2
4 6 8 10
contents Volume 5, Number 1 August 2011
A Letter from the President
REPORTS Division I Track & Field Division I Cross Country Division II Track & Field Division II Cross Country Division III Track & Field Division III Cross Country High School IAAF Report
8
FEATURES
16
Approach Run and Acceleration Patterns by Dave Nielsen
16
Coaching Youths
24
A Mental Plan
36
Mental Imagery
by Matthew Buns, Ph.D.
by Lawrence W. Judge, Ph.D., CSCS and Erin Gilreath, MA.
by Sterling M. Roberts
44
49
Developing Your High School Track & Field Program By Don Helberg
AWARDS 2011 USTFCCCA Outdoor Regional Coaches & Athletes of the Year
24
36
Cover photograph by Mike Corn AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
1
A Letter From the President PUBLISHER Sam Seemes
G
reetings from Lincoln, Nebraska! I hope you have been able to relax a bit this summer before things ramp up again in the fall. Although there is always plenty of work to do, I certainly enjoy the slightly slower pace of summer. Beginning in August I have the privilege of assuming the office of President of the USTFCCCA. First, I want to thank the outgoing president, Curtis Frye of the University of South Carolina. Curtis’s energy and passion provided great leadership for our association over the past two years. Going home from last year’s convention I found myself at the same airport gate as Curtis. I learned two things from that chance meeting. 1. The job of President may be more stressful and tiring than I thought. When I got up and walked over to Curtis in anticipation of gaining some insight on the job I was going to take on, I found Curtis with his eyes closed catching a little cat nap! Sorry, Curtis, just had to give you a hard time. I know you worked very hard at the convention and probably spent a good deal of time answering questions from people like me. 2. Curtis loves our sport. He was very generous with his time and was more than willing to share his thoughts on the role of the President. It did not take long for me to feel the passion that Curtis has for our sport and his desire to see track & field and cross country grow and prosper. I remember being at the first meeting of our association in Louisville, KY in 1993 (I am sure we did not call it a convention) with about 60 other coaches. From that humble beginning our membership has grown to 7,649 with almost 1,000 coaches registered at our last convention. I hope to see continued growth in our membership during my term as president. In an effort to promote even more involvement in our association, the cross country executive committees of the NCAA I, II and III recently approved an initiative designed to boost membership. They have requested that all USTFCCCA members who host regular-season 2011 Cross Country meets offer preferred entry fees for USTFCCCA members. Hopefully this initiative will encourage coaches who may not be members currently to seriously consider joining us. Electing our first NCAA III President of the USTFCCCA is further evidence of the growth and evolution of our association. I am humbled to be in this position and assure you that I take this responsibility seriously and will do my best to serve the association. We have some issues and challenges ahead of us that are specific to certain groups of institutions and others that are relevant to the entire organization. Regardless of affiliation, NCAA I, II, III, NAIA or high school, I know we all are focused on doing what is best for the greatest sport in the world. I look forward to working with and for you all over the next two years. Enjoy the rest of the summer and I wish you the best getting your new year started this fall.
DR. TED BULLING PRESIDENT, USTFCCCA DIRECTOR OF TRACK & FIELD AND CROSS COUNTRY, NEBRASKA WESLEYAN UNIVERSITY tab@nebrwesleyan.edu
2
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
EXECUTIVE EDITOR Mike Corn ASSOCIATE EDITOR Sylvia Kamp ASSOCIATE EDITOR Mason Cathey MEDIA MANAGER Tom Lewis MEMBERSHIP SERVICES Mandi Magill PHOTOGRAPHER Kirby Lee EDITORIAL BOARD Vern Gambetta,
Larry Judge, Boo Schexnayder, Gary Winckler, Ralph Vernacchia
Published by Renaissance Publishing LLC 110 Veterans Memorial Blvd., Suite 123, Metairie, LA 70005 (504) 828-1380 www.myneworleans.com
USTFCCCA
National Office 1100 Poydras Street, Suite 1750 New Orleans, LA 70163 Phone: 504-599-8900 Fax: 504-599-8909
techniques (ISSN 1939-3849) is published quarterly in February, May, August, and November by the U.S. Track & Field and Cross Country Coaches Association. Copyright 2011. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced in any manner, in whole or in part, without the permission of the publisher. techniques is not responsible for unsolicited manuscripts, photos and artwork even if accompanied by a self-addressed stamped envelope. The opinions expressed in techniques are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of the magazines' managers or owners. Periodical Postage Paid at New Orleans La and Additional Entry Offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to: USTFCCCA, PO Box 55969, Metairie, LA 70055-5969. If you would like to advertise your business in techniques, please contact Mike Corn at (504) 599-8900 or mike@ustfccca.org.
NCAA REPORT
Division l Track & Field and Cross Country
RON MANN
BARRY HARTWICK
PRESIDENT, NCAA DIVISION I TRACK AND FIELD COACHES
PRESIDENT, NCAA DIVISION I CROSS COUNTRY COACHES
would like to take this opportunity to thank Beth Alford-Sullivan for her leadership as President over the last two years. In addition to faithfully discharging the regular duties of our President, she also led us through a challenging restructuring process of the Outdoor Track and Field Championships. Having experienced the new Championships format for the last two years, the competition at our National finals is the finest I have seen during my career in Division I Track and Field. Our Association will continue to work with the NCAA and the NCAA Division I Track and Field Sport Subcommittee to improve the conduct and administration of the Preliminary Championship Competition and Final Championship Competition. As a part of those ongoing efforts, following the work done by your Executive Committee and the Division I coaching body at the last USTFCCCA Convention, we recently submitted requests for funding for participants and hosts of the Preliminary Championship Competition. Now, as I begin my term as President, I look forward to continuing our work with the NCAA Sport Subcommittee, the Executive Committee of USTFCCCA, and the Division I coaching body at large to make the Division I Track and Field experience more exciting for all athletes, coaches and fans. Over the next two years of my term as President of Division I Track and Field Coaches, I ask that we continue to focus on the strategic plan that we adopted in 2009. That plan includes making our sport more valuable and valued on our campuses and throughout our society. The USTFCCCA has some of the brightest and most dedicated individuals on university campuses across this country. As such, my challenge and request of each of you during my tenure is that we unite to present to our public a sport that is marketed, presented and administered using all of the technology and creativity available to us at this time. Athletic administrators want to see their university Track and Field teams in competition on their campuses. Fans want to see an exciting, timely, visually stimulating event one that they can follow and understand. Our student-athletes want to be proud alumni of their universities and of the oldest and best sport in the world - track and field. Finally, we as coaches should continue to swell with pride as we train our athletes to become the best they can be on and off the track.
