Archiv der Kategorie: Kontroverse

Security and inertia

“Instead of allowing in new thoughts and trying something different they do what all the others do. Then they feel that they cannot be wrong. The Swedish words for security and inertia (trygghet och tröghet) sound very alike and what is reassuring is often too slow and difficult to change. This is often reinforced by players who become coaches and coaches who become managers. So it is often people with the same experiences that control operations in our football clubs”. (Per-Göran Fahlström, Footblogball interview January 2016)

Practical implications

Miguel Crespo et al. made the practical implication from their study about „Skill acquisation in tennis: Research and current practice“ from 2007 that, „…as compared to overly prescriptive coaching, indications are that tennis players would benefit from earlier introduction to aviable and random practice designs and the accompanying increased opportunity to intrinsically evaluate their own performance.“

Miguel Crespo und andere kommen in ihrer Studie „Technikerwerb im Tennis: Forschung und gegenwärtige Praxis“ aus dem Jahre 2007 zu der Schlußfolgerung, dass es im Vergleich mit streng auf die Technik festgelegtem Training Hinweise gibt, dass Spieler*innen von einer frühzeitigen Hinführung zu variablem und „zufälligen“ (random) Trainingsgestaltung und intrinsischen Entwicklung ihrer Performance profitieren.

The frames of implicit skill acquisation

In 2007 Machar Reid, Miguel Crespo and Brandon Lay wrote an article on the acquisition of tennis skills in the Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport, in which they reviewed the state of research and current practice. They come to the conclusion, that implicit learning brings better results but a differential view on the implicit approach is necessary. This is in one point due to the fact that there can be no pure implicit learning. To rely exclusively on liberate play leads in the long term to unfavorable skills and limited tactical creativity. The frames of implicit skill acquisation weiterlesen

Why „evidence based“?

Why „evidence based coaching“?

The term is derived from medicine. It describes the attempt to ask what are intuitive training methods derived from coaches‘ learning experience in tennis and how to conduct a scientific review. At the same time, „New paths in tennis learning“ are to be developed.

Evidence-based medicine

„Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM)“ is a recent developmental trend Why „evidence based“? weiterlesen

Believing in experience

Experience values ​​as the basis of the coaching work! Very important. However, these are limited when we look at the basic conditions in our everyday training, since we have only a subjective access and only a selected group. In studies, there are always comparative groups, which we do not have, since we then have to use different methods. Also, we do not have the right measurement methods and measuring instruments. My calculation of the „Kolonnentraining“ results in a hypothesis, which actually still needs a scientific review. This is not yet scientific ;-). Believing in experience weiterlesen

The plate’s edge

It’s always the same question that comes up, when I’m reading and watching coaches teaching tennis. These colleagues, willing to do the best for their players, are using methods, that are absolut contradictionary to evidence based coaching.

They focus on body motion, they try to provide text-book techniques, they let players stand in a row to control the technique, and so on.

I think, there are two main problems: 1. a lot of coaches do what they „have always done“. They transport methods, they have learned in their own tennis biography. 2. coaches are tennis-coaches. Means they seldom look over the „plate’s edge“, where tehy could find so many studies about motor learning and creativity in related sports as golf, volleyball, basketball, soccer and so on.

Coaching technique

‚Technique coaching, I’ve never done with Andy before – zero … because I believe that it simply does not bring anything belendltween 27 and 29. On the other hand, because I’m lousy in technical training.‘

Nicely put to the point by Ivan Lendl, the coach of the world number one Andy Murray. Whether he argues in the sense of our coaching philosophy of INNER COACHING, perhaps a daring presumption. Nevertheless, the quotation says a lot and supports our methodological approach: game-oriented and action-oriented instead of technology-oriented.

„Techniktraining? Habe ich mit Andy noch nie gemacht – null….Zum einen, weil ich daran glaube, dass es zwischen 27 uns 29 schlichtweg nichts mehr bringt. Zum anderen, weil ich mies im Techniktraining bin.“

Schön auf den Punkt gebracht von Ivan Lendl, dem Coach des Weltranglistenersten Andy Murray. Ob er damit im Sinne unserer Trainingsphilosophie des INNER COACHING argumentiert, wäre vielleicht eine gewagte Vermutung. Dennoch sagt das Zitat etwas aus und unterstützt unsere methodische Vorgehensweise: spiel- und handlungsorientiert statt technikorientiert.

Data-driven approach vs „old-approach“

„When the data-driven approach to high-stakes decision-making did not lead to immediate success—and, occasionally, even when it did—it was open to attack in a way that the old approach to decision-making was not.“ (Michael Lewis)

This article is about Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky and their research about decision making that has a great influence in sports.

How Two Trailblazing Psychologists Turned the World of Decision Science Upside Down

More about Kahnemann

Willensanstrengung ist ermüdend