On the efficacy of early talent identification and talent - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

On the efficacy of early talent identification and talent development programmes NYSI Youth Athlete Development Conference 2016 Arne Güllich  The ‘idea’  The questions The findings  The implications Our Partners

The ‘idea’ of early TID and TDP Performance / success TDP TID General youth sport population Time / age

The ‘idea’ of early TID and TDP Performance / success TID To select the most promising young TDP talents for the purpose of focusing TDP delivery on these selected few. TID criteria • ‘Coach’s eye’ • Performance in competition, motor, phy- siological tests (sometimes relative to bio- TID logical maturation) • Anthropometry • Psychological tests (less frequent) → Assessment of performance (or General youth sport population components or progress) Time / age

The ‘idea’ of early TID and TDP TDP Performance / success To provide conditions and apply inter- ventions to the selected athletes to increase their likelihood of long-term senior international success. TDP TDP interventions Time-economic core → Extensive time-economy: • High-profile coaching Expand available time for training • Scientific, medical, para-medical and competition. services, nutritional consulting → Intensive time-economy: • Psychological services, life-style TID Use available time efficiently. management, support for educa- tion Early TDP → expand ‘treatment’ period until expected peak performance age. General youth sport population Time / age

The ‘idea’ of early TID and TDP Fundamental premises Performance / success 1. Talent can already be identified at a young age. 2. Senior success results from long-term development in a sport. Success increases with progressive duration of involvement, together with extended training volume and intensified TDP nurture. 3. Long-term development of excellence can be positively influenced by TDP interventions at a young age. TDP TID General youth sport population Time / age

The 1 st st Question ion Research question Performance / success Q1 Do characteristics assessed in early TID correlate with later performance? ? TDP TID General youth sport population Time / age

The Fi Findings Predictive accuracy of early TID Impediments – early TID is very difficult. Junior success is is a poor predictor of of long-term senior success. The task Correlation with  Success results from interaction with opponents. But Junior success at age … senior elite success opponents’ performance cannot be influenced. 2 = 0.00 -10 y R s  2 = 0.01 11-14 y R s Performance components may be mutually compen- sable. Their relative significance changes across age. 2 = 0.02 15-18 y R s  Performance structure and demands change across athlete generations. Types of sports cgs game combat art. comp. -10y 0.01 0.01 0.14 1 0.01 The performer 0.06 1 11-14 y 0.02 0.01 0.00  Biological maturation, relative age (RAE), psychological 15-18 y 0.01 0.03 0.11 0.02 qualities vary inter- and intra-individually over time. The environment Note: 1 negative correlation.  Prior and future training and socio-material environ- Güllich & Emrich, 2012. National squad members, all Olympic sports; ments vary inter- and intra-individually over time. n=616. Interaction of task, performer, and environment Test quality  TID tests are imperfectly objective, reliable and valid.

The Fi Findings Predictive accuracy of early TID TID tests may distinguish future higher vs. lower ‘Success rates’ are low in the field. performers. Multi-year longitudinal studies Consider ‘ base rate ’ (Ackerman, 2013) Assignment to (later) higher or lower performing groups Assumptions Some studies:  0% correct assignment   1/1000 youngsters becomes senior world class E. g., Bottoni et al., 2011; Gee et al., 2010; Kuzmits & Adams, 2008; 70% correct assignment Lidor et al., 2005a → Probability of a positively identified talent to  Some studies: up to 70% correct assignment become senior world class is: 0.2% E. g., Falk et al., 2004; Figueiredo et al., 2009; Gonaus & Müller, 2012;  Höner et al., 2015; Le Gall et al., 2008; Lidor et al., 2005b; Till et al., 90% correct assignment 2015; Vandorpe et al., 2012; Van Yperen, 2009; Zuber et al., 2015; two → Probability: 0.9% studies higher: Forsman et al., 2015; Pion et al., 2015 Empirical studies  ‘Success rates’ up to 2.0% E. g., Ackerman, 2013, Gray & Plucker, 2010; Güllich, 2014a; Gül- lich & Emrich, 2005b, 2012; Höner et al., 2015; Hong, 2008; Ljach, 1997; Malina, 2010; Morris et al., 2004; Pion et al., 2015; Sands, 2012; Vaeyens et al., 2009 → The problem is in the nature of the subject , rather than deficient scientific sophistication of TID.