I
Ron Mann is the Head Men’s & Women’s Track & Field Coach at the University of Louisville. Ron can be reached at ron.mann@louisville.edu
4
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
s you read this letter, over 300 Division I cross country teams will be preparing for the 2011 season. I am opening my report with that thought because I don’t think that we can emphasize enough how wide-sweeping our sport is throughout the NCAA. As president of our coaches group, my goal is to have all of our plans and decisions be made in the best interests of all of these programs. My term as president started this summer and I would like to thank outgoing president Bob Braman for all of his hard work during his term. In addition to his leadership of the coach’s association he also guided Florida State to the runner-up finish at the 2010 NCAA meet. Bob has been a great example of a coach who not only takes care of his own program but looks at the big picture of our sport as well. Joining me in leadership roles for the next two years are Sean Cleary and Dave Smith as vice-presidents. Sean and Dave are incredibly talented coaches who annually produce tremendous teams at West Virginia and Oklahoma State respectively. I am going to count on their experience and enthusiasm to help us move forward. Our association voted overwhelmingly to change the date of our national championships from Monday to Saturday. We need to keep pushing so that this can be enacted for the 2012 championships. We need to nail down the date, and sites, for the 2012 regional meets. We have had long discussions on how many days prior to the championship to host the regionals. Now is the time to get a final decision approved. We also need to select our regional sites at least two years in advance. I think we have a reasonable chance of increasing the size of our championship field. Providing greater access to the championship would be a major plus for our association. We are working on this already for indoor track and field; the time is ripe for cross-country as well. A second and even easier change is to increase the number of schools ranked at the end of the season. We can use the existing formula that we use for the 13 at large spots to rank teams from 32 to 64. This is a win-win. It is recognition for more schools and allows cross-country to be an even more important part of the Director’s Cup rankings. I hope to work with the national office on this project. Finally, as you make a variety of travel plans this fall for your team or for recruiting, please keep the national convention in mind. It is a little disappointing to see how may schools do not send even a single representative to the convention. You will have a chance to have your voice heard. Believe me, I understand that it can be frustrating to vote on something at the convention and then see the motion disappear into the NCAA swamp. The more voices that are heard, the more coaches that follow up with their AD and conference commissioner, the more likely we are to control our own destiny. I am looking forward to a great season with the Dartmouth crosscountry team. Best of luck to you and your team as well!
A
Barry Hartwick is the Head Men’s Track & Field and Cross Country Coach at Dartmouth College. Barry can be reached at Barry.Harwick@Dartmouth.EDU
NCAA REPORT
Division ll Track & Field and Cross Country
STEVE GUYMON
MARLON BRINK
PRESIDENT, NCAA DIVISION II TRACK & FIELD COACHES
PRESIDENT, NCAA DIVISION II CROSS COUNTRY COACHES
hope as we enter August that everyone has been enjoying the summer. As we have now put the 2011 Outdoor season behind us, I would like to thank Kim Duyst and her staff at Cal State Stanislaus once again for all the hard work they put in while making the Outdoor Championships a success. Congratulations to Abilene Christian and Grand Valley State on winning the team titles for both indoor and outdoor and to all the athletes and coaches for a good year. I would also like to congratulate the Division 2 Hall of Fame inductees and their institutions. We need to express our thanks as well to the NCAA for allowing us to have the awards presentations and Hall of Fame included in the banquet program. I felt it went well and in a timely fashion. I know how much it meant to the inductees and their families. I would like to remind you that the 2012 HOF nominees are due on Dec. 5, 2011. You can find the form on the USTCCCA website. We are combining the cross country and track and field Halls of Fame and presenting them at the outdoor championships, which will be at CSU-Pueblo in 2012 and 2013. The 2012 indoor championships will be in Mankato, Minn. 2013 is an NCAA Sports Festival year and the site has not been determined at this time. All of you should have received emails on the new rules for pole vault for the upcoming season, as well as emails on the submission of proposals for the convention. Please refer to the Division 2 handbook on the USTFCCCA website for the procedures on how to submit a proposal and what the deadlines are. The first deadline is September 15 for a proposal to be considered for the convention agenda. Late proposals may be accepted for this convention or may be tabled to the following year. Again, please refer to the handbook. I would like to send best wishes to Joplin, MO and the staff at Missouri Southern State University as well as so many others that were affected by the devastation the tornado brought to that area. I would also like to thank Chris Asher for his dedication and leadership for the past few years as our president. I will do my best to represent you (the coaches) and the sport throughout my term as your president.
I
s we head into the 2011-12 academic year, it is a time of renewed excitement as teams are busy with the start of a new cross country season ahead. I am equally excited for this year as it is the beginning of my two-year tenure as USTFCCCA Cross Country DII President after having served the past two years as First Vice President and two additional years as Second Vice President. The USTFCCCA organization, under the direction of our CEO Sam Seemes, is always striving to help better the sports of cross country and track and field. I hope that I can help guide our sport as a voice for your ideas and proposals in the meetings in which I will be representing you. I encourage you, if you have ideas or concerns, to contact your conference representative or myself as we will have monthly conference calls where we will discuss issues that can help promote the betterment of our sport. You should have received, or will soon receive, information regarding the 2011 DII Cross Country Preseason Polls. You should have the formal request and team outlook form sent to you by your regional poll rater, which you should return by August 15. As a former regional poll rater, I can tell you that these are very helpful in creating the initial polls as teams can change significantly from year to year. Please take the time to submit your information to your region rater. Your coordinators are Ray Hoffman (women’s poll) and T.J. Garlatz (men’s poll) and Michael Friess (poll committee chair). The proposal to increase field expansion is moving through the NCAA. If it passes it would increase the number of qualifiers to the NCAA II Cross Country National Championships by one team per region and one individual per region. A new policy adopted by NCAA DI, DII, and DIII USTFCCCA members states that hosts (of regular season meets) offer a preferred entry fee to those teams who are members of USTFCCCA. Meet hosts are to offer a $50 discount to those member institutions. The purpose of this is to help increase involvement in USTFCCCA. Finally, it is not too early to start thinking about booking your room and flight to the 2011 USTFCCCA Convention, Dec. 12 to 15, in San Antonio, Tex. All information is posted on the USTFCCCA website. Your attendance and participation is crucial to the betterment of our sport! Good luck in the upcoming cross country season!
