Let me tell you something about 3x3 basketball that completely changed how I approach the game. I've been playing and coaching for over a decade, and I used to think the transition from traditional basketball was just about adapting to a smaller court. Boy, was I wrong. The recent performance by the Risers team against Manila opened my eyes to what truly makes 3x3 basketball unique and why certain strategies work where others fail miserably.
When I analyzed that game where Robbi Marion Darang, Lorenz Capulong, and Hubert Cani each contributed 10 points, something clicked for me. Three players scoring exactly 10 points each? That's not coincidence—that's strategic execution at its finest. In my experience coaching both 5v5 and 3x3 teams, I've found that balanced scoring isn't just nice to have in 3x3—it's absolutely essential. The Risers demonstrated this perfectly with their three-pronged offensive approach that left Manila scrambling. What impressed me most wasn't just the individual performances but how they worked in concert, creating opportunities for each other while maintaining that perfect scoring balance.
The numbers don't lie—when seven Risers combined to outscore Manila, who stumbled to a dismal 2-20 record, we're seeing more than just a lucky game. We're witnessing the result of deliberate strategy. From my perspective, Manila's collapse stemmed from their failure to adapt to the unique pace of 3x3 basketball. I've seen this happen countless times—teams coming from traditional basketball backgrounds trying to force their old systems into this faster, more intense format. It's like trying to fit a square peg in a round hole. The 12-second shot clock changes everything, and teams that don't respect this difference end up like Manila—frustrated and defeated.
What really separates elite 3x3 teams from the rest, in my opinion, is their understanding of spacing. On that compact court, every inch matters more than in traditional basketball. I remember coaching a team that kept clustering around the basket, and we couldn't buy a bucket until we spread out properly. The Risers understood this instinctively—their movement created passing lanes and driving opportunities that Manila simply couldn't defend. When you have three players who can all create their own shot like Darang, Capulong, and Cani demonstrated, the defense has to pick their poison. That's why I always emphasize developing multiple scoring threats rather than relying on one superstar.
Transition defense is another area where most teams drop the ball, no pun intended. In 3x3, the game moves so quickly that if you're not sprinting back on defense immediately after a made basket, you're already beaten. I've drilled this into my teams until they're sick of hearing it, but it's that important. Looking at how the Risers managed to score consistently while limiting Manila's opportunities, I'd bet my coaching whistle they'd mastered this aspect. The 2-20 record for Manila tells me they were getting killed in transition—probably taking poor shots that led to easy baskets going the other way.
Let's talk about conditioning, because honestly, this is where many players underestimate 3x3. People see the smaller court and think it's easier physically. Nothing could be further from the truth. The constant movement, the quicker transitions, the limited substitutions—it's brutal out there. When I first switched from coaching 5v5 to 3x3, I had to completely rethink our conditioning programs. The Risers clearly had the endurance advantage, maintaining their intensity throughout while Manila faded. That 30-point performance against Manila's 20 doesn't happen without superior fitness.
The mental game in 3x3 is something I'm particularly passionate about. With only three players per side, there's nowhere to hide. Every mistake is magnified, every defensive lapse costs you dearly. I've seen talented players crumble under this pressure while less skilled but mentally tougher players thrive. The balanced scoring from Darang, Capulong, and Cani suggests they had the mental fortitude to share responsibility rather than forcing shots or playing hero ball. Meanwhile, Manila's collapse to 2-20 reeks of a team that lost composure early and never recovered.
What I love about analyzing games like this Risers versus Manila matchup is that it reinforces what I've been teaching for years. The fundamentals matter, but understanding the unique strategic demands of 3x3 matters more. Teams that treat it as just "smaller basketball" will continue to struggle, while those who embrace its distinctive nature will find success. The numbers from that game—three players with 10 points each, seven contributors overall, holding opponents to 20 points while scoring 30—these aren't random statistics. They're the product of intentional strategy, proper preparation, and understanding what makes 3x3 basketball special.
Having implemented these lessons with my own teams, I've seen remarkable improvements. We went from middle-of-the-pack performers to championship contenders simply by focusing on balanced scoring, transition defense, and conditioning specific to 3x3's demands. The Risers' approach validates what I've been preaching—that in 3x3 basketball, the whole truly is greater than the sum of its parts. Their victory wasn't about individual brilliance but collective execution of strategies tailored specifically for this format. That's the transformation every 3x3 player and coach should be seeking.