Notes on the Chitown PSP layout

I'm moving in a new-ish direction with general field analysis--as recent posts might have suggested. With PSP Chicago I want to point out a few features (or factors) that will come into play and should be kept in mind as you familiarize yourself with this layout. It is a good design on a couple of counts and, in my estimation, is lacking in a couple of others. Overall, it's an interesting design that offers quite a lot of variety in the ways it can be played. I'm not a big fan of design elements that tend to break momentum as the D-side does on this field but that's a quibble.

The red denotes positions and OTB lanes. Keep in mind the snake side cross field lanes are much higher risk than any of the others and can really only be used irregularly. (The alternative method for slowing your opponent down if you're consistently losing the D-side is to a) accelerate your snake attack (which may prove difficult) or b) play the X more frequently with the expectation of cutting down the opponent's d-side player(s) quickly (while forcing them to defend against the X which will also slow their attack in future points.)

Shifting attention to the purple boxes note the orientation of the Cake(s). It has two significant effects; One, it makes Snake 1 virtually unplayable and Two, it neutralizes the gap between snake 1 and snake 2 in such a way that the only positions that can contest a move into Snake 2 is down the wire or from the snake-side MT (and a standing player. Otherwise it should be possible to crawl around snake 1 at will--though the precision of the actual set-up could have an effect.

Moving on to the blue circle [Snake 2] the blue lines demonstrate the domination of the snake position over all the forward D-side spots. The result of this bottleneck (of sorts) is that the race for control is between the D50 and Snake 2. And in the larger context of the whole field I suspect many teams will tend to play this layout defensively or as a counter-punching field. (By counter-punch I mean the willingness to give up some spots because it's more advantageous to be the second one there. For example, always bunker out the D50 instead of seeking to get to it first. One of the reasons for choosing that option is the D50 is a better holding point than it is an attacking position.)

Lastly let's look at the snake corner (circled in green.) There's two things I like about this bunker. One, it's an excellent launch point to enter the snake, two, the wrap dominates potentially key spots on the opponent's side of the field and three, it's susceptible to the cross field 50 if the player isn't careful. All positions on the field should have a balance of risk and reward.

Okay, that was a very quick rundown. If some aspect isn't clear or you have a related (or separate) question don't hesitate to post them in comments.