Steve Guymon is the Head Men’s and Women’s Track & Field Coach at Harding University. Steve can be reached at sguymon@harding.edu
Marlon Brink is Head Men’s and Women’s Track & Field and Cross Country coach at Wayne State College. Marlon can be reached at mabrink1@wsc.edu
A
AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
5
NCAA REPORT
Division llI Track & Field
CHRIS HALL PRESIDENT, NCAA DIVISION III TRACK & FIELD COACHES
s I am writing this edition of my president’s report the 2011 outdoor season has come to a close. Hopefully all of you are enjoying a relaxing summer and recuperating from what was a very long but also a great year of track and field. We had an outstanding outdoor championship and I would just like to take a moment to thank Ohio Wesleyan, who served as the host for the meet, and to congratulate our champions. The University of Wisconsin-Oshkosh found themselves back in a familiar position, winning the women’s team championship for the first time since 2007. This was the first under head coach Pat Ebel. On the men’s side it was again North Central College capturing the NCAA championship, the first time, under new head coach Frank Gramarosso. The Titan women had a relatively comfortable victory of 21 points while the men’s crown was not decided until they crossed the finish line in the 4 x 400 relay. Two points separated La Crosse and North Central in the team standings but it was really just 2 tenths of a second that determined the team champion. Both Pat and Frank were recognized as coach of the year. I would also like to take a moment and recognize the tremendous work and leadership we are receiving from our USTFCCCA National office and of course our CEO Sam Seemes. This office has been instrumental in developing a much more unified coaches association and given us a voice that is being heard by the NCAA and our sport committee. There is no doubt that they have our best interests in mind and are working hard to give our student athletes an experience they will never forget. As always there is additional work to be done and I hope that, while reading this report, you will begin thinking about getting more involved in the association. Our meetings will again be held in San Antonio, Tex., from Dec. 12 to 15. We expect to have a number of significant agenda items to discuss, highlighted by the indexing of indoor tracks for national qualifying performances and field size for the championship meets. We are also asking each of you to please consider what you feel could make our already great sport better. Submit your items for consideration at the convention before September 15th and we will continue to work with the NCAA Track & Field Subcommittee to make improvements for the 2012 indoor and outdoor championships.
A
Chris Hall is the Head Men’s & Women’s Cross Country and Track & Field coach at the University of Chicago. He can be reached at hallc@uchicago.edu
6
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
NCAA DIVISION III CROSS COUNTRY
he Division III Cross Country Executive Committee has suggested that member programs who host a regular-season 2011 cross country meet adjust their entry fee structure such that USTFCCCA member programs receive a preferred rate $50 less than that of non-USTFCCCA members. More information can be found at http://www.ustfccca.org/ustfccca-xc-preferred-entry-fees
T
REGIONAL REALIGNMENT The NCAA Division III Championships Committee is still reviewing its options. Because this realignment must take into effect the best interest of so many sports you can understand that it is a lengthy process. As always, the USTFCCCA national office will keep you updated on advances on this issue.
USTFCCA COMMITTEES Interested in becoming more involved with Division III cross country? Two committees are seeking members: The Law and Legislation Committee and the Nominations and Elections Committee. Involvement for either committee would involve working with the respective chair throughout the year and meeting as a group at the annual convention. You can find more information, including the committee chairs, within the handbook located online. If you are interested in serving on either committee, please email President Greg Huffaker at ghuffake@iwu.edu
RANKINGS A reminder: A preseason regional ranking will be released on Tuesday, August 23 with the first regional ranking of the season released on Tuesday, September 13. The preseason national poll will be released on Wednesday, August 31 and the first national poll of the season released on Wednesday, September 14. All release dates are listed on page 31 of the Division III Cross Country Handbook found online. A reminder: Meet schedules and results can be found on the USTFCCCA website. Please send meet dates to Tom Lewis (tom@ustfccca.org) in the USTFCCCA national office if your meet is not posted. The USTFCCCA Track & Field Academy is hosting several programs over the next several months, including two high-level courses, Sports Science for the Speed and Power Events and Sports Science for the Endurance Events. Those courses, along with other TFA programs, will be held prior to the USTFCCCA convention in San Antonio. Additional information about the Track & Field Academy and the convention can be found at www.USTFCCCA.org.
This report was prepared by the USTFCCCA national office staff.
HIGH SCHOOL REPORT
IAAF COACHES COMMISSION REPORT VICTOR LOPEZ
WAYNE CLARK
CHAIRMAN, IAAF COACHES COMMISSION
ecently the Ohio Association of Track & Cross Country Coaches recognized the 75th anniversary of Jesse Owens establishing four world records during one track meet. I thought you might like to read a little history about this great track and field performer. Loving to run, Jesse began his track career in junior high school becoming an exceptional talent in the sprints. During his high school days at Cleveland East Tech Owens established the national high school record in the long jump and equaled the world record in the 100-yard dash at 9.4 seconds. Because of an after-school job, Jesse practiced mostly on his own before school each day. Yet, Jesse persevered. Unbelievable by today’s standards, Jesse attended Ohio State University without a scholarship. Also, in that time period, because he was African American, he was banned from living and eating with his white university teammates, was given individual travel arrangements, and had to work a part-time job to help pay for his tuition. But Jesse persevered. It was just over 75 years ago, in 1935, that Jesse set four world records within a 45 minute time period in the Big Ten Championships. He tied his own WR in the 100 yard dash and smashed the WR in the 220, the broad jump, and the 220 low hurdles. Some sports enthusiasts claim this meet to be the most valiant sports accomplishment of all-time. This achievement in just 45 minutes! Jesse persevered. Not only was Jesse a tremendous athletic ambassador for track and field, but in the highly racially motivated 1936 Berlin Olympic Games, Jesse won four gold medals, making him an ambassador for all mankind. After these accomplishments Jesse became somewhat more accepted, but he was not recognized by any U.S. President until Dwight Eisenhower honored Owens as an “Ambassador of Sports” in 1955. Throughout, Jesse persevered. After his 1936 Olympic successes, Owens was obligated to continue racing in Europe without expenses or funding. He became homesick and returned to the United States without “permission”. His amateur status was immediately revoked by USOC President Avery Brundage, and Jesse was left with few resources for his family. Jesse’s life was sustained by periodic involvements with failed businesses, exploitation of racing against horses, as well as employment as a gas station attendant. Fortunately, Jesse’s family remained lovingly true to him. But, during his deepest lifetime low, Jesse had to file for bankruptcy. Remarkably, Jesse persevered. In later life Jesse traveled the world speaking for large corporations and the U.S. Olympic Committee, which had rejected him in prior years, relating his story and encouraging others of less fortunate circumstances to persevere. Perhaps Jesse’s story will encourage all of us to scrutinize our treatment of others, while encouraging those we coach to remain persistent in striving to achieve Jesse’s athletic accomplishments.
