Specialized styles or all encompassing system?

[ChenPengFi]

Studies from the former Soviet Union, in which early specialization was widely practiced, have provided evidence against its efficacy. Nagorni (see 6)found that only a minority of Soviet athletes from single sport backgrounds were able to improve performance later in their careers and that most diversified athletes attributed success to a multisport background. Harre (see 6)
reported that although athletes who specialized early in their careers experienced quick performance irnprovement, they attained their best performances by age 16, then performed much less consistently and quit their sport sooner than those whose training programs were diverse. Finally, Barynina and Vaitsekhovskii (4) found that Russian age- group swimmers who specialized at later ages advanced at a greater rate than those who did so earlier and declared that early specialization had no performance-related advantages.
Specialization, in fact, may potentially limit overall motor skill development, which has implications for long-term physical activity patterns upon retirement from competitive sport.
A swimmer, for instance, performs a skill horizontally for hours; a soccer player is taught not to use his or her hands; an ice hockey player's feet rarely touch the ground. Will these athletes' skills be limited, thus limiting their ability to perform lifetime fitness activities other than those they know best? The athlete's lack of general athletic skills (perceived or otherwise) 16 Wiersma may inhibit the likelihood of participation in alternate activities, with one consequence being compromised long-term health.

http://www.humankinetics.com/acucust...Item/12188.pdf


There's more there, detailing various risks and benefits but that's pretty compelling.

[ChenPengFi]

Based on a Danish sample of 148 elite and 95 near-elite athletes from cgs sports (sports measured in centimeters, grams, or seconds), the present study investigates group differences concerning accumulated practice hours during the early stages of the career, involvement in other sports, career development, as well as determining whether or not these variables predict membership in the elite group. The results clearly reveal that elite athletes specialized at a later age and trained less in childhood.

(my bold)

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...omisedMessage=

[ChenPengFi]

Results: For most sports, there is no evidence that intense training and specialization before puberty are necessary to achieve elite status. Risks of early sports specialization include higher rates of injury, increased psychological stress, and quitting sports at a young age. Sports specialization occurs along a continuum. Survey tools are being developed to identify where athletes fall along the spectrum of specialization.

http://sph.sagepub.com/content/5/3/251.short

[W. Rabbit]

Your penchant for misquoting and misrepresenting is shameless.

Hey thanks for the sources/data.

Now please point out the misquote AND the misrepresentation, thanks.

[ChenPengFi]

Successful competitive performance in early judo competition was not associated with success later in adulthood.

http://www.amsciepub.com/doi/abs/10.....113.4.139-149

[ChenPengFi]

Hey thanks for the sources/data.

Now please point out the misquote AND the misrepresentation, thanks.

Lol, fuck you wabbit, you do it constantly.

[ChenPengFi]

Specialization often conflicts with the educational mission of schools whose goals should be to provide athletic programs that lead to the greatest personal growth for the greatest number of students (Gillis, 1993). Multi-sport athetes tend to get better grades, and are often the most active and productiveathletes in the school (Cardone, 1994). An athlete who participates in team and individual sports gains the perspectives and values unique to each
(Matheson, 1990), and the exposure to different coaches with different philosophies, strategies, and personalities can provide important benefits for the development of a well-rounded athlete (Hill, & Hansen, 1988).
Finally, by participating in multiple sports, athletes gain the opportunity to learn transferable athletic skills, such as the football player who learns balance and agility from wrestling.
Failure or injuries can be devastating to specialists if they have no other sport to fall back on, whereas multi-sport athletes have the option of moving to another sport that provides new opportunities and challenges. This type of stress can take a toll on athletic specialists. With pressure to succeed hinging on one sport, the consequent anxiety often leads to burnout (Hill & Hansen, 1988).

There is little to suggest that specialization makes an athlet
e better at a sport.

http://letitflyfootballcamp.com/imag..._in_sports.pdf

[W. Rabbit]

Lol, fuck you wabbit, you do it constantly.

Not on purpose, I'm not in the habit of intentionally misquoting anyone.

If that's your flag of surrender on the topic, ok, I accept your sources and offer.

It does appear all these sources show the psychological aspects are the bigger issue when it comes to specializing kids early, and being counter productive to future athletic activity, especially when it comes to the statistics in these studies on injuries...that's just common sense, the psychological impact of injuries on future success is clear. That goes for outside sports/MA, too. It's right there in the study you posted.

