Author: Vernon Gambetta
Talent Development & Skill Learning
The lifeblood of any sport system is talent identification. Once the talent is identified and directed then the task is to develop that talent. A key aspect of that development process is how the sport skill is learned and acquired. Nobody in recent years has done a better job at this than Barcelona Football Club. These three books will give some great insights into talent development and some of the reason why a system used at Barca works and can be duplicated, The Little Book of Talent – 52 Tips For Improving Your Skills by Dan Coyle – I am a big fan of Dan Coyle’s writing. I think he has done a great job of taking much of the current thinking on skill acquisition and teaching and putting in a format that the layman can understand. This little book is full of stimulating ideas and thoughts in that regard. My only criticism is that I would like it to have the big book of talent. There is so much there that it almost demands more detail. This will stimulate your thinking and motivate you to search for more, it is well worth reading. Barca: The Making of the Greatest Team in the World by Graham Hunter – Terrific insights into the evolution of their system. The majority of their players are home grown developed at their La Masia training school. Their coaches are also developed and learn through the same system as the players. The emphasis is on creating “Automatismos” – habits that are so ingrained they become second nature. I thought an interesting point was that if a player starts at age ten in La Masia and debuts with the first team at age twenty he will have accumulated 2,300 training sessions! This computes out to 3,070 hours. The emphasis is first on technique (not drills), then tactics and at age fifteen to sixteen is there an increased emphasis on the physical – stamina and power. I also thought it was interesting that they were taught how to lose! They learned how to handle defeat with dignity. Attention and Motor Skill Learning by Gabriele Wulf Book – This one will get you thinking. This is the science behid the other two books. For those of you who are still using detailed internal verbal cues and instructions you may won’t to reconsider. My take home point from this book is to focus on external cues that trigger implicit learning. Wulf’s concepts certainly are in concert with all the current thinking on learning and cognitive neuroscience. This is a must have for any coaches library.
Flash & Dash
Good coaching and subsequently good training is not about flash and dash. Good training is actually somewhat mundane, day to day it is not very exciting. You must repeatedly do the basic things well and keep refining and fine-tuning. Good training has substance, with the focus clearly on the need to do activities and methods that will get the athlete better. Don’t get caught up in hype and marketing so characteristic of the Internet training porn that so common today. There are no secret training methods or quick fixes, don’t let anyone convince you otherwise. To achieve success at any level you must do the work and do it consistently well.
The Blind Men and the Elephant
Does this remind you of anyone you know? “The Blind Men and the Elephant" by John Godfrey Saxe (1816-1887) . It was six men of Indostan To learning much inclined, Who went to see the Elephant (Though all of them were blind), That each by observation Might satisfy his mind The First approached the Elephant, And happening to fall Against his broad and sturdy side, At once began to bawl: “God bless me! but the Elephant Is very like a wall!” The Second, feeling of the tusk, Cried, “Ho! what have we here So very round and smooth and sharp? To me ’tis mighty clear This wonder of an Elephant Is very like a spear!” The Third approached the animal, And happening to take The squirming trunk within his hands, Thus boldly up and spake: “I see,” quoth he, “the Elephant Is very like a snake!” The Fourth reached out an eager hand, And felt about the knee. “What most this wondrous beast is like Is mighty plain,” quoth he; “ ‘Tis clear enough the Elephant Is very like a tree!” The Fifth, who chanced to touch the ear, Said: “E’en the blindest man Can tell what this resembles most; Deny the fact who can This marvel of an Elephant Is very like a fan!” The Sixth no sooner had begun About the beast to grope, Than, seizing on the swinging tail That fell within his scope, “I see,” quoth he, “the Elephant Is very like a rope!” And so these men of Indostan Disputed loud and long, Each in his own opinion Exceeding stiff and strong, Though each was partly in the right, And all were in the wrong!
Two Articles Worth Reading
Both of these papers are well worth reading. They both challelge conventional wisdom. They should get you thinking. The Rocky Road to the Top: Why Talent Needs Trauma Collins, Dave; MacNamara, Áine Sports Medicine. 42(11):907-914, November 1, 2012. The increasingly well funded and high-tech world of talent development (TD) represents an important investment for most sports. Reflecting traditional concepts of challenge and focus, the vast majority of such systems expend a great deal of effort maximizing support to the young athletes and trying to counter the impact of naturally occurring life stressors. In this article, we suggest that much of this effort is misdirected; that, in fact, talented potential can often benefit from, or even need, a variety of challenges to facilitate eventual adult performance. Our argument is built on evidence that such challenges are more common in athletes who reach the top, together with a critical consideration of the modus operandi and impact of psychological/character-focused interventions such as mental toughness and resilience. In conclusion, we explore some implications for the design and conduct of optimum academies and TD environments. Periodization Paradigms in the 21st Century: Evidence-Led or Tradition-Driven? John Kiely IJSPP Volume 7, Issue 3, September 2012, 7, 242 – 250 The planning and organization of athletic training have historically been much discussed and debated in the coaching and sports science literature. Various influential periodization theorists have devised, promoted, and substantiated particular training-planning models based on interpretation of the scientific evidence and individual beliefs and experiences. Superficially, these proposed planning models appear to differ substantially. However, at a deeper level, it can be suggested that such models share a deep-rooted cultural heritage underpinned by a common set of historically pervasive planning beliefs and assumptions. A concern with certain of these formative assumptions is that, although no longer scientifically justifiable, their shaping influence remains deeply embedded. In recent years substantial evidence has emerged demonstrating that training responses vary extensively, depending upon multiple underlying factors. Such findings challenge the appropriateness of applying generic methodologies, founded in overly simplistic rule-based decision making, to the planning problems posed by inherently complex biological systems. The purpose of this review is not to suggest a whole-scale rejection of periodization theories but to promote a refined awareness of their various strengths and weaknesses. Eminent periodization theorists—and their variously proposed periodization models—have contributed substantially to the evolution of training-planning practice. However, there is a logical line of reasoning suggesting an urgent need for periodization theories to be realigned with contemporary elite practice and modern scientific conceptual models. In concluding, it is recommended that increased emphasis be placed on the design and implementation of sensitive and responsive training systems that facilitate the guided emergence of customized context-specific training-planning solutions.
