate their successes and contributions to the team, and “held the opposing jammer long enough for our jammer to get through the pack” is one of the most important, things they can do on the track. Sure, the crowd goes nuts for a big hit, but derby has evolved to emphasize containment and control, and “plowed in front of the jammer” or “effectively braced my teammate” just doesn’t get the audience going. Thinking of lead as a team accomplishment recognizes the subtle, smart play that it takes to hold a jammer in 2018-style derby.

What do you think? Is defense underrated? Are there jammers who can do it all on their own? Let me know in the comments!

Most of us flip immediately to the “game summary” tab, which gives us cool info like point differential, lead jammer percentage, and VTAR (Versus Team Average Rating) for each player*. We look at these to see which players were most effective in which positions for a given game. And this is where our perusal of the stats book can fly off the rails.

While we all intuitively know that every jam is different, few of us admit that an apples-to-apples comparison across players is almost totally useless. Why? A good bench is putting the best players into the worst situations.

Say your jammer is in the box with seven seconds remaining. This is the time for a power pack, four blockers who can hold the opposing jammer long enough to let your jammer get in and get lead. Your four best blockers are going in this jam, already at a disadvantage.

By contrast, if you have the power start, and heck, they are down a blocker in the box, so you plan to play a passive offense. This is when you rest your best blockers, and maybe throw in a jammer who is fast, but not the best at breaking up walls. Now your second-stringers have padded their stats.

Obviously every team runs its bench differently, but you can almost certainly think of equivalent scenarios on your own team. The end result is a leveling of the stats: skaters who are playing well (have good stats) will be put into tough scenarios (hurting their stats), and vice-versa.

This isn’t to say you should never look at the summary tab, or that there’s no useful information there, and we’ll come back to that in a future post. This is just to warn against comparing across players, or even comparing a single player across games, and making too many judgements based on summary stats alone. Without context, stats are just numbers, and you use them at your team’s peril.

*If you aren’t already familiar with the basics of each of these columns, Steg O’Saur does a nice breakdown here:

What do my stats mean?

Fer Chrissakes Start Going Long When You Are Down Big

I’ve been thinking about this article all year, and watched my coaches and team try to implement its lessons to varying degrees of success. But now that my team is done playing ranked games for the year, I’m asking a different question: Does the concept still apply when we are not playing for rankings?

Maybe you are playing a home team game, or maybe you are playing in a tournament where the win is more important than the rankings points. Or maybe you’re just playing in a mash-up, and you want to keep it interesting for the crowd.

This past weekend, I found my(injured)self coaching the last of these, a mash-up team that was down about 160–100 with 15 minutes to go. Is it possible to make up 60 points in 15 minutes? Yes. Can you do it by calling off the jam every time the opposing jammer gets in a scoring position? Absolutely not.

Every time you call off a jam, you have 30 seconds of line-up, and at least 15 seconds of initial pass and lap around until you are scoring again. If you grab a single point and call it off, the most you could score in fifteen minutes is 20 points. And that’s assuming you get lead every single time against a team that was heretofore beating you.

The bottom line: SCORING IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN SHUTTING THE OTHER TEAM DOWN.

It’s time to trust your defense and keep scoring. If your jammer got out faster than the opposing jammer on the initial lap, why wouldn’t you get out again faster on the first scoring pass? And the second and the third?

What’s more, in a non-ranked game, coaches may thrown in relief jammers once they are up by a wide margin. If your jammer is up against a relief jammer, make that jam last as long as possible. Same thing if they pass the star to a pivot who isn’t a primary jammer. Lots of pivots are used to grabbing the star and hustling around to force the call-off; they may not be prepared to make their way through the pack and actually score points.

Of course, your jammers should still call it if they get into real trouble, if the opposing team is filling the penalty box, or if they are feeling tired to the point of sloppiness. But the decision should be based on YOUR jammer, not the opposing one.

In my recent experience, I regret that I didn’t make the “go long” decision at halftime, when we were down about 140–85. That was enough of a gap that we should have made the change, and it would have given me time to communicate that and let everyone get into the right mindset. It’s not just the jammers who have to change their play; blockers have to be ready to hold strong on the opponent’s scoring pass (rather than speeding up to protect their point for a second or two in anticipation of a call-off), slow down the pack to maximize scoring opportunities, and stop yelling at their jammer to call it when the bench says otherwise.

I hope to try this out more at my league’s scrimmages and get more evidence for how it works in practice, but for now, I think the concept is sound. Let me know your thoughts in the comments.