depends on the coach and group - different things work for different people

I think you are better playing div 2 at a top 5 team rather than div 1 in a bottom 4 team - it depends on the level of competition

div 3 or below - forget it - go div 1 anywhere

chances are most clubs run a div 1/2 squad

All players, all sports , should play as close to the "level of the learner".


It is the most important aspect of learning any new skill.


Coaches should also pitch practice at that level and allow kids to have variations in challenges within a drill.

This is the essence of great coaching.
Practise is most important at u/14 level and games experience more important after that.
So An U/16 bottom age player who feels they are capable of playing Div 1 needs to make a decision in this age bracket to best suit their indivdual development.
Scott Ninnis was still playing Div 2 in u/18 because his club had no div 1 team.
By u20 3 years later he was a crucial part of the state team.

It is an extreme example, that is slightly irrelevant these days, but illustrates my point.

I prefer players to play rather than sit on the bench. If a player is marginal then play more minutes in the division below...and practise at home!!!

IMO

XXX

Open skills- teach with progresive part method and build up.
Closed skills- whole method.
Closed skil in an open situation- whole /part whole.

Again the skills of coaching are complex!!

Even the above can be varied to introduce competition or pressure.
Still comes back to the "level of the learner".

Leading for the ball is a closed skill in an open siuation.
As are

defensive shuffling.
V- cutting
Posting up
passing..................shall I go on

An open skill requires the reading of information of an environmental or external nature ie catching a pass hitting a tennis ball.
Closed skill would be a free throw, but you could argue an open environment given heart rate or crowd.
The classic closed skill in an open situation is playing a shot in golf.

Most of basketball is open skill and the best players are the ones who can read the "play " and have the skills to apply.

Indiana, spot on. basketball is an open skill and not closed skill sport. Ability to read the play, along with natural god given talent will help the player to succeed, not repetative learning.

all the "super coaches" with the big egos pay way to much credence in their own knowledge of the game in developing kids.

Get a whole lot of super-talented kids together send them to a playground to hoop it up 5 or 6 times a week and it doesnt really matter who these kids play for or who their coach is. I hope that answers the original question.

#74999
Sorry cant agree with that.


Dont discount the feedback a coach can give a player regarding performance.
The feedback cycle will feed information back to the player who can refine the action/decision /movement and so the cycle will create improvement.
The best programs will give personalised indvidual feed back and thus dramatically increase the time taken to learn.
Good coaches dont just Know a lot they accelerate learning by the feed back.

Repetition.

Repetition is a necessary evil because it teaches the muscles to do things in a regular action which stops the breakdown when the external influences come, ie scoreboard defense etc.
Drilling is exactly that and we could all do more.

Indiana, valid points. Its all a matter of a continuum. Feedback is important and so is knowledge but not important when compared to game sense learning. The less feedback the better, the sooner you can introduce players to the autonomous phase of learning the better.

Too many coaches who value themselves waste alot of time trapping athletes in the associative phase of learning. This is boaring for athletes.

Drilling is important but we could all do it less. Indiana, please read some articles here on gamesense:

http://www.ausport.gov.au/coach/sense.asp

Let the kids play!

75009



# become more tactically aware and able to make better decisions during the game
# start thinking strategically about game concepts
# develop skills within a realistic and enjoyable context, rather than practising them in isolation
# develop a greater understanding of the game being played.
These are great points and I agree with them totally.
Game sense is just another skill that must permeate all drills, feedback is the gel that defines training vs practice. Transfer from training to games is the thing we all look for in our teams from week to week. This determines emphasis for trainig next week.
The thread started on the appropriate level for players to compete and I suppose it is why a decision of where to place a player is not easy when they are on the cusp of a grade!

There is a difference in how this should be approached based on age.

Little tackers through to mid teenager need to have as a primary focus the love of the game developed by including team concepts relevent to the age group and having the fundementals correctly coached at a very early age.