Labels
Do you believe in ______ (Fill in the blank)? Do you use kettlebells? Do you do Olympic lifts? Do you squat? Do you static stretch? Do you periodize your training? Do you lift heavy? And on and on – you get the gist of this. The answer to all of the above is a succinct yes. I do all of the above and more. Those are all attempts to label and pigeon hole someone into one camp or another. As far as I am concerned all methods and modes of training are on the table. The key to all of this is do you know why you do what you do when you do it and with whom. Knowing why you choose to use a particular method is essential, it so much more than blindly following some ideology or school of thought. Good coaching demands an eclectic approach. You choose methods that fit your system and adapt and blend accordingly. This is why I think it is so important to be a generalist so that you can have a firm grasp on the bigger picture and how it all fits together. Effective training is so much more that an exercise, a method or a mode of training. My own system is a careful blending of many varied influences that have evolved over the years. I have made the mistake of getting locked into one method or selection of exercises; the result was stagnation not adaptation. Don’t allow yourself to be pigeon holed. Just as you want your athletes to be adaptable you also must be adaptable. Know why, how and when to use different training methods that fit the athlete and sport you are working with.
Learning with new eyes and ears
Look and listen and you will be surprised at what you see and hear. Take the familiar and unknown and turn it around and make unfamiliar and unknown. See your day to day world with new eyes. Look at it with childlike wonder. Swimmers swim, runners run, jumpers jump, throwers throw but how do they do what they do? Keep questioning. Watch a swim from underwater; watch a runner or jumper from behind and in front. Close your eyes and listen to the run the run or jump. Beware of confirmation bias – seeing what you are looking for. Clear your mind and pretend you are seeing the movement for the first time. As coaches our richest source of learning and information is the athletes we coach. They are doing it – get their feedback – both verbal and non-verbal. In coaching we should be growing with the athlete, it we get better then they get better and vice versa. As coaches we must challenge ourselves daily in order to be able to continue to challenge our athletes. What are you going to do today to challenge yourself to be better? What can you see, hear or feel at today’s workout that will make a better coach? What will you learn from your athletes today?
Hiring the Sports Performance Professional – Part Two
How important are letters of recommendation and references? In my opinion they are very important. Seldom, if ever, will a candidate list someone as a reference who would give a negative recommendation. I will often ask a candidate if they would give me someone who would give a negative recommendation and why that person would be negative. I want people who are honest. My concern is a way to find out if they really did what they said they did. One way to do this is to ask for a detailed sample program from a team or individual they have worked with. Evaluate this sample program against the following criteria, does the program include: Injury prevention component Speed Development component Strength/Power development component Sport specific conditioning component Flexibility component Are there provisions for recovery? Is the program realistic given the time, personnel, facilities and equipment available? Is the program adaptable? Was this program a real or a theoretical model program? I would also ask for video of a workout from the program as it was implemented. A face-to-face interview is a must for any candidate you are seriously considering. This should be as extensive possible and be conducted by all the key people that will be working with the potential candidate. I would also consider an audition. This scenario would involve the potential candidate actually showing a workout in a typical coaching setting in which they would be working. In addition it is necessary to evaluate the candidate relative to their other experiences. Often the persons success or failure is not determined by technical expertise but by administrative, management, and personnel considerations. The following are those types of considerations that need to be evaluated: Facilities Planning and Organization Equipment Purchase Organizational abilities and Skills Program Planning, Implementation and Compliance Leadership ability Work ethic and work habits Personal grooming and fitness Athletic background Computer skills In terms of knowledge areas and specific competencies the SPP should have a good background in all of the following areas: Strength Training encompassing the whole spectrum of training methods Plyometric Training Speed Development Flexibility Sport Specific Fitness Development Testing & Evaluation Drug Education/Awareness Nutrition Growth and Development How does the prospective candidate compare to the existing staff members or the person they are trying to replace. Along the same line of thought where does this person fit into the department organizational structure? Educational background and certification are important considerations. It is my opinion that education and teaching and coaching experience weigh more heavily than certifications. An activity based physical education or sports science degree would be the best, unfortunately those programs are now hard to find. A college degree should be the minimum educational requirement, hopefully in some related field. As far as certification, that is another matter. I know many of these jobs list the NSCA CSCS certification as required, I guess that is acceptable as long as the limitations are understood. The CSCS does not require a practical component, it only requires passing a written exam. This is an inherent weakness; nonetheless, it is still probably the preferred certification. The NASM certifications though very popular carry very little or no weight in my consideration of hiring someone. NASM is nothing more than a certification mill. To my knowledge, at last count, there were over 250 certification programs in related fields. For someone doing the hiring it is very tough to assess the relative merit and advantage of all of these. The biggest weakness missing from almost all of them is a lack of a practical component. Ultimately some certification is necessary to satisfy liability considerations. The Sports Performance specialist can have a very profound impact on the success of any athletic department. Hiring this person or persons because of the relative undefined nature of the field is not as simple as hiring an ATC where the profession is well established and the roles are more clearly defined. I hope this will give you some basic guideline to help in this process.
