4-4-2 And Its Closest Variations. Why Are They So Strong? -- Some Quick Thoughts

Hi guys,

Here're some quick thoughts, aimed at trying to figure out the 4-4-2 formation in Top Eleven, including its closest and obvious variations like; 4-4-1-1, or 4-1-4-1, and even the less obvious ones like the popular flat 4-5-1, and the rather defensive 5-4-1.

I've come to notice that all those formations have one thing in common, and are really a simple and similar alteration to their "parent" formation: the Classic 4-4-2.

--x--x-- (area 5)
-------- (area 4)
x-x--x-x (area 3)
-------- (area 2)
x-x--x-x (area 1)


But, before we get into those alterations, let's first try to understand the strengths and weaknesses of this classic 4-4-2, and why it's viewed among most as one of the best balanced formations.


THE 4-4-2

4-4-2, with its 4 symmetric Defenders, can cover nearly the entirety of the defensive and defensive midfield area of the pitch (area 1 and 2, on diagram). Its DR an DL can handle any of the opponent's offensive winger, and support the defensive area (area 1), when need be. Its 2 DCs are perfect to handle up to 2 ST from the opponent's formation, and can even do great, with the help of its DR and DL, against a 3 ST formation.

Its midfield is also one of the strongest one can wish for, simply because of its high 80% complete coverage of the area 3. This allows the game to be decided and, in most cases, even "won" there, and thus permit a better pressing against the opponent.
In Top Eleven, this usually results in a higher possession percentage, and more total shots, free-kicks, and corners.
Its MCs, ML and/or MR, can also be "arrowed" to support area 4, and create a better link between Midfield and the Attacking area (area 5) of the pitch. This can help improve, furthermore, offense and pressing.

For example by arrowing the ML/MR, one can increase the offensive flanks of the pressing, and act as if AML/AMR were placed there. Similarly, by arrowing the MC, one can mirror this same effect, and improve the pressing through the middle, again as if there were an AMC on the pitch. This makes the 4-4-2 midfield quite flexible and balanced overall.

Regarding its Attack and Striking area, only a 3 ST (or 1-2) formation can better it. The 2 symmetric ST facilitates the reception of passes made by the midfield -- be it from the flanks (ML/MR), or directly through the middle (MCs).
Thus once again, this area appears to be rather quite balanced and flexibility friendly.

All of this make the classic 4-4-2, as said earlier, one of the best go-to formations when one isn't really sure what to play.

Now that we know a bit about its advantages and pros, let's stir a bit towards its weaknesses, and why despite its great balance, it still isn't perfect and foolproof.

THE WEAK SPOTS

The first weak spot of the Classic 4-4-2 formation, is found in the area 2 of the pitch (DM section). Since there's no DM in this formation, a formation can take advantage of this and strengthen its pressing directly through the middle, and use a "free" AMC as a true game maker.
One of those formation is the popular Narrow Diamond (4-1-2-1-2), which has close to the best through the middle pressings in the game (if not the best).
By taking advantage of the AMC (and even the red arrowed DMC) in this manner, the Narrow Diamond, really makes the 4-4-2 DL and DR close to useless, and put almost all the pressure on the 2 DCs, whom eventually do fall under that pressure.

Here's where the first variation of the formation comes into play. In order to prevent this, one can decide to bring in a DMC to exactly counter the opponent's AMC (and arrowed DMC), and rebalance things.
Since the least alteration one can think of, in order to stay as close as possible to the classic 4-4-2, is the removal of one Striker (since the game is really made in the midfield most of the time), it seems logical to allocate that Striker spot to the new DMC, and yield a 4-1-4-1 -- a close "relative" to 4-4-2 thus.

Notice that one can reallocate the Striker's position to a 3rd DC instead of the DMC (5-4-1, another 4-4-2 variation, but less obvious), to have a similar effect, but increase defense (and decrease offense) a bit more in the process.

Yet another weak spot, of the initial 4-4-2, can be found in the AM area of the pitch (area 4).
Against a formation that has 4 Defenders but no DMs, using only 2 STs against it, without AMs, can make one find himself being countered quite a bit, simply because the midfielders passes aren't getting through to the 2 ST, whom are being closely guarded by 4 "die hard" defenders... The easiest way to score then becomes having your midfielders take long shots 25/30 yards away, which will limit your chances if those MFs are weaker than your opponent's defenders and GK. A quick solution is to put red arrows on some of your MFs, in order to cover a bit better the area 4, and facilitate your pressing.
However, an even better solution is simply to have a free AMC in that area to "fully" make the link, between MFs and STs. This is even more effective since the opponent has no DMC to counter him, and thus he'll be free to seal the deal right there.
Again, the best position to reallocate is the 2nd ST for the same reasons as discussed above, and thus yielding a 4-4-1-1, the closest "relative" to classic 4-4-2.

