The blog of lists: 101 summaries of important/interesting research into sport (Part 1)

Research is a complex and time-consuming activity.  It can involve years of data-gathering, and its findings are often subtle and difficult to reduce to a few simple recipes.


BUT, if it wasn't ...


This entry tries to summarise some important research studies in sports coaching and related areas like physical education, youth sport and sport development.  I have also included some lists that just seem interesting to sporty folk.  In all cases, the summaries are in the form of lists.


My ambition in doing this is twofold: I hope this lists are useful and interesting in their own right.  But I also hope the reader will go from here to the original research papers, many of which readable.


The lists are not in any particular order.  Why?  Because it seems to me that we come across some of the most insightful ideas when we are looking for something else.


[Oh, I should acknowledge straight away that there are nowhere near 101 lists!]

What are the minimum requirements of sports programmes aiming to foster positive sporting experiences for young people?

1.       a clear mission;
2.       developmentally appropriate content;
3.       a safe and healthy environment;
4.       suitably trained staff;
5.       integrated family and community partners; and
6.       on-going assessments.

Sources: E.g., Bodily, S., and Beckett, M. K. (2005)  Making out-of-school-time matter: Evidence for an action agenda. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Education and Rand Labor and Population.  Coatsworth, J. D., and Conray, D. E. (2007)  Youth sport as a component of afterschool programs.  New Directions for Youth Development, 115, pp. 57-74.  Eccles, J. S., and Gootman, J. A. (eds) (2002) Community programs to promote youth development. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Why were Olympians first attracted to their sport?

1. a love of the sport
2. an intrinsic love of activity
3. early success in the sport

Once introduced to their sport, why did these Olympians continue to participate?

1. the challenge and love of competition
2. fun
3. a desire to be successful

As the level of competition increased, why did these Olympians continue to participate?

1. the challenge and love of competition
2. a desire to be successful
3. the need for a competitive outlet
4. fun

What are the most important qualities of a coach?

1. the ability to teach
2. the ability to motivate or encourage
3. training knowledge
4. skill competence
5. strategic knowledge of sport

What are the least important qualities of a coach?

1. assistance with goal setting
2. management and organisational skills
3. assistance with balancing the lives of athletes

Source: Gibbons, T., Hill, R., McConnell, A., Forster, T., Moore, J. (2002)  The path to excellence: a comprehensive view of development of U.S. Olympians who competed from 1984-1998. Colorado Springs, CO: United States Olympic Committee.

How do Female Athletes Want their Parents to Behave?

The study found three categories of parental behaviour across different phases of competition (before, during, after):

• preparation for competition
• parental support and, encouragement during competition
• the provision of feedback after competition

Source: Knight, C. J., Neely, K. C., & Holt, N. L. (2011) Parental Behaviors in Team Sports: How do Female Athletes Want Parents to Behave? Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 23(1), pp. 76-92.

Why Do Children Want to Take Part in Gymnastics Classes?

1. Being with and Making Friends
2. Developing Physical Fitness
3. Learning and Improving Skills

Source: Wald, J. (2003) Parental Motivations for Enrolling their Children in a Private Gymnastic Program.  The Sport Journal.  6(3).

World's Most Popular Sports (for fans)

1. Soccer / Football
2. Cricket
3. Field Hockey
4. Tennis
5. Volleyball

Source: http://www.mostpopularsports.net/




Highest Paid Sportspeople (2011-2012)

1. Tiger Woods, golf - $75 million
2. Kobe Bryant, basketball - $53 million
3. LeBron James, basketball, $48 million
4. Roger Federer, tennis, $47 million
5. Phil Mickelson, golf, $46.5 million
6. David Beckham, football, $40 million
7. Cristiano Ronaldo, football, $38 million
8. Alex Rodriguez, baseball, $35 million
9. Michael Schumacher, motor racing, $34 million
10. Lionel Messi, football, $32.3 million

Source: http://www.forbes.com

You have read this article baseball / children / coaching / disability sport; sport; inclusion; School Games / education / Football / myths / sports / sports coaching with the title baseball. You can bookmark this page URL https://say-sport.blogspot.com/2012/03/the-blog-of-lists-101-summaries-of.html. Thanks!

Sport Science - good, bad and bogus

The sport sciences have garnered a huge body of evidence regarding the measurement and improvement of performance. Television programmes reporting on the preparation of elite players for events like the 2012 Olympic Games show them in laboratories, where scientists in lab coats connect them to tubes and cables and the ubiquitous machines that go 'ping'.

The scientific foundations of modern training and measurement are simply taken for granted by those involved in sport. Personally, I am not so sure.

Dave Collins (formerly Performance Director at UK Athletics and now Professor at the University of Central Lancashire) and I have recently written a paper for the International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics called 'Scienciness' and the allure of second-hand strategy in talent identification and development. We argue that senior sports coaches and administrators are too quickly impressed by apparently 'sciency' looking strategies and practices which, on closer inspection, are really not very good science at all.

Of course, not all sport science is dodgy; the great majority is perfectly respectable. A problem, though, is that the people who actually use the research are rarely able to distinguish between good and bad science.

Without an understanding of science, most of us turn to good-old-fashioned common sense, which is probably a good bet most of the time, but occasionally is paradoxical and surprising and quite the opposite of common sense. And there are countless examples of bogus ideas in sport that seem common sensical; consider talent identification: the importance of spotting talent young; the need to identifying children with the correct body shape for specific sports; the necessity of focusing on one sport early. All of these ideas are widely believed to be true, because they seem like common sense. Yet they are all, more or less, nonsense.


One of the most fascinating examples of the battle between science and non-science is reported in Michael Lewis' Moneyball, which has just been released as a film starring .. [drum roll] .. Brad Pitt. The book / film focuses on Major League Baseball, possibly the most evidence-laden sport in the world, and its reliance on a combination of the wisdom of aged insiders and common sense-based, sciency statistics. According to Lewis, the statistics used by even the most elite teams to evaluate player success and, vitally, to identify the most talented recruits, were simply not relevant for the modern game.



Moneyball also tells of the remarkable success of the Oakland A's, a relatively poor team that somehow managed to compete successfully against much wealthier and established teams. Their secret? They used informed statistics to identify the real key predictors of playing success. So, while their opponents continued to assess players' potential and performance using common sense measures like batting averages, the A's turned to on-base percentages and slugging percentages. These scores were not only more valid predictors of playing success, but they also allowed the team to buy much more economically.

The events told in Moneyball took place some years ago, and the other Major League teams were forced to change, albeit reluctantly. It may be the new film will stimulate interest in the issue of good, bad and bogus sport science, and - who knows - perhaps it will contribute to the sport science education of coaches and administrators.

[A recent issue of the Financial Times has a fascinating discussion between Michael Lewis and Billy Beane, the man behind the A's statistical revolution]

You have read this article administration / baseball / bullshit / children / science / sport / talent development with the title baseball. You can bookmark this page URL https://say-sport.blogspot.com/2011/11/sport-science-good-bad-and-bogus.html. Thanks!