So why does any of this matter? Well, a 4-3-3 is a very good formation for lots of possession. That is why it is the go to shape for Pep Guardiola and Maurizio Sarri. A 4-2-3-1 has a more natural
The 4-2-3-1 explains the tactical concept far more clearly. Furthermore, there are additional 4-5-1 systems, like for example the 4-1-4-1. By comparing the 4-2-3-1 with the diamond formation of the 4-4-2, we may recognize the structures of the 4-2-3-1 more clearly. This can be seen in the following illustration: In the basic formation, we move
Is 4 3 3 a good formation? The 4-3-3 is also a good formation from which to press. A three-man forward line provides good numbers to apply pressure on the opposition defence. The midfield three then provides cover and protection in central areas. This is useful both when pressing high or converting into a more reserved block.
I'm a fan of the 4-3-3 formation, its the one that, on paper atleast, I find out to be the most balanced and flexible formation since it has atleast 3 players in each third of the pitch, defense, midfield and attack but ultimately it all comes down to how you set it up, role and instruction wise, in order to be successful with it and that's the