When 1point responded to BKR, he agreed with BKR's assertion that:

the general development of physical attributes is what counts. Otherwise, elite level performance will not follow

I questioned that conclusion, because what appears to really count is not burning out kids, mentally, at a young age. Forcing children to specialize is counterproductive to them mentally. It's not the training itself, necessarily, or the stress of physical development (which is probably still very positive for any particular kid on average). Better mental health considerations for these kids = fewer injuries, greater future success, greater involvement in sports etc.

Every source you posted supports that conclusion. It should be OK to let a kid specialize and they'll probably do fine in future sports and even become "elite". But putting them in a pressure cooker of stress while doing so at a young age is a really bad thing for their future, and I'll be the ramifications go well beyond sports...probably affects every aspect of their lives. Again, makes sense.

[ChenPengFi]

Most of the links discuss motor skills and sport performance, not just the psychology.

You've been a lying, misquoting and strawman building blowhard since your ED days, dude.

[ChenPengFi]

Here, dipshit:

early specialization, particularly for children, is enormously counterproductive to success in sport.

!=

it is "enormously counterproductive" to train anything for any particular child

[W. Rabbit]

But the context of that first statement was with regards to "physical" development, so my question was "why?", maybe I phrased it wrong.

When I asked for research and questioned the premise, you didn't quote from the study from any of the sections that dealt with motor skills and sport performance.

You provided a quote from the section entitled "PSYCHO SOCIAL" to support them.

When I read why (dug into some excerpts from that book) it seemed the "counterproductive" part that 1point2 mentioned wasn't related to any lack of general physical attributes early on..it was all about the mental pressure put on kids, which often lead to physical injuries, and the combination of those is really what negatively impacts future performance.

[ChenPengFi]

You dumbfuck, read the passages better, here's part of the last one:

Finally, by participating in multiple sports, athletes gain the opportunity to learn transferable athletic skills, such as the football player who learns balance and agility from wrestling.

The conclusions are the same in almost all of them.
It's the same with academics.
Anyone with decent childhood education or coaching experience is well versed in this.
Stfu wabbit.

[W. Rabbit]

You dumbfuck, read the passages better, here's part of the last one:

The conclusions are the same in almost all of them.
It's the same with academics.
Anyone with decent childhood education or coaching experience is well versed in this.
Stfu wabbit.

Or anyone with common sense, right?

However once again you're arguing about developing physical, motor, athletic skill. I'm asking what's truly "counterproductive". It doesn't seem to be physical training, whether you specialize or multiplex.

You don't think PSYCHO SOCIAL burnout happens to kids doing MULTIPLE sports too? Any less than kids who specialize at an early age? Do you truly believe that psycho social burnout is a specific fault of early specialization?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the studies appear to conflict with how you're attempting to utilize them, to argue that kids will be fine and excel if you push them into multiple sports at a young age. It's just as likely if not MORE likely to burn most out, with the occasional exceptions. How is that any better for their long term prognosis?

This is what you seem to be arguing.

You're being daft, man. Do you have real pediatric experience? I'm curious.

[ChenPengFi]

Specialization isn't really appropriate until after adolescence.
If they underperform compared to more well rounded, general athlete peers, yes, that's counter-productive.
If they burn out earlier, that's counter-productive too.
More injuries are counter-productive as well.
You're just being a dumbass.

[1point2]

It's blindingly obvious, Rabbit, when you turn the corner from having a discussion to just saying things to disagree with someone you feel has recently slighted you. (For everyone watching: I just called him out for a silly thing he said in a CMA thread: http://www.bullshido.net/forums/show...=1#post2866509) It makes me worry for your psychological well-being.

This is one of those topics where I'm stupefied that you disagree. Every sport scientist I've read is consistent in saying that young children should be exposed to a broad range of athletics, partly to avoid an excess of social/familial pressure on performance, partly to avoid psychological burnout, but also to avoid physical burnout. Kids can't handle the same kind of repetitive stress that someone in their 20s can. Then there are the factors of repeatedly learning new skills and developing the body in new ways, which is beneficial not just in gaining those skills and developments, but even more so for the skill of picking up new skills and the physical resilience of a body that is frequently adapting to new and different demands. (...But don't take this idea as far as Greg Glassman's propaganda.)

Let me check my library to see if I can find a quick reference for you. But I do note that you've brought this up in a kind of dickish way.