Hiring the Sports Performance Professional – Part One
When you are looking to hire a performance specialist what do you look for? Where should you look? The most logical first step is to define what the performance specialist is. Usually the performance specialist is known as a strength coach or a strength and conditioning specialist. I am not sure that these two terms are accurate descriptions of what a performance specialist needs to do is in today’s changing job market. The name is important because words create images and images create action. Therefore the name should describe the job as accurately and succinctly as possible. The job title “Strength Coach” limits the scope of the job. It conjures up an image of someone who never leaves the weight room, when in fact this individual is in all probability is going to be asked to be many places and wear many hats, sometimes all at the same time! To call this person a strength and conditioning coach also creates an inaccurate image. It artificially separates strength and conditioning when in fact strength is a facet of conditioning. In order to advance this new profession( Aprofession crying out for definition) we need to have a more accurate term for this position. The athlete requires a total conditioning program with strength training as an integral part of the conditioning program. As a step toward this I propose that we call this individual a Sport Performance Professional (SPP). Sports performance specifically describes the individual’s goal and professional denotes that this is the person’s profession. That is how they make their living. That is what they are trained to do. With this in mind and the consideration that this is a relatively new field, approximately twenty-five to thirty years old, lets look at a step-by-step process to go about hiring a Sports Performance Professional. The first step is to clearly define the job the person will be expected to perform. Will this person be expected to work with all sports or will this be a position that only works with selected sports? Who is this person accountable to? Is this chain of command and organizational structure clearly defined? Is this an existing position or a new position? This can be a significant factor in the hiring process. If it is a new program whomever the person that is hired will define the job. If it is an existing position the new person will in all probability need to have a degree of flexibility to fit into an existing situation with established guidelines and procedures. As far as I am concerned this is more than a job description. If it is a new position look more at what you want the job to be and find an individual that will define their roles and responsibilities in that position. Remember that this person is much more important that than facilities or equipment so it necessary to allocate finances accordingly in order to hire the best individual possible. A good coach will have a system that is adaptable to the athletes they work with not the other way around. If this person is being hired by the trainer (ATC) how much will the SPP be involved with rehab and reconditioning the injured athletes? Will this person have a staff to help or will they be by themselves? Also consider the bottom line – how much can you pay? These are all questions that must be answered in detail before the hiring process is begun. The biggest question is determining qualifications because the most important and overriding consideration is experience. Does the person have experience in a coaching environment, much less as a SPP. Personal training is not coaching. Coaching involves long term planning and commitment. It demands the ability to work with groups and to organize in a time constrained setting. It involves motivation and communication with a variety of people, some of whom may not be particularly interested in being there. It also involves working closely with sport coaches. Some of these coaches may have very different ideas about conditioning their athletes. In short experience in a coaching environment is the experience that is most needed. One of the big problems that I have found in the hiring process is how do you assess experience? What constitutes experience? If the person has been coaching for ten years has that person had one experience ten times or ten different experiences. I personally would prefer the latter. In talking to several of my colleagues who are Division I head S&C coaches this is also the biggest consideration they weigh in hiring people. They would rather have someone who has coached Little League than someone who has no coaching experience or was a weight room supervisor or a personal trainer. Their reasoning is that this person has been on the firing line in an actual coaching situation and has a better command of the whole picture. I get calls all the time from young people just starting out who want advice about how to get Division I or professional jobs in this field. Without exception I advise them to gain experience at the high school level, as this is a true test of their coaching abilities as well as a great foundation. This is where the premium is on teaching and where you will see a great difference of abilities. At this level you will have to innovate and motivate to get the job done. This will provide the experiences necessary at higher levels of sport. What about internships? How do you weigh them in the experience context? Where was the internship – there are certain internships that I definitely weigh higher than others. You must ask what exactly did the internship entail? Was there program planning and actual supervision and training of athletes involved? Also from the point of view of the job seeker is an internship a valuable time spent as a step toward getting a fulltime position or are you just free labor?