The purpose in this paper is to examine the effectiveness/usefulness of the long-term athlete development (LTAD) model, particularly in the coaching of judo. The major influences on the LTAD approach, including deliberate practice, are reviewed along with recent evidence that leads to questions about the usefulness of the LTAD model. While Judo Canada has attempted to implement this model in its program to train coaches, there remains a great deal of incongruity between the LTAD approach and the pedagogy that often characterizes judo.
G. Cornelis van Kooten
Simon A. Rogers, Peter Hassmén, Alexandra H. Roberts, Alison Alcock, Wendy L. Gilleard and John S. Warmenhoven
Sports Medicine . Br J Sports Med . 2014 ; 48 ( 4 ): 287 – 8 . PubMed ID: 24463910 doi:10.1136/bjsports-2013-093299 24463910 10.1136/bjsports-2013-093299 7. Ford P , De Ste Croix M , Lloyd RS , et al . The Long-term athlete development model: Physiological evidence and application . J Sports
Alistair P. Murphy, Rob Duffield, Aaron Kellett and Machar Reid
High-performance tennis environments aim to prepare athletes for competitive demands through simulated-match scenarios and drills. With a dearth of direct comparisons between training and tournament demands, the current investigation compared the perceptual and technical characteristics of training drills, simulated match play, and tournament matches.
Data were collected from 18 high-performance junior tennis players (gender: 10 male, 8 female; age 16 ± 1.1 y) during 6 ± 2 drill-based training sessions, 5 ± 2 simulated match-play sessions, and 5 ± 3 tournament matches from each participant. Tournament matches were further distinguished by win or loss and against seeded or nonseeded opponents. Notational analysis of stroke and error rates, winners, and serves, along with rating of perceived physical exertion (RPE) and mental exertion was measured postsession.
Repeated-measures analyses of variance and effect-size analysis revealed that training sessions were significantly shorter in duration than tournament matches (P < .05, d = 1.18). RPEs during training and simulated matchplay sessions were lower than in tournaments (P > .05; d = 1.26, d = 1.05, respectively). Mental exertion in training was lower than in both simulated match play and tournaments (P > .05; d = 1.10, d = 0.86, respectively). Stroke rates during tournaments exceeded those observed in training (P < .05, d = 3.41) and simulated-match-play (P < .05, d = 1.22) sessions. Furthermore, the serve was used more during tournaments than simulated match play (P < .05, d = 4.28), while errors and winners were similar independent of setting (P > .05, d < 0.80).
Training in the form of drills or simulated match play appeared to inadequately replicate tournament demands in this cohort of players. Coaches should be mindful of match demands to best prescribe sessions of relevant duration, as well as internal (RPE) and technical (stroke rate) load, to aid tournament preparation.
Alistair P. Murphy, Rob Duffield, Aaron Kellett and Machar Reid
To investigate the discrepancy between coach and athlete perceptions of internal load and notational analysis of external load in elite junior tennis.
Fourteen elite junior tennis players and 6 international coaches were recruited. Ratings of perceived exertion (RPEs) were recorded for individual drills and whole sessions, along with a rating of mental exertion, coach rating of intended session exertion, and athlete heart rate (HR). Furthermore, total stroke count and unforced-error count were notated using video coding after each session, alongside coach and athlete estimations of shots and errors made. Finally, regression analyses explained the variance in the criterion variables of athlete and coach RPE.
Repeated-measures analyses of variance and interclass correlation coefficients revealed that coaches significantly (P < .01) underestimated athlete session RPE, with only moderate correlation (r = .59) demonstrated between coach and athlete. However, athlete drill RPE (P = .14; r = .71) and mental exertion (P = .44; r = .68) were comparable and substantially correlated. No significant differences in estimated stroke count were evident between athlete and coach (P = .21), athlete notational analysis (P = .06), or coach notational analysis (P = .49). Coaches estimated significantly greater unforced errors than either athletes or notational analysis (P < .01). Regression analyses found that 54.5% of variance in coach RPE was explained by intended session exertion and coach drill RPE, while drill RPE and peak HR explained 45.3% of the variance in athlete session RPE.
Coaches misinterpreted session RPE but not drill RPE, while inaccurately monitoring error counts. Improved understanding of external- and internal-load monitoring may help coach–athlete relationships in individual sports like tennis avoid maladaptive training.
Despite significant advances in the development and performance of United States-born hockey players since the 1970s, room for improvement remains, especially when one compares the U.S. to its top international competition, much of which succeeds at the Olympic and World Championship level with dramatically smaller pools of talent from which to assemble its elite teams. USA Hockey sought to address this performance discrepancy and fulfill the full potential of American hockey through creation and implementation of its American Development Model (ADM), a nationwide reinvention of how hockey was taught at the grassroots level. Based on long-term athlete development principles and founded on sport science and proven child development best practices, the ADM represents a revolution in athlete and coach development. This paper explores the research that helped create USA Hockey’s ADM, along with the initiative’s methodology, execution and early outcomes.
Damien McKay, Carolyn Broderick and Katharine Steinbeck
With the advent of long-term athlete development programs and early sport specialization, the training of elite athletes now spans the period of adolescence. Adolescence represents a period of physical, psychosocial and cognitive development, but also a time of physical and psychological vulnerability. Changes in skeletal and physiological attributes coincide with an increased risk of sport related injury. A window of vulnerability is shaped by the properties of the musculoskeletal system, the influence of pubertal hormones and the lag time between physical and cognitive development. This article aims to challenge the assumption of adolescence as a time of increased vigor alone, by highlighting the presence of specific vulnerabilities, and proposing that the hormonal, musculoskeletal, and neurocognitive changes of adolescence may represent intrinsic risk factors for sport related injury.
Lori A. Gano-Overway and Kristen Dieffenbach
% (9) Emergency Action Plans 82% (53) 14% (9) Proper Nutrition for Optimal Performance and Health 80% (52) 17% (11) Program Evaluation 79% (51) 21% (14) Issues Related to Diversity 79% (51) 19% (12) Mastering Sport Techniques & Tactics 77% (50) 20% (13) Long-term Athlete Development 74% (48) 22% (14
Durva Vahia, Adam Kelly, Harry Knapman and Craig A. Williams
nonfunctional overreaching and overtraining compared with recreational players ( 22 ). The Long-Term Athlete Development model classifies players aged 16–18 as in the “training to compete” phase of development with highly structured training ( 12 , 21 ). At this age, players are still developing their physical
Gemma N. Parry, Lee C. Herrington and Ian G. Horsley
to determine meaningful change, particularly if they are using CMPU to monitor training program effects and long-term athlete development because tests that are deemed reliable are not necessarily the most effective for monitoring performance changes. References 1. Sander A , Keiner M , Wirth
Katherine A. Tamminen, Kaleigh Ferdinand Pennock and Courtney Braun
sport. Long-term athlete-development model ( Canadian Sport for Life, 2014 ) Developmental model of sport participation ( Côté, 1999 ) Personal assets framework for sport ( Côté et al., 2016 ) Week 1: online activity Athletes (Intervention group completed activities with parents.) Controllable and