R
Wayne Clark is the Clinic Chair of the Ohio Association of Track and Cross Country Coaches. He can be reached at clark002@columbus.rr.com.
he 2003 IAAF Congress held in Paris, France approved a resolution to make athletics the number one sport in schools all over the world. We as coaches understood that this was a very important step in the development of track and field. Theold system which was used in most countries all over the world, the club system, was dying. Therefore, the IAAF Long Term Athlete Development Plan emphasis since 2003 has been to introduce athletics from the primary school up to high school in all the countries around the world. I pleased to say that the program is making progress with the introduction of the IAAF Kids Athletics program in elementary schools and with an emphasis in Youth competition beyond the primary school. In the NACAC area, especially in the Central American and Caribbean region, the program is pretty much in place and making big strides with athletes all over the region producing fantastic results. I must say that, in the U.S., this system has been the bread and butter in the development of track and field. Seeing that the system has worked in U.S. and other countries like Jamaica, Cuba, the Bahamas, Puerto Rico and elsewhere, the IAAF understood that this was the way to go. But where the U.S. really is a mile apart from the rest of the world is in the development of track and field beyond the secondary schools. The U.S., with its NCAA program, has perhaps one of the best if not the best high performance development systems in the world. No other country in the world has a system of three divisions like in the NCAA, a system in the NAIA and a system in the junior colleges, where athletes receive a scholarship to study and to participate in athletics at that particular university or college. Puerto Rico has a similar program, maybe the equivalent of the NCAA Division II, where there is a university league composed of 21 institutions where the competition in a number of sports is as intense as in the U.S. and the athletes receive scholarships like in the U.S. I believe universities in Jamaica are starting to do the same. Where else can you get a four- or five-year education, practice the sport under the best coaches, have use of the best facilities and compete in a top-notch program? The only place that we know which has a program of that magnitude is in the U.S. Therefore, the IAAF aspiration is that all the countries around the world follow that example because it has proven that it is the best. I would like to congratulate all the members of the USTFCCCA for the fantastic job that they do year in year out in developing athletes—not only from the U.S., but from other countries as well.
T
Victor Lopez can be reached at victorlp8@aol.com.
AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
7
KIRBY LEE PHOTOGR APH
8
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
APPROACH RUN ACCELERATION PATTERNS
T
BY DAVE NIEL SEN
The UCS Spirit National Pole Vault Summit is a fantastic gathering of many of the best pole vaulters in the nation. This annual event is staged in Reno, Nevada, each January and attracts an eclectic group of athletes from best to beginner, young to old, and professional to recreational. Every year the Saturday competition is tied to a Friday clinic. The clinic offerings encompass a myriad of topics related to the event which focus on safety, performance and enjoyment. This is a learning environment for all athletes, coaches and parents in attendance. The elite vault coaches, scientists, and lecturers are selected each year to make the presentations and are not likely to leave without a new idea or a few. The 2010 year was another tremendous success and, as a presenter, I certainly gleaned insight which I will share in this article.
AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
9
I was contacted by associate event director Lane Maestretti about creating a station to test and provide feedback for athletes (primarily high school) in regard to their approach run. We talked about methods of timing the run in an accurate and reliable manner. Further, Lane thought it would be beneficial to provide feedback on run-up lengths as to their effectiveness feeling that many a high school athlete (and coach) try to use a longer-than-needed approach length. We decided that we wanted to have feedback on the speed the athlete was running at a series of successive intervals. The testing length was to be equal to the maximum approach length of any athlete whom we were to test. Since most of the research refers to speed (velocity) as measured in meters per second, a metric measure was used. The test allowed the athlete a three meter (about 10 feet) run into the first timed segment. Each timed segment was five meters in length. Seven segments were timed so the total run length evaluated was 38 meters. This run up length is equal to or exceeds an 18 step (e.g. nine left) approach for almost all vaulters. Diagram 1 provides the outline of the basic set up. The next hurdle to cross was how to time this so that the result would be available in a timely manner and with a reasonable amount of accuracy. Video tape was rejected due to the time analysis would have taken and the fact that using hand held times for this type of project would be far too unreliable (inaccurate). Fortunately, devices such as the Brower Timings System Speed-Trap and Brower TC are made for this type of thing. I had two units that I share with football and soccer but our proposed set up required eight gates. Fortunately, Brower Timing Systems is located in Salt Lake City, which is only a couple of hours away from my home. I contacted Mark Brower of Brower Timing and he was kind enough to lend us the eight photo gates (A-B units) required, 16 tripods, two TC-timers, and two display boards for our project. See diagram 1.
10
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
MIKE CORN PHOTOGR APH
A P P R O A C H R U N A N D A C C E L E R AT I O N PAT T E R N S
Peak velocity was noted for each athlete, each trial, and the compilation of these peak velocities graphed. See Graphs 1 & 2 . It is important to note that before the data of any trial was used it was screened for any obvious error. The primary error, albeit one that rarely occurred, happened during the pole carry trials. The athlete would drop the pole and prematurely trip the photo gate. That determination was made on observing the trail itself and any obvious peak/drop in velocity on the data sheet. Occasionally a passerby would accidentally bump a tripod that the photo gate rested upon and trigger a false trip. All of those trials were eliminated from the data set.
