I see the hexagonal attack as more of a teaching tool that can educate players about the importance of spacing. Yes, by maintaing adequate/effective distance between the thrower and his teammates, a team can find easy, short-distance throws all the way up the field. But if you never teach players to go against the grain, to break their marks, to switch fields, to run a reset, to isolate deep cutters, or how not to fall into a defensive trap — I'm just worried that this offense throughout a game will see fewer and fewer openings until their opponent's defensive adjustment has clamped down and stifled these cuts. Are you also teaching the necessary fundamentals alongside this strategy so that players can bail their teammates out when it fails?

I know for a fact that if a team repeatedly relied on the strategy we see in this GIF, they would be facing really stalwart defense by halftime, as their opponents adjusted more and more to take away the live side. I hope that another tenet of this offense is switching the point of attack. Because all I see above is the same point of attack moving its way up the field vertically. I would just bracket this team or run a 3-3-1 and force your players to switch the field to beat us. Once they did that, I'd maybe go force middle and see what results we got there.

I guess all I'm saying is that hexagon is a good visualization for how we should space ourselves during an offensive point. But "take the easy throws to the force side" is the guiding principle seen above, which is not revolutionary — and in fact, it's passé. One thing I stress to everyone who lends me an ear is that positions are a suggestion and not a rule, as you state above. And yet, I see three players moving up the field in a 3-handler horizontal stack look. Is this so the dump-swing is there in case the live side space is covered?

Can we see teams run this who have better disc skills? All the footage I've seen of this mostly involved throwers staring upfield and waiting for cutters to get open. I'm being critical because I really fail to see how this strategy (a) is new and (b) how it provides a better opportunity to win. I think it's a good teaching method for beginners—lord knows I hate the "piston" analogy when people are teaching ho stack—but I just don't know how well it translates to higher levels.