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

Performance / success

The ‘idea’ of early TID and TDP

TDP

TID General youth sport population Time / age

Performance / success

The ‘idea’ of early TID and TDP

TID

TDP

To select the most promising young talents for the purpose of focusing TDP delivery on these selected few.

TID criteria

TID

• ‘Coach’s eye’ • Performance in competition, motor, physiological tests (sometimes relative to biological maturation) • Anthropometry • Psychological tests (less frequent) → Assessment of performance (or components or progress)

General youth sport population Time / age

Performance / success

The ‘idea’ of early TID and TDP

TDP To provide conditions and apply interventions to the selected athletes to increase their likelihood of long-term senior international success.

TDP

TID

TDP interventions

Time-economic core

• High-profile coaching • Scientific, medical, para-medical services, nutritional consulting • Psychological services, life-style management, support for education

→ Extensive time-economy: Expand available time for training and competition. → Intensive time-economy: Use available time efficiently. Early TDP → expand ‘treatment’ period until expected peak performance age.

General youth sport population Time / age

The ‘idea’ of early TID and TDP

Performance / success

Fundamental premises 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

Performance / success

The 1st Question

Research question Q1 Do characteristics assessed in early TID correlate with later performance?

?

TDP

TID General youth sport population Time / age

The Findings

Predictive accuracy of early TID Impediments – early TID is very difficult. The task  Success results from interaction with opponents. But opponents’ performance cannot be influenced. 

Performance components may be mutually compensable. Their relative significance changes across age.



Performance structure and demands change across athlete generations.

Junior success is a poor predictor of long-term senior success. Junior success at age … -10 y 11-14 y 15-18 y

Correlation with senior elite success Rs2 = 0.00 Rs2 = 0.01 Rs2 = 0.02

The performer  Biological maturation, relative age (RAE), psychological qualities vary inter- and intra-individually over time.

Types of sports cgs -10y 0.01 11-14 y 0.02 15-18 y 0.01

The environment  Prior and future training and socio-material environments vary inter- and intra-individually over time.

Note: 1 negative correlation. Güllich & Emrich, 2012. National squad members, all Olympic sports; n=616.

Interaction of task, performer, and environment Test quality  TID tests are imperfectly objective, reliable and valid.

game 0.01 0.01 0.03

combat art. comp. 0.141 0.01 1 0.06 0.00 0.11 0.02

The Findings

Predictive accuracy of early TID TID tests may distinguish future higher vs. lower performers.

‘Success rates’ are low in the field.

Multi-year longitudinal studies Assignment to (later) higher or lower performing groups

Consider ‘base rate’ (Ackerman, 2013)



Some studies: 0% correct assignment E. g., Bottoni et al., 2011; Gee et al., 2010; Kuzmits & Adams, 2008; Lidor et al., 2005a



Assumptions 

1/1000 youngsters becomes senior world class 70% correct assignment → Probability of a positively identified talent to become senior world class is: 0.2%



90% correct assignment → Probability:

Some studies: up to 70% correct assignment 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., 2015; Vandorpe et al., 2012; Van Yperen, 2009; Zuber et al., 2015; two studies higher: Forsman et al., 2015; Pion et al., 2015

0.9%

Empirical studies 

‘Success rates’ up to 2.0% E. g., Ackerman, 2013, Gray & Plucker, 2010; Güllich, 2014a; Güllich & 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 2nd and 3rd Question

Research questions

Performance / success

Q2 Does early involvement in TDP correlate with later senior success? Q3 Does early TID/TDP preferentially select and facilitate developmental participation patterns that facilitate long-term development of outstanding senior success?

?

TDP

TID General youth sport population Time / age

The Findings

Involvement and development within TDP Successful senior athletes were selected later.

Achieved squad level

Entry age [years] 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 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 Findings

Involvement and development within TDP Early TID and TDP boost early specialization.

Once involved in TDP → another 95% greater increase of specific training through subsequent 3 years.

Emrich & Güllich, 2016; Güllich & Cobley, 2016

The 4th Question

Performance / success

Involvement and development within TDP

Q4 Does the population of senior elite athletes (a) develop from those selected early and their long-term nurturing, or rather (b) emerge via the course of repeated selection, de-selection and replacements through the consecutive age stages?

General youth sport population Time / age

The 4th Question

Performance / success

Involvement and development within TDP

?

?

? ? ?

General youth sport population Time / age

The Findings

Involvement and development within TDP TDP’s are highly permeable at all stages.

Güllich & Emrich, 2012 7-year longitudinal observation, n=4686

The Findings

Involvement and development within TDP TDP’s display high annual athlete turnover. Mean annual turnover(1)

TDP

Probability of persistence after 3 years after 5 years

“Examplary TDP” sport clubs Elite sport schools Soccer youth academies

19% 28% 25%

53% 37% 43%

35% 19% 24%

NSOs’ junior squads (7 sports)(2) NSO’s junior squads (soccer)

44% 41%

16% 21%

5% 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

Individual athlete level  74% of youth squad careers last up to 2 years.  The younger the entry – the younger the exit: r=0.92. Güllich & Emrich, 2012; Güllich, 2014a

The 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%

0% -U11

-U13

-U15

-U17

-U19

Academy U11 - persistence

Academy U13 - persistence

U-teams U15 - persistence

A-team entry U-teams

3% -U21

22+

A-team entry academy Güllich, 2014a

The Implications

Q1

Future ‘top athletes’ cannot be predicted reliably by way of young-age TID.

Q2 Q3

Particularly early TDP is neither necessary nor beneficial – 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 populations. → The population of senior top athletes emerges in the course of repeated selection, de-selection, and replacements across all age ranges.

The Implications

Explanations – the confluence of impediments

Questions for practitioners and governing bodies

 

   





Low ‘base rate’ Uncertainty Predicting an athlete’s future potential Superiority of TDP interventions compared to conditions outside TDP Inconsistency of developmental participation patterns leading to early selection and to long-term senior international success Expansion of youngster’s costs and risks through TDP (time, their body, health, enjoyment, education, dropout)

At what age to start TID and TDP? What numbers of athletes to involve at what age? By what criteria to select ‘talents’? What conditions to provide and what interventions to apply to the selected? How intensively to nurture them?

Promote … Early specialization Early selection Standardized TDP

↔ ↔ ↔

Varied experiences Later selection Individualized TDP

Focus on the selected few

↔

Enlarge the ‘talent pool’

Thank you ! Vielen Dank !