Notice that one can reallocate the ST's position to a 3rd MC instead of the AMC (4-5-1, another 4-4-2 variation, but less obvious), and increase midfield dominance to 100% coverage, and use red arrows to cover as much as possible the area 4.
Which one is the best, is dependent on various factors, like how strong is your opponents own midfield? If he has 4 symmetric MFs there, then a 3rd MC is indeed more interesting in order to conserve the midfield domination. If he has less than 4, then an AMC would be more useful in that case, since you already have the midfield dominance.

CONCLUSION

I'll end these "thoughts" here, as it's starting to get a bit longer than what I initially wanted... The conclusion is thus as follows :

Classic 4-4-2 is possibly the most flexible and balanced formation in Top Eleven, as once its variations and alterations are allowed (4-4-1-1 ; 4-5-1 ; 4-1-4-1 ; 5-4-1), made possible by a "swinger player" (the reallocation of the 2nd ST), it and its various variations, together, do have the potential to counter every formation you can think of, simply because of their capability to cover rather nicely every single position on the pitch.

This is mostly important because the variations made to obtain this somewhat "unbeatable" effect are really small and easily done in a live match, most of time by a single sub, or none at all.

So there. That's really all that comes in mind right now. In any case, let me know in the comments below what you think of it ! Why you disagree or agree ! And anything else that could be added to it !

If most people agree with the content, and find it accurate and revealing enough, I'll be glad to polish it a bit more, and make it a guide for any that can learn from it.

Thanks for reading. :)

Great infos kebess. I made you something to tune this thread up.

http://i.imgur.com/QqDwrBz.jpg

Thanks for the diagram Calimac, it's really awesome ! : )

Great read but one question from me.
I have problems with solid ML or MR (doesn't have 2 of them or 2 high quality). Can I play asymetric formation when one of the wings is replaced with AML or AMR. If yes than do I have to give them blue arrows? Or maybe it's better to put a player not on natural position and give red arrow to go to his primary one?

Of course it doesn't work always but I'm trying to use it or variation (I'm thinking for example about 4-LM CM CM-AMC AMR-ST) of it against 4-3n-2w-1 formation.

Hey Adam, glad you liked it !

Usually, it's always worse to play a player on a wrong position. You'll always get more from him on his natural one, so suggest you avoid that.

Concerning the asymmetric Wingers, you can if you have no other choice. But depending on the formation you're going up against it could be less effective. Using AML/AMR and blue arrows to replace ML/MR, is surely doable, but those AMs won't give you as much midfield control as true Midfielders.
Often, the difference is very slim though, so sure, if you have no other options, go ahead and use them as such !

You might also consider simply playing your AML/AMR at their full strength on that position (meaning with red arrows instead) an orienting your passes on the flanks to attack from there. That can work as well, depending on what you're up against.

This topic can be more helpfull if you can sugest some advice about : passing, mentality , pressing , etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlorinBihor

This topic can be more helpfull if you can sugest some advice about : passing, mentality , pressing , etc.

---

Agreed. I'm planning on doing just that. I want to gather a bit more data though, against same/high quality teams first, before getting into that. I might have something decent in a few days.

wow so great your analisis :D

Really glad you like it, : )
Feel free to ask if you have any question or random suggestion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kebess

Really glad you like it, : )
Feel free to ask if you have any question or random suggestion.

---

please share result your match versus formation 4-4-2 classic :o

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by memer

please share result your match versus formation 4-4-2 classic :o

---

I've been doing rather well against 4-4-2 formation, since I'm still undefeated this season, : )

Here're some results since you asked :


This first one doesn't really count because of the quality difference being so ridiculous... :

Attachment 13256Attachment 13257


This one is much more revealing since my team is just very slightly better, and I'm playing away :

Attachment 13258Attachment 13259Attachment 13260


And this is less revealing. My team was better. I was playing away though :

Attachment 13261Attachment 13262


This last one is more revealing, since this time both teams were more or less equal. I still had the home advantage however :

Attachment 13263Attachment 13264Attachment 13265


That's all the 4-4-2 teams I've come across this season.
As you can see, I basically use a flat 4-5-1 against 4-4-2 classic. It allows to have a better midfield control and thus have a pressing advantage since both format. are based on the midfield game. With red arrows on my ML/MR and central MC, my offense is still very strong even with just one ST.

