After the point, everything seems obvious. The opposing middle blocker moved early, the outside was open and the set went to the most difficult place. But what could the setter see before touching the ball? Were they able to use the other option? Was the attacker ready?
Analysing only the outcome produces easy answers that might not have helped during the play. The read needs to be reconstructed using the information available at that moment, not with the advantage of already knowing the ending.
Ricardinho offers concrete examples of this reasoning: observing the opposing middle blocker, considering an attacker's characteristics and recognising when the serve changes an outside hitter's situation. The decision comes from the relationship between these pieces of information.
Start by separating what you saw from what you concluded
The blocker took a step in one direction: that is an observation. They abandoned the other option: that is already an interpretation. Choosing the attack into the space that appeared available is a decision.
The three stages can happen quickly, but separating them in the review helps locate the error. The player may have correctly perceived the movement and overinterpreted it. They may also have chosen well and executed poorly.
A tendency is not a certainty
If an opponent repeats a particular response, that information deserves attention. Even so, they may change. When a team turns a tendency into certainty, it risks no longer following the play.
This applies to serving, blocking and distribution. The history helps prepare an expectation; the current ball needs to confirm or contradict it. A useful read leaves room for correction.
A good hypothesis needs to fit what can be executed
Noticing an opportunity does not mean being able to use it from anywhere. The setter may see an option without being able to deliver that ball with control. The attacker may notice a space without yet mastering the solution needed to use it.
The UFMG study published in the Revista Brasileira de Educação Física e Esporte investigated setters' tactical knowledge and identified, among other aspects, the influence of confidence and attackers' technical and tactical limitations on distribution. Reading takes place within the team's possibilities, not outside them.
An option is only available when someone can execute it in that situation.
Three examples of how Ricardinho connects information and choice
In Ricardinho's explanations, observing the opponent, recognising a teammate's situation and adjusting delivery appear as parts of the same decision. Three examples help follow these relationships.
Observe the opposing middle blocker before distributing
When presenting 5x1 situations, Ricardinho highlights observing the middle blocker on the other side. This information enters the choice alongside the ball's situation and the available attacking options.
The middle blocker may be committed to one threat or ready to move. For the setter, perceiving this organisation helps assess alternatives. But looking at the blocker without ready attackers does not create an option that does not exist.
Applied to training, one question is what the player noticed before deciding. If they cannot identify any information, they may be executing a memorised combination. If they noticed it but could not deliver the ball they imagined, the focus may be execution or choosing a viable alternative.
Consider what the serve did to the outside hitter
In his explanation of P4, Ricardinho links the pressure of the serve on the outside hitter to the attacking alternatives. Attention is not restricted to where the pass arrives. It includes the situation of the player who had to receive.
This difference changes the read. The setter may have an accessible ball but an attacker who is late for the combination. Insisting on the distribution planned before the serve may ignore information the play itself has just produced.
The reception article explores this transition between controlling the first ball and offering an attacking option again.
Adapt the ball to the attacker's characteristics
Ricardinho describes different preferences for middle blockers such as Rodrigão, André Heller and Gustavo. He also describes a quick back set to André Nascimento, who is left-handed, in a P5 situation.
These examples show that knowing your teammate is part of reading the game. The decision considers an established partnership, not just the space that seems open on the other side. The same trajectory may suit one attacker and be uncomfortable for another.
The setter's role includes developing that knowledge and updating it as the team evolves.
A complete situation: the opponent changes their response
Imagine a training session in which the opposing middle blocker repeatedly follows the threat through the middle. The setter notices the movement and uses the wing with an attacker who is ready. The choice produces good conditions in some attempts.
Later, the blocker stops committing so early and starts reaching the wing in a better position. The setter keeps repeating the same distribution, now because it had worked before.
Where the read stopped following the game
The initial interpretation may have made sense. The error appears when the player turns an earlier response into a rule for subsequent plays. The information changed, but the choice remained tied to what had already worked.