For those parents who believe that their child is a budding champion then they need to have have a knowlegeable person look at the kid AND talk with them to see if the parents have unrealistic expectations.

There is a lot to be gained from taking kids to the ABL and getting them to find role models to help foster the dream to a realistic level and if they are beyod that then look at Rep squads and potential college.

But having said that its ultimately the child that sets the pace of the learning and the coaches and parents are there to support UNTILL a decission needs to be made to take it serious and therefore start to drive the TEENAGER to strive for higher goals.

Agreed on that last post wholeheartedly.

In terms of players at the cusp of a grade or level. I think the higher the level the player can play at the better. Especially if they are genetically pre-disposioned to success because they will adapt. Research (Abernathy if I recall correctly) shows that elite athletes were introduced to sports with older, better athletes at an early age amongst other things. Humans will adapt to their environment.

By last post I meant 75012.

TK, cant say I agree with much of what you said other than the last paragraph.

Not the last paragraph actually, the third paragraph.

"There is a lot to be gained from taking kids to the ABL and getting them to find role models to help foster the dream to a realistic level and if they are beyod that then look at Rep squads and potential college."

Where would we be if children set the pace of learning.
Developmental stages vary between children but a coach is able to advance children at varying rates even in the same squad, this is essential.
Coaches determine pace , not the child.
The coach determines the pace from the children and previous benchmarks through her experience.

Indiana,

I think you are a little loose in your understanding of "open vs. closed" skills. In on post you are saying Leading for the ball, defensive shuffling, V- cutting, Posting up, and passing are all closed skills, later you say "most of basketball is open skill"

This may help you:

"Open skill  a skill performed in an environment that is unpredictable or in motion and that requires individuals to adapt their movements in response to dynamic properties of the environment.

Closed skill  a skill performed in an environment that is predictable or stationary and that allows individuals to plan their movements in advance." (Schmidt & Wrisberg, 2000.)

I will let you make up your own mind now on what you believe to be open or closed.

In response to the initial question:

There are more factors that come into development than just what division they are in. In short the best program is one that enhances the psychosociophysiological and skill development to the greatest level.

Indiana, I believe you may have misunderstood me.

My intention was not for the child to tell adults HOW they want to learn as they are not qualified to do so. Its throught their Actions, Enthusiasum (or lack of)and Engagement that the COACH aids in right approach to take with a child.

This is where the difference can be found as to a good coach and a great one. The ability for a coach to develop the enquiring mind as well.

But I do accept that there are those children/teenagers that need to be told. I guess that there are Learders and Followers in all age groups.

psychosociophysiological!
Thats a ripper!

Lucky Kids dont post here.
Might drop that one at the next parents meeting.

I agree with the definitions ITA, but a closed skill applied in an open situation does not make the skill change. It is still a closed skill.

This has ben a bone of contention for ever and really on helps determine the best way to taech the skill.

Sorry small words next time ;)

But by definition (using Schmidt & Wrisberg, 2000) it is the environment that determines the skill to be open or closed.

Consider shooting a free throw vs. shooting from the free throw line during a game. The "motor pattern" does not change (ok slightly different pattern for jumpshot, but you get the drift), however the "skill" is now open.

Since the environment is predictable in a free throw situation, and allows the shooter to plan their movement prior to shooting it, it is closed. Since the environment is constantly changing in a game situation (9 other players on the floor), the shooter must adapt their movement (primarily the "preparation phase", or footwork to get open, maybe the shot too if a big hand comes at them) to allow for this. Open skill, familiar motor pattern selected from previously practised options.

In terms of teaching the skill, the motor patterns must be taught first. Once these are competent only then can you teach to react. Consider being overplayed one way and asking the player to change directions. It is inefficient at best (dangerous at worst) to just teach to react and go the other way without them having a solid fundamental understanding of the motor patterns involved. Yes it is important to put them in an open environment but without the fundamental motor pattern it is fraught with danger.