The Truth Behind the 2-Pointer… So Far

When the 2-point arc was introduced — a bold 40-metre line offering double reward — the expectation was clear: change the rhythm of the game,reward bravery, and stretch defensive systems.

Now, with data from over 30 inter-county matches, we’re starting to see what’s really happening.

Since the 11 v 11 rule has been introduced, teams are averaging just under 6 shots per game from outside the arc. A handful are pushing that to 8 or more, but it still represents a minority of total shot volume. Most attacks continue to funnel into the 20–35m zone, where accuracy is higher but reward is fixed at one point.

But the numbers suggest something interesting: according to the  GAA Games Intelligence Unit official data 2-point shots are, on average, more efficient than many expect. With a 38% success rate, they return 0.76 points per attempt. Compare that to close-range 1-point shots at 61% success (0.61 pts/shot), or longer 1-point efforts around 35–40m, which convert at 46% (0.46 pts/shot).

Modelled out:

• A team taking 6 two-point shots and 16 one-point shots would average 14.3 points.

• Adjust that to 12 two-point attempts and 10 one-point efforts, and the projected return climbs to 15.2 points — with no increase in shot volume.

That’s nearly a full point gained by simply shifting where shots are taken from — not how many.

Now, when you add in the extra goal chances that are created as defences push out to deny the 2 point shot, there could even be more value that just whats on the surface.

So why aren’t more teams adjusting?

The arc is being used. But the data shows it’s not being maximised. Whether that’s tactical caution, habit, or a skillset gap is still unclear.

But one thing is emerging: for the teams willing to commit to it, the 2-pointer isn’t just one of the new rules — it’s an opportunity.