DISCUSSION The cumulative average velocities, within each segment of the trial runs, is displayed in Table 1 for both boys and girls groups, with and without pole carry. Review of Table 1 (which visually supported in Graph 1) shows that both groups accelerate rapidly to 90% of their top speed whether carrying a pole or not. The average of all groups showed an excess of 90% of top speed within Segment 3. This third five meter segment measurement accounted for the time taken to run between 13 and 18 meters, or for familiarity, between roughly 42’ and 59’. All
athletes (with the exception of one girl’s trial without carrying a pole) were still accelerating at this point and, therefore, the actual 90% of top speed mark likely occurred somewhere between 50-55’. For the jumper, whether it be long, triple, or pole vault, that would translate to roughly a 10 step approach (e.g. 5 lefts). On average, it took the athletes three more segments, 15 meters (about 50’), to accelerate the remaining 10% to top speed. That path did not necessarily follow a smooth pattern either as evidenced by , for example, the girls’ runs with the pole. The length of run needed to bring these athletes to top speed is presented in Table 2 and corresponding Graph 2. When running without a pole, 67% of the boys and 78% of the girls were at their top speed in this test by the 6th segment or likely somewhere around 100’. While carrying a pole, 60% of the boys showed their peak speed by the 6th segment whereas 88% of the girls were their fastest by this point. This may have been due to pole length and weight or the skill carrying a pole. Everyone ran slower when they carried a pole (which only makes sense) and within these two groups, on average, the “cost to top speed” of carrying the pole was 4.6% and 5.7% for girls and boys respectively. Notably, the girls ran faster carrying
AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
11
A P P R O A C H R U N A N D A C C E L E R AT I O N PAT T E R N S
TESTING PROCEDURE – POSTING RESULTS The project successfully tested 34 girls and 52 boys in two runs each. The boys and girls came to our station in groups of 12-18 as a rotation from their clinic work at the vaulting pits. All athletes had received a general warm up prior to coming to the timing station, but had admittedly not “peaked” for their trial. Upon arrival of the group the athletes provided our staff with their names to be loaded into the system. Once everyone in the group was accounted for we began the testing. After a little practice, we were able to test, recall splits, and load data at the rate of two athletes per minute. Two timers were used to
12
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
recall the splits, one as a primary and the other as back up. Between each rotation and when there was a little extra time, a data sheet and accompanying speed graph was printed and posted for each athlete.
RESULTS The data was compiled by gender (boys group/girls group) and whether or not the athlete was carrying a pole. Average times for each five-meter segment was calculated and graphed just as it had been for each individual athlete. Peak velocity is defined as the fastest five-meter segment of the athlete’s trial.
AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
13
A P P R O A C H R U N A N D A C C E L E R AT I O N PAT T E R N S
14
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
a pole relative to their top speed. Much of this difference is likely due to pole size more so than to carry efficiency but that was not tested. These willing athletes exhibited a wide range of abilities. All of them did have experience with none being raw beginners (no experience). Those with more experience and with greater performances (higher vaults to their credit) tended to run faster and had a more even acceleration curve. An example is provided in Tables 3 and 4 with their corresponding graphs. Comparing these two athletes, one was a high school intermediate and the other a skilled high school athlete (in fact, one of the top high school athletes attending the clinic). This may suggest that it is a skill to develop an approach that can smoothly and effectively bring an athlete to top speed, or put another way, bring an athlete to useable top speed. Observing all the data, it seems that just running from further back is not likely the key factor in bringing out the athlete’s very best.
TO SUM UP THE STUDY OF THIS GROUP: These athletes were running at 90 percent of their top speed less than 60 feet into their trial run whether they carried a pole or did not carry a pole. On average, the remaining 10 percent of their top speed required a distance of between 50 and 60 feet, or roughly half the distance required to accelerate to top speed, again whether carrying a pole or not. The boys tended to need a little more distance to hit top speed when carrying a pole whereas the girls tended to need a little less distance. Carrying a pole while running slowed these runners about five percent. An unmeasured observation was that the faster and more experienced athlete took longer (distance run) to reach top speed and tended to have a more regular acceleration curve than the less-experienced and slower athlete. I think these observations are worthy of consideration for the coaching of all jumping events. Of special coaching note is that if an athlete needs more technical preparation in jumping mechanics, taking more trials from an approach of six to 10
steps (three to five lefts) makes good sense. The athlete will, in all likelihood, be able to take more attempts, concentrate jumping technique, and still function near top speed. The process of achieving top speed in a controlled and “smooth or regular” manner also appears to be a skill and therefore needs to be practiced as well.
ADDENDUM The Brower timing system was also used in the Friday night elite men’s and women’s competitions. In congruence with existing research model on runway velocity just prior to the take off, photo gates were set up to time the last five meters prior to the take off. Results of each attempt of these elite athletes was recorded and shown to the audience on the display units provided. My sincere thanks to Mark Brower and the Brower Timing System staff for their support of the Reno Pole Vault Summit and this project.
AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
15
COACHING YOUTHS
O
The 4 guiding principles of motor development | BY MATTHEW BUNS, PHD ver 100 years of motor development research can be summarized by these 4 guiding principles. Each one of them is important in understanding how track and field athletes develop and what that means for coaches.