The 2 nd nd and 3 rd rd Question ion Research questions Q2 Does early involvement in TDP correlate with later senior success? Performance / success Q3 Does early TID/TDP preferentially select and facilitate developmental participation pat- terns that facilitate long-term development ? of outstanding senior success? TDP TID General youth sport population Time / age

The Fi Findings Involvement and development within TDP Successful senior athletes were selected later. Entry age [years] Achieved squad level M (±SD) D-squad (regional junior squad) 15.3 (2.2) C-Squad (national junior squad) 16.8 (2.5) A-squad (senior world class) 18.9 (3.6) Güllich & Emrich, 2012; consistent: Güllich & Emrich, 2005b, 2013, Güllich, 2014a, b

The Fi Findings Developmental participation patterns Developmental pathways facilitating rapid junior success and long-term international senior success differ. Senior world class vs. youth success vs. senior national class  Start main sport later Moderate main-sport practice intensity  More practice in other sports Particularly before start main sport Involvement over more years  Later specialization

The Fi Findings Involvement and development within TDP Early TID and TDP boost early specialization. Once involved in TDP → another 95% greater in- crease of specific training through subsequent 3 years . Emrich & Güllich, 2016; Güllich & Cobley, 2016

The 4 th th Question ion Involvement and development within TDP Q4 Does the population of senior elite athletes Performance / success (a) develop from those selected early and their long-term nurturing, or rather (b) emerge via the course of repeated se- lection, de-selection and replacements through the consecutive age stages? General youth sport population Time / age

The 4 th th Question ion Involvement and development within TDP ? Performance / success ? ? ? ? General youth sport population Time / age

The Fi Findings Involvement and development within TDP TDP’s are highly permeable at all stages. Güllich & Emrich, 2012 7-year longitudinal observation, n=4686

The Fi Findings Involvement and development within TDP TDP’s display high annual athlete turnover. Mean annual Probability of persistence turnover (1) TDP after 3 years after 5 years Individual athlete level   74% of youth squad careers last “ Examplary TDP” sport clubs 19% 53% 35% up to 2 years. Elite sport schools 28% 37% 19%  The younger the entry – the Soccer youth academies 25% 43% 24% younger the exit: r = 0.92 . NSOs’ junior squads (7 sports) (2) 44% 16% 5% Güllich & Emrich, 2012; Güllich, 2014a NSO’s junior squads (soccer) 41% 21% 7% (1) Annual athlete turnover: (number of entries + number of exits) / 2 total members Longitudinal observations over 3 to 13 years. (2) Athletics, cycling, field hockey, rowing, table tennis, weightlifting, and wrestling. Güllich et al., 2005; Güllich & Emrich, 2005b, 2012; Güllich, 2014a

The Fi Findings Involvement and development within TDP Most early selected youngsters do not become successful seniors. Most successful seniors were not selected particularly early. Example soccer 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 91% 80% 60% 40% 20% 20% 14% 9% 6% 3% 0% -U11 -U13 -U15 -U17 -U19 -U21 22+ Academy U11 - persistence Academy U13 - persistence A-team entry academy U-teams U15 - persistence A-team entry U-teams Güllich, 2014a

The Implication ications Q1 Future ‘ top athletes ’ cannot be predicted reliably by way of young-age TID. Q2 Particularly early TDP is neither necessary nor beneficial – Q3 but correlates negatively with long-term senior success. Early TID / TDP preferentially selects and further reinforces early specialisation and intensification of specific practice. Q4 The populations of the early selected and the successful seniors are not identical but are widely disparate popula- tions. → The population of senior top athletes emerges in the course of repeated selection, de-selection, and replace- ments across all age ranges.