I have tried to play 442 for this season but struggled with 4-3N-2W-1 & 3W-4-3. But reading your thread I realise that 4-5-1 & 5-4-1 may have done the trick. Good information & many thanks.:)

I need to reverse a 5-2 away defeat & yes I maybe should have played 4-4-2 but that's history.

Attachment 13302

I now need to win 3-0 or 4-1 So I am intending to play 4-4-2 & maybe motivate later with arrows. What do you think?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kebess

I've been doing rather well against 4-4-2 formation, since I'm still undefeated this season, : )

Here're some results since you asked :


This first one doesn't really count because of the quality difference being so ridiculous... :

Attachment 13256Attachment 13257


This one is much more revealing since my team is just very slightly better, and I'm playing away :

Attachment 13258Attachment 13259Attachment 13260


And this is less revealing. My team was better. I was playing away though :

Attachment 13261Attachment 13262


This last one is more revealing, since this time both teams were more or less equal. I still had the home advantage however :

Attachment 13263Attachment 13264Attachment 13265


That's all the 4-4-2 teams I've come across this season.
As you can see, I basically use a flat 4-5-1 against 4-4-2 classic. It allows to have a better midfield control and thus have a pressing advantage since both format. are based on the midfield game. With red arrows on my ML/MR and central MC, my offense is still very strong even with just one ST.

---

nice formation but I thnk you win because your team quality is better than your rival :D
because i'm use 4-4-2 classic too :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Croft Original

I need to reverse a 5-2 away defeat & yes I maybe should have played 4-4-2 but that's history.

Attachment 13302

I now need to win 3-0 or 4-1 So I am intending to play 4-4-2 & maybe motivate later with arrows. What do you think?

---

Good luck in advance, :) it's not gonna be easy. Who has the better team by the way ?

Here's what I suggest against his 4-1-3-2 :

This :

----x---- (ST)
x-------- (AML) (red/blue x means red/blue arrow)
--x-x-x-x (3MC/MR)
---------
x-x---x-x (4 in the back)

OR this :

----x---- (ST)
--------x (AMR) (red/blue x means red/blue arrow)
x-x-x-x-- (ML/3MC)
---------
x-x---x-x (4 in the back)


The one you chose should depend on your opponents defense quality. If the left side of his defense is much weaker (meaning his DL and left DC are weaker than his DR and right DC), then chose the 2nd formation (the one with AMR). If it's the opposite and his right side is weaker, then chose the 1st formation with AML.

The idea as you've guessed is to pressure/attack his weaker flank and do all your pressing on that side. It's usually a pretty effective approach, and if your AML/AMR is stronger than his DL/DR, then it's even better (especially his Speed). Also, put your strongest MC on the side you're doing the pressing.

If his defense is pretty balanced in quality, then use this :

----x---- (ST)
x-------x (AMR/AML)
--x-x-x-- (3MC)
---------
x-x---x-x (4 in the back)

And attack on both flanks.

The orders should thus be, right or left or both flanks passing, depending on which formation you pick. Start with Normal Mentality. If at 45min, you still have 1 or less goal, but you're leading the pressing and possession, then switch to Attacking.
Go hard tackles, own side pressing, mixed passes, no trap, no counter.

A quick note on why these formations is, they will allow you to dominate the midfield, have a solid defense, and above all a strong attack, since you really need goals ! If you see he's having a bit too much chances to score, you can put a blue arrow on the middle MC, or replace him with a DMC, but don't rush too fast into that decision.
If you didn't need so many goals, you could start right away with a DMC there. So, as soon as you're comfortable and confident of a win, don't hesitate either to make the switch.

There. Good luck, and don't forget to post the results !

Thanks K

The result will be posted after the match 22:30 GMT

this thread is perfect form now on i'll use 4-4-2 cuz i have 2 strong ST ..


so can you tell me what is the best orders for 4-4-2 from your experience ?!

i would like to go with attacking cuz this is my style (hardly way) ... short or mixed but id rather short cuz it's flat formation.. mixed or both flanks ?!

Result

Well wasn't to be but thanks for the advice they were just the better side.

Attachment 13360

Lost 2-1 7-3 agg

Do you have more on the results ? Did you loss 2-1 ? Some screens would be nice.