In the review, it is worth asking whether the setter noticed the change. If not, the focus is following the opponent's preparation. If they noticed and repeated the choice because they did not trust the other options, the problem may involve repertoire and partnership, not just attention.
How to test an alternative without inventing another certainty
Training can maintain two executable attacking options and vary the blocker's response. The setter needs to identify what appears and choose. After each sequence, the group compares the information perceived with the action taken.
There is no need to reward only the point. A coherent decision that meets good defence may reveal learning; a point from an opponent's error may hide a weak choice. Execution and outcome enter the analysis without erasing the preceding process.
The play that worked before needs to keep making sense now.
What each role needs to perceive
Reading the game is not a skill exclusive to the setter. Relevant information changes according to the responsibility and the moment of the action. Not everyone needs to observe everything at the same time.
| Role in the situation | Information that deserves attention | Related decision |
|---|---|---|
| Passer | The serve's trajectory and the agreement with neighbouring players | Take responsibility, communicate and deliver |
| Setter | The first ball, available attackers and the block | Choose an executable distribution |
| Attacker | The set's situation and the opponent's organisation | Prepare the approach and use an attacking option |
| Blocker | The attacking build-up and coordination at the net | Commit to one option or follow distribution |
| Defender | The attack that developed and their own team's block | Adjust their reference and prepare contact |
Use the table to choose the focus of observation without trying to follow every element simultaneously. The time available and the level of practice influence what each player can perceive.
The blocking article develops reading at the net. The side-out analysis follows decisions from receiving serve to building the attack.
How to study video without letting the outcome answer for you
Choose a play with a clear decision. Pause before the action you want to analyse. Note what is visible: the ball's situation, players who are ready, the opponent's position and the time available. Then list alternatives that appear executable.
Only then watch the continuation. Compare the choice with the preceding information. This procedure helps reduce the tendency to consider obvious what only became clear after the point.
The camera has limits too
An image may hide the athlete's field of view, the exact moment of a communication or a player outside the frame. Do not attribute intention simply because you can see something from a different position.
When information is missing, describe the limit: the image shows the movement but does not allow us to state what the setter saw. This makes the analysis more precise and avoids turning commentary into an invented story.
Look for sequences, not just highlights
An isolated play can show a possibility. A sequence helps reveal adaptation, repetition or a change in the opponent's response. Errors matter too because they show where the decision or execution stopped working.
When observing an experienced player, look for the relationship that can be studied in your context. Copying the outcome without the technical ability or the same options may produce an attempt that does not make sense for your team.
How to bring this observation into training
A task with an always-announced response allows execution practice. To train choice, some information needs to vary and more than one feasible alternative must exist. The difficulty should allow the player to perceive that difference.
Start with a specific decision: recognising whether the passer managed to prepare to attack, for example. Then add another piece of information, such as the block's response. If all variables change at once, the player may simply survive the task without understanding what guided the action.
Make the discussion produce a next test
Useful questions include: what did you notice, which option did you consider and what changed before contact? The answer may reveal a coherent read, overlooked information or an execution limitation.
The next correction should correspond to that. If the choice was feasible but delivery lacked control, work on setting. If the player did not recognise the change, adjust the task to make that information perceptible. Repeating that they need to think more does not explain how to improve.
FAQ: questions about reading the game
Is reading the game a talent you are born with?
There are individual differences, but perception and decision-making can be developed through experience, appropriate tasks and review. Calling everything a gift hides what the player can still learn to recognise and execute.
Is watching lots of matches enough to improve?
Watching helps when there is an observation question. Following only the ball and the point may miss the preparation. Connecting video to an on-court task allows what was understood to be tested.
Does reading quickly mean deciding before the play begins?
No. Preparing hypotheses before the serve is useful, but the decision needs to follow new information. Anticipation without the possibility of correction may simply be guessing.
How can you train reading with beginners?
Choose one simple difference and two responses they can execute. For example, recognising which player is available for the second ball. Increase complexity as the group becomes able to perceive, decide and continue the action.
