When one solution becomes the beginning of the next problem

By Coach Barry Jones
IIHF Level 3 High Performance | USA Hockey Level 4 Performance

 

So far in this series, we've looked at problems mostly one relationship at a time.

Can you get the puck UNDER?

Can you find a way OVER?

What does AROUND look like?

Where is THROUGH available?

That gives athletes somewhere to begin exploring.

But hockey rarely asks us to solve one problem and then politely waits while we reset.

The first solution changes the environment.

The defender reacts.

Space moves.

Pressure arrives.

A new opportunity appears.

So the next progression isn't necessarily teaching athletes more techniques.

It might be helping them learn to stack problems together.

One Solution Changes the Problem

Imagine an athlete attacks a defender and finds a way AROUND their stick.

Problem solved?

For a moment.

But going AROUND may bring another defender into the play.

Now the available space might be UNDER another stick.

That solution might draw pressure and open a teammate THROUGH a seam.

Suddenly:

AROUND → UNDER → THROUGH

Not because the coach designed a three-move combination.

The combination emerged because each action changed the next problem.

That's an important distinction.

Don't give athletes combinations. Give them interacting problems and let combinations emerge.

From Technique Chains to Problem Chains

Coaches have always used combinations.

Toe drag into shot.

Pull through into pass.

Escape turn into acceleration.

There is nothing inherently wrong with that.

But if I prescribe the entire sequence, I've already solved much of the problem for the athlete.

What if instead I stack the problems?

First:

Find a way AROUND.

Then:

Can you go AROUND and solve the next problem UNDER?

Later:

Can you solve three different spatial problems before you score?

The athlete still gets repetitions.

They still develop movement combinations.

But the order and organisation can emerge from what they perceive.

I'm no longer asking them to remember a sequence.

I'm asking them to solve what happens next.

Complexity Comes Back In

Earlier in this series, we deliberately reduced the problem.

U-O-A-T gave us a way to constrain attention without prescribing one exact movement.

Stacking begins putting complexity back.

One problem becomes two.

Two become three.

Another player enters.

Pressure changes.

The destination moves.

The athlete now has to connect solutions together.

This matters because skills don't exist independently in games.

A successful puck movement changes the position of the puck, athlete, defender and surrounding players.

The information available after the movement is different from the information available before it.

So rather than treating the completion of a skill as the end of the repetition, we can ask:

What problem did that solution just create?

Now the learning continues.

The 360 Kid

I have an athlete who has spent a lot of time developing a McDavid-style 360.

It's a good movement.

He's confident with it.

And everyone knows it's coming.

He risks becoming the 360 kid.

This is where U-O-A-T gives us a useful way to broaden the problem without taking away something he does well.

The 360 is not AROUND.

It's one solution for AROUND.

So instead of telling him to stop using it, I can ask:

What else was available?

Could you go UNDER?

Could you go THROUGH?

Could another version of AROUND work?

And eventually the 360 itself can become information for the defender.

If the defender expects AROUND, can the athlete show the beginning of the 360 and create THROUGH?

Now the movement isn't being removed.

It's being connected to other possibilities.

The goal isn't to stop the 360 kid doing a 360. It's to make sure the 360 isn't the only answer he sees.

Stacking Without Scripting

This is where coaches need to be careful.

Once we see athletes successfully combining movements, it's tempting to capture the combination and teach it.

AROUND, then UNDER, then OVER.

Repeat.

But the moment we make that sequence compulsory, we've changed the task.

The athlete is now executing our combination rather than organising one around the information they perceive.

Instead, we can constrain the relationships while leaving the order open.

For example:

Solve two different relationships before attacking the net.

Or:

You can't use the same relationship twice.

Or simply:

How many different solutions can you connect before the pressure wins the puck?

Now athletes can experiment.

UNDER → AROUND.

OVER → THROUGH.

AROUND → UNDER → OVER.

The combinations become consequences of solving interacting problems.

Athletes Start Learning From Each Other

Stacking also becomes interesting in mixed-ability groups.

A new-to-game athlete may solve the first problem very simply.

A performance athlete may see something completely different.

Another player might combine two solutions nobody else has tried.

Athletes begin watching each other.

Not because I've stopped the activity to demonstrate the “correct” combination, but because someone else's solution has made another possibility visible.

That creates another source of information in the environment:

each other.

One athlete's exploration can expand another athlete's solution space.

That doesn't mean they need to copy the movement exactly.

They can borrow the idea and reorganise it around their own capabilities.

The Coach Designs the Interaction

Stacking isn't about creating chaos for the sake of chaos.

The coach still shapes the problem.

We decide how many relationships are involved.

We control space.

Pressure.

Numbers.

Time.

Scoring opportunities.

We can make the second problem easier or harder.

We can even constrain a preferred solution temporarily if an athlete continually returns to it.

The coaching question becomes:

What does the athlete need to solve next?

That allows us to progressively deepen the environment without simply adding more rules.

The first problem creates the second.

The second changes the third.

And eventually the task begins to behave more like the game.

Take It to the Ice

Choose one U-O-A-T problem your athletes already understand.

Start there.

Then add one more problem.

If they solve AROUND, what happens next?

Can the next opportunity invite UNDER?

Can another defender create THROUGH?

Can the scoring target make OVER useful?

Don't tell them the movement sequence.

Let the environment create it.

Once they're comfortable, remove the required order altogether.

Then watch what begins to emerge.

Which solutions get connected?

Which athletes keep returning to the same answer?

Which new combinations appear?

And most importantly:

Does solving one problem help the athlete recognise the next one?

Because hockey isn't a collection of isolated skills.

It's a continuously changing series of problems.

And perhaps one of the most useful things we can develop isn't an athlete with more predetermined combinations.

It's an athlete who can keep finding the next solution.

Coming Next: Creating the Space

So far, we've largely explored opportunities that already exist.

But what happens when the space you need isn't available?

In Part 6, we'll move from finding solutions to creating them, using movement, puck position and deception to manipulate defenders, reorganise the environment and make new opportunities appear.

---

Barry Jones is an IIHF Level 3 High Performance Coach and USA Hockey Level 4 Performance Coach. His work blends ecological dynamics, nonlinear design, and athlete-centred leadership to build adaptive teams that thrive in uncertainty. He is also the developer of Task Sketch, a tool designed to support coaches in creating game-representative training environments.