CHILDREN ARE NOT MINIATURE ADULTS
Children are obviously smaller than adults. But, if you drew a child and adult to the same scale, they would look very different because children have different proportions and com-
16
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
position (Figure 1, pg18). Children have relatively larger heads, shorter extremities, and smaller torsos than adults. Compared to an adult, the younger the child is, the greater the difference in proportion (Malina, 1984). At birth, the head is about 25% of total body length: for an adult the head is about 12% of the total body length. Similarly, adult leg length accounts for at least half of the total height; at birth, the legs are about 30% of total body length. The extremities grow faster than the torso which grows faster than the head. Consider how difficult tasks such as balancing and jumping are for young children based
KIRBY LEE PHOTOGR APH
on their short legs and large heads! Running speed increases during childhood because stride length increases. The stride increases as the legs grow longer and stronger and as the pattern becomes more efficient. As children progress, they take longer steps or strides and stay in the air longer during flight phase. When young children are asked to run faster, they generally take quicker steps—often in place. Rather than saying “Run faster,” coaches should say, “Take bigger steps.” The fastest runners use their arms to pull themselves forward. The arms move in opposition, with the upper arm (humorous) driving forward forcefully. In young children the arms may be stationary or may flail in
no particular pattern. As skill increases, the arms begin to rotate in opposition, but this movement is generated by a twisting of the spin rather than by conscious movement of the humorous. Skills change systematically for children from 2 years of age through elementary school. For example, you would expect to see a 2-year old run with arms high, extended, and straight (picture Frankenstein’s walking), feet shoulder-width apart, and a short, flat-footed step. You would not expect to see this kind of movement in an adolescent or an adult. Why do these skills change? Some change is caused by growth. For example, as legs get relatively longer, the stride length increases. Similarly, as relative head size decreases balance is less of a problem. Also, the central nervous system is maturing with increase in synapses and better integration of information. These allow better motor control with maturation. The biological changes work with practice to improve the execution of skills. The developmentally appropriate track and field program is designed to recognize the individual differences in rate of change in the fundamental skills and to capitalize on the consistency of the order of these changes. Coaches should plan for the average and then accommodate variation by individualizing up or down within each practice. The body makes two major adjustments during aerobic exercise such as running. First, muscles do their work during exercise by using fuel (food) and oxygen. The more intense the work is, the more the body uses oxygen and fuel. Generally, respiration and heart rate increase with the intensity of exercise. At some point, the circulatory system can no longer keep up in delivering oxygen and removing waste. Fatigue sets in quickly at that point, and work must be stopped or substantially reduced. The second effect of exercise is the production of heat. The body dissipates some heat by breathing but removes most of it by sweating. The circulatory system increases blood flow to the skin, and the heat is lost by radiation and evaporation of sweat. Coaches should be conscious of this process, particularly during hot and dry weather, when excessive sweating and evaporation may produce a loss in total body fluid that can result in dehydration. People of all ages are susceptible to dehydration. Always permit children to drink as much water as they want to during and after training. Water is as good a fluid replacement as any of the advertised commercial products. The USDA warns that children do not drink enough water regardless of whether they are exercising, so encouraging children to drink water meets the demands of training and a more general nutritional need. Children and adults handle heat and oxygen producing differently during training. Children have higher resting heart rates than adults; at rest, children’s hearts are workAU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
17
COACHING YOUTHS
Figure 1.
Changes in form and proportion of the human body during fetal and postnal life. From Malina, R.M. (1984). Physical growth and maturation. In Motor Development during childhood and adolescence. Minneapolis, MN: Burgess.
ing harder than adults’ hearts. For example, a six year-old boy has a resting heart rate of 86 beats per minute (a girl’s at the same age would be 88); by age 13, his resting heart rate would be 66 (hers would be 70). The maximum heart rate for a six year-old is 215, compared with 201 for a 13-year-old. Anaerobic power, the ability to work without oxygen, is also lower in children than in adults. This is because children have less of an important enzyme (phosphofructokinase or PFK) in their muscles; this enzyme allows the muscles to work without oxygen. Children produce more PFK after puberty. Anaerobic power is important in activities such as sprinting. Children also have a lower hemoglobin concentration in the blood than adults. Hemoglobin is the part of blood that carries oxygen to the working muscles (e.g., in the heart and legs), so children transport less oxygen per unit of blood than adults. This means that children can do less work than adults. Hemoglobin content in the blood increases at puberty; however, the increase is not as great in women as it is in men. Children become more fit as a result of fitness training but the responses to training tend to be lower in children than in adults for several reasons: Children tend to be more fit at the onset, so training results in less improvement Children have higher resting and maximum heart rates, which limits the intensity of training Children have less hemoglobin, which limits maximal oxygen uptake.
18
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
During exercise, adults are working at closer to their maximum capacity (aerobic capacity) for oxygen delivery than during rest. Children work close to the maximum aerobic capacity all of the time, so they benefit less from cardiovascular training and they fatigue more rapidly during exercise (Bar-Or, 1983). Much of the improvement is attributable to improved technique, for example pacing themselves when they are running a mile. Exercise training does produce three benefits for children and adults. First, hearts become stronger as a result of training as stroke volume (the amount of blood the heart can pump in one beat) increases. Second, more capillaries develop as a result of training, which provides a better supply of blood to the heart and working muscles. Third, better extraction of oxygen from blood leads to improved enzymatic reactions. Weight training for children is a controversial topic. The two most important issues are cost-benefit trade-off and potential for injuries. Weight training takes a lot of time and, for prepubescent children, the gains are small (Faigenbaum, Westcott, Loud, and Long (1999). Therefore, the time might better spend doing something else. As children are growing, there is risk of injury; however, low-intensity (low-weight) training regimens can be safe when the coach is qualified to coach young children. Children are not miniature adults—if they were, imagine how much easier coaching children would be! As people get older, they get better. Childhood lasts for about 12 years and is followed by adolescence, which continues for several more
Figure 2. Average height and weight curves for American boys and girls. Malina, R.M. (1984). Physical growth and maturation. In Motor Development during childhood and adolescence. Minneapolis, MN: Burgess.
years. There is a reason for this extended period of development. Development is a process that takes time and nurturing in order to reach a successful conclusion.
BOYS AND GIRLS ARE MORE ALIKE THAN DIFFERENT The bodies of girls and boys are more alike than different during childhood: however, differences emerge during puberty that give males a performance advantage in certain activities. At puberty, or about 12 to 13 years of age, the growth of girls slows dramatically and then stops completely at about 15 to 16 years of age (Figure 2). Males reach puberty about two years later than girls and therefore reach their adult size at about 17 to 19 years of age, thus growing 2 years longer than girls (Malina, 1984). Prior to puberty, boys and girls are very similar in height and weight: in fact, in elementary school the advantage may go to the earliest maturing girls, who are likely to be taller than everyone else. What does this mean for grouping athletes? Take care when grouping children. Optimally, children of similar skill should work together because it can be safer and motivations for success peaks when the challenge is appropriate. For young athletes, the motivation to learn and master skills is driven by two questions: Am I getting better? Am I normal? Those who answer these questions positively are likely to continue practicing and improving (Scanlan, 1995). Coaches should identify the following problems in running for remediation: arms swinging too much or too little, crossing the midline of the body, or flailing; feet toeing in or out or producing flat-footed steps; or trunk leaning too far forward and twisting. The range of performances on most motor skills during elementary school is greater within a gender than the differences between genders. The average running speed for girls and boys is nearly the same during elementary school. Girls demonstrate the mature
running form described earlier at a slightly earlier age than boys. Most children demonstrate a mature run by 7 years of age. At puberty, boys continue to increase running speed, whereas girls’ running speed tends to level off or decreases slightly (Figure 3, pg 21). The differences during elementary school are attributed to different treatment of boys and girls. For example, boys tend to have great opportunity, expectation and encouragement—but there is no biological reason to expect differences during elementary school. Therefore coaches need to provide equal opportunity, have similar expectations and encourage boys and girls equally. Respiration response is the same for girls and boys. As children train, respiration rate can provide information about level of fatigue. For example, a child who can talk easily while jogging is probably breathing steadily; when respiration interferes with talking, the child is moving toward fatigue. Although this article has spent some time discussing gender differences, the fact is that all children are more alike than different. The focus of this principle is, of course, inclusion—whether the difference between two children is race, ethnicity, culture, gender, disability, or socioeconomic status.