Interesting thread here i bring you the zones covered by each player when you are using 4-4-2 formation using zonal marking. I hope this will be useful for the thread. Thanks.
Attachment 13368

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IsengardHobbit

Interesting thread here i bring you the zones covered by each player when you are using 4-4-2 formation using zonal marking. I hope this will be useful for the thread. Thanks.
Attachment 13368

---

Awesome! Do you also perhaps have info on how this varies after using a specific arrow?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kebess

Awesome! Do you also perhaps have info on how this varies after using a specific arrow?

---

I have a theory on arrows, i believe you can use them to fit a square on the field, example if you have a DMC and you put red arrow on him, he will try to play as a MC ergo he will fit that position an cover the zones of an MC but slightly less efficient, same for blue arrows, if you have a MC and you want put blue arrow on him, he will try to cover that space and all the adjacent squares.

PS i kinda use always blue arrows on strikers. Last season i scored +110 goals in lvl 3 league. In lvl 4 now and i won my first 10 games in league. Always using blue arrows on strikers.

I also believe you can use arrows with player that play 2 or more positions. Example if you have a AML/ML and you use him as a ML you can use red arrow with him, other example is if you have a DMR/DR you can use blue arrow, i think you can get my point. Best of luck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IsengardHobbit

I also believe you can use arrows with player that play 2 or more positions. Example if you have a AML/ML and you use him as a ML you can use red arrow with him, other example is if you have a DMR/DR you can use blue arrow, i think you can get my point. Best of luck.

---

Yep, this bit is the general "accepted" knowledge on how arrows work. I was really asking if you knew how effective was an arrowed position/player? In terms of numbers, does it have 0.5 point of effectiveness (instead of a 1 on the diagram) or even less ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IsengardHobbit

Interesting thread here i bring you the zones covered by each player when you are using 4-4-2 formation using zonal marking. I hope this will be useful for the thread. Thanks.
Attachment 13368

---

Please, can someone explain who to read the diagram. Thanks

It's a count of how many men cover each spot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DiZZee

Please, can someone explain who to read the diagram. Thanks

---

Each player can influence everything around him, and that influence gives the position "1 point". The numbers in the upper box (the one with colours) represent the total amount of players influencing a given position.

Example :
The first number is 1, in a green box (upper left corner). That means there's only one player influencing that section of the pitch, which is the left ST.

Im still new to the game but this has been a fantastic read. I have been playing mostly 4-5-1V but have been noticing that 4-4-2 seems to always do pretty well.

I am playing a game tomorrow and am countering his formation (left) with a kind of narrow diamond (right). I was wondering if this is messing with 4-4-2 too much with having both a DMC and a AMC but they both seem necessary. Do you think I am doing the right thing?

Attachment 13407 Attachment 13408


Ill post my results of course after the game.

Hi Sephiroth,

Glad this thread helped.

Concerning a counter formation for 4-3-1-2, I'd recommend either a simple 4-1-4-1 (you have all the necessary tools in it), or if you want a more offensive approach, a 4-5-1V. He has no midfield wingers so you definitely should use that in your advantage.

Put red arrows on the following : DL/DR, and ML/MR or AML/AMR, and if he's getting a bit too much opportunities a blue arrow on your DMC.
Then set your passing on both flanks -- you should be able to hurt him nicely from there. Normal mentality, hard tackles (if possession is an issue), mixed passes, no trap, no CA.

So basically, your defense was good, but your attack needed to be more on the flacks, since he's weaker there. Good luck !


PS: Love your name by the way, :) go figure...

Thank you for the advice. He changed his formation this morning to a much more defensive one but I noticed he still doesn't have any midfield wingers so I will stick with the advice you gave before and see if it's enough to get through his defence.

Attachment 13418.......v.......Attachment 13420

If he sticks with this, you'll have 80% possession. It should ease things. If he gets too many counter attacks, put a blue arrow on your DMC.

He did indeed stick with that formation for most of the game so I stuck with it and won 5-1.

He changed his formation a bit 3/4 way though and took away his AMC for some reason so I took away my DMC and went with straight 4-4-2 and it seemed to match up well.

Shame he got so many shots off at me with 20% possession for most of the game but I guess it happens.

My team is much better than the one he seemed to be able to field though.

Attachment 13429

Stats are so "ridiculously ridiculous" sometimes, : ) How on earth did he get more passes/corners than you with only 26% possession and a defensive formation ? Quite unrealistic if you ask me. In any case, good job !

Maybe it's worth noting that I have reached the quarter finals of both cups and 9 out of the 16 teams that have got here are playing one of the formations in your sig, 10 if you include 4-5-1V.

No, it DOES mean something. These formations are good/great counters most of the time. I very, very rarely use anything else. And when I do, it's mostly for experimental purpose only.