GOOD THINGS ARE EARNED Figure 4 (pg 21) compares overhand throwing by girls and boys using effect sizes. An effect size of .5 is moderate, and .8 is large. By using effect sizes, this figure shows the results of a large number of studies (so not just one sample of throwers). Most of us are aware what the phrase “throws like a girl” means: The throw is a slow, weak lower-arm motion accompanied by a short step on the same foot as the throwing hand. The arm motion often looks like a dart throw. Contrast this motion with the typical throw for a boy, which is vigorous: the entire body coils backward; as a large
AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
19
COACHING YOUTHS
Table 1. Sex Differences in World-Record Performance in Track (400 meters)
step is taken forward, the hips rotate forward, followed by the shoulder, then the upper arm, and finally the lower arm and hand. The throw ends with the body leaning forward over the stepping leg. Why these differences in throwing motion? A few theories exist on this. The most likely is that the sociocultural importance of throwing well for males creates an atmosphere in which girls who throw poorly are allowed to continue to throw poorly and boys who throw poorly are trained until they throw well. The fact remains that training reduces those differences but does not eliminate them. All children should be expected to throw with an efficient pattern. As boys and girls practice, encourage them to take a large step, throwing with force. Do not worry about accuracy until a mature pattern is well established (5 for boys, 8 for girls). Table 1 shows how both males and females improved in the 400 meter dash over this 70-year span although females clearly improved more. Why? Opportunity, expectations, and encouragement for females are much different today than they were in 1923. World-class athletes are all motivated, well trained, and well coached. At this level, males and females differ by about 10% in performance— this likely represents a true biological difference. The differences within a gender are also large; that is, some males are much better at a particular activity than other males, and likewise some females are much better at a particular activity than other females. Thus, depending on the particular track and field event or task, biological
20
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
and inherited factors make a relatively small contribution. Sportswriters, broadcasters and parents often use terms such as “natural athlete” to describe superstars. Less often they use the terms “hard worker” and “dedicated.” When working with young athletes, it is hard work and practice that should be emphasized, because that is within their control. The characteristics leading to performance are biological (physical size), psychological (motivation) and cognitive (knowledge and practice). Many professional athletes report being discouraged during childhood and adolescence. However, they persisted and became successful. This is likely attributable to the relative age effect—which means the oldest athletes in youth sport are identified as the best and the youngest and least mature as the poorest (Thomas & French, 1999). The relative age effect was discovered by examining the age of players on youth all-star teams, where the players with birthdays just after the cut-off date were most frequently all-stars. Similarly, in baseball the skilled position players (pitcher, catcher and shortstop) are all about a year older than outfielders and bench players. If environment did not matter, practice would be unnecessary—as would coaches. If innate “talent” is all that matters, practice becomes unimportant. A coach’s training philosophy is based on the notion that environment (and nurturing) does matter. The foundation for youth sport is effort, practice, and improvement. Motor development research suggests that good things do come to those who work hard.
Figure 3. Running speed during childhood. From Espenschade, A. and Eckert, H. (1974). Motor Development. Science and medicine of exercise and sport (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Harper and Howl.
Figure 4. Effect size for overarm throwing (gender differences increase with age). From Thomas, J.R. and French, K.E. (1985). Gender differences across age in motor performance; A metaanalysis. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 260-282.
AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
21
COACHING YOUTHS
Figure 5. The three body types
NO BODY (NOBODY) IS PERFECT Effective coaches embrace the uniqueness of each athlete. There is variability among athletes and within each student. The coach’s job is to leverage the potential of each athlete by understanding how children are different, how they develop, and how they learn. Physique is described by 3 body shapes (Figure 5). The apple-or pearshaped body (endomorph), the muscular body (mesomorph) and the linear body (ectomorph). Most people are a combination of two. Early maturing females tend to be endomorphs, and later maturing children tend to be ectomorphs. Individuals usually have little control over their physique. Physical activity and healthy eating allow people to make the most of their physique. As a coach you can help children understand that a) there is no ideal body shape, b) we are all more alike than different and c) all of us can have healthy bodies. The emphasis on body type creates two additional problems: It shifts the focus away from athletic improvement, a positive behavior, and toward body weight. In some people, it may encourage unhealthy eating and a desire to be “too thin.” What is also important for children and adolescents to understand is that larger bones and a healthy amount of muscle are good. Their participation in track and field can help by increasing muscle and bone growth, and reducing fat. Although a moderate level of skill is important in order to enjoy most sports, you do not have to be an expert to enjoy track and field. The task for youth coaches is to provide all children with a variety of skills so they can choose events in which they can enjoy success.
22
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
Success does not mean winning; success means participating regularly and performing effectively relative to skill level and expectations.
REFERENCES Bar-Or, O. (1983). Pediatric sports medicine for the practitioner. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag. Espenschade, A. and Eckert, H. (1974). Motor Development. Science and medicine of exercise and sport (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Harper & Howl. Faigenbaum, A.D., Westcott, W.L., Loud, R.L., and Long, C. (1999). The effects of different resistance training protocols on muscular strength and endurance development in children. Pediatrics, 104, 5. Malina, R.M. (1984). Physical growth and maturation. In Motor Development during childhood and adolescence. Minneapolis, MN: Burgess. Scanlan, T.K. (1995). Social evaluation and the competitive process: A developmental perspective. In Children and youth in sports: A biopsychosocial perspective. Dubuque, IA: Brown & Benchmark. Thomas, K.T. and Thomas, J.R. (1999). What squirrels in trees predict about expert athletes. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 30, 221-234. Thomas, J.R. and French, K.E. (1985). Gender differences across age in motor performance; A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 260-282. Matthew Buns, PhD, Concordia University Chicago can be reached at matthew.buns@cuchicago.edu or 641-512-1736.
A MENTAL PLAN UTILIZING POSITIVE SELF-TALK TO BUILD COMPETITIVE CONFIDENCE IN THE THROWS BY LAWRENCE W. JUDGE, PH.D., CSCS AND ERIN GILREATH, MA. 24
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
KIRBY LEE PHOTOGR APH
W Without adequate mental preparation, an athlete, even with excellent physical and technical preparation, can undermine his or her own performance. A seasoned coach can use sport psychology to help the athlete in gaining a competitive advantage by assisting with the mental preparation needed to perform at peak levels. Psychological preparation is focused on techniques that athletes can use in a competitive situation to maintain control and optimize performance (Reardon, 1992). Mental skills must be developed in a systematic, progressive fashion to achieve maximum results (Judge, Bell, Bellar, & Wanless, 2010). Mental periodization has emerged as the latest tool to help coaches prepare athletes for competition (Holliday et al., 2008). Mental periodization is a conscious systematic mental conditioning program designed for peak performance for specific competitions and is focused on such items as motivation, arousal awareness, developing pre-competition routines, self-talk, and confidence (Table 1, pg 26). The concept of periodization framework is easily accepted intellectually by coaches; however, the practicalities of putting this framework together in an effective manner are much more difficult to grasp. Thus, coaches and sport psychology consultants must work together to properly implement mental periodization plans to achieve optimal results (Judge et al., 2010). There are many components that contribute to peak performance in athletes. Usually these components are interrelated in such a way that, if one piece of the puzzle is weak or absent, the other pieces will not function optimally. Having confidence (or lack thereof ) can affect many other aspects of performance as well. Achieving an optimal level of arousal and focus is a necessity for successful athletes and this optimal mental state for a thrower can be referred to as a “flow” state (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). An athlete’s self-talk during practice and competition is important to achieving a flow state (Reardon, 1992). Self-talk is a skill that, if used properly, is rooted in an athlete’s confidence level. More specifically, the manipulation of self-talk can have positive or negative effects on the perceived ability of the athlete. Negative self-talk can limit an athlete’s performance, increase stress level, and adversely affect selfconcept. Most throws coaches are quite adept in training the necessary physiological systems, but
AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
25
A M E N TA L P L A N
Table 1
don’t address the mental components as effectively. There is a lack of information available on a system of mental preparation that is thorough enough to match the physical preparation and help the athlete to achieve “flow.” One strategy to achieve “flow” is to increase the athlete’s awareness of selftalk, identifying areas of self-talk that need to be improved, and to develop strategies to improve the content of self-talk. The purpose of this article is to: 1. describe themes related to self-talk, and 2. suggest methods that can increase awareness of self-talk and develop strategies to change self-talk units that are detrimental to performance.
DEFINING SELF-TALK Self–talk refers to the mental dialogue that occurs when faced with conflict, life challenges, or even simple day-today concerns. Self-talk is a running commentary about everything you do (Reardon & Gordon, 1999). Every occurrence in your life receives some internal comment, remark, or evaluation. Patterns of negative or positive self-talk often start in childhood and often color a person’s thinking for years, and can influence the experience of life’s stress. These patterns are worth changing if they become negative in nature (Reardon & Gordon, 1999). Research on self-talk has sought to answer questions pertaining to the where, what, why, and when of self-talk. The results of a study by Hardy, Gammage, and Hall in 2001 were as follows: Where did self-talk occur most often? Sport-related locations
26
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
were mentioned first and home was mentioned second When did it occur? During practice or competition. What was the nature of the self-talk? Polarity/nature (+/-), structure (phrases, cue words, or sentences), or task instructions (skill-specific or general) Why did athletes use self-talk? Motivation (more than for skill development/execution). In an effort to quantitatively evaluate the self-talk of athletes, researchers found that most self-talk is positive, and contains equal parts negative and neutral self-talk (Reardon & Gordon, 1999). Also, males are more prone to using negative self-talk and more external self-talk than their female counterparts (Hardy, Hall, & Hardy, 2005).
SELF-TALK AND EXERCISE INTENSITY Self-talk will differ in content depending on the activity level and fatigue of an athlete. St Clair Gibson and Foster (2007) classify self-talk as being either associative or dissociative, and the category of self-talk is dependent on exercise intensity: as exercise intensity increases associative self-talk increases. Associative self-talk that occurs when working out at high intensities serves many functions including pace/body monitoring and awareness of effect. This kind of self-talk would be important for preventing injury by promoting body awareness and for sustaining exercise beyond a certain threshold. Dissociative thoughts have to do with the environment, reflection, problem-solving, and general conversational chatter that occurs inside one’s head.
Dissociative thoughts are more prevalent during low intensities as the mind tends to wander away from the task the body is performing because extra mental effort is not needed to continue the task (St Clair Gibson and Foster, 2007).
INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL SELF-TALK Self-talk can be described as the dialogue that one has with oneself, either internally or aloud, with most self-talk occurring internally (Hardy et al., 2005). In a paper by St Clair Gibson and Foster (2007), it was observed that negative self-talk was more likely to be said aloud as opposed to positive self-talk. Zinsser, Bunker and Williams (2010) describe self-talk as the “key to cognitive control” because of its ability to change thought processes, regulate arousal and anxiety, maintain appropriate focus, and cope with adversity. The anxiety regulatory and coping effects of self-talk have been well documented in the literature. In a recent study by Hatzigeorgiadis and Biddle (2008), it was revealed that athletes who perceived their pre-competitive anxiety as facilitative reported less negative self-talk that those who perceived their anxiety as debilitative. In a follow-up study, Hatzigeorgiadis and Biddle (2008) then sought to discover if actual performance correlated more directly with negative self-talk than pre-competitive anxiety due to goal-performance differences. They found that discrepancies between goals and performance were more strongly correlated to negative self-talk than pre-competitive anxiety. The results of this follow-up study demonstrate that when athletes perform poorly relative to their expectations of achievement, or when confronted with competitive adversity, they will tend to focus on self-evaluative, performance-related thoughts. This relationship between goals and performance is a more powerful predictor of negative self-talk than is pre-competitive anxiety, even if that anxiety was seen as debilitative by the athletes. Ideally, self-talk is absent as athletes report having little conscious thought during peak performance or “flow” (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990), but it’s difficult to train a mind to think of nothing, as the mind would have to focus on thinking of nothing in an effort to clear the mind. This is not an efficient way to spend time during mental training as the athlete should be focusing on thoughts that are conducive to performance. Too much self-talk can also be detrimental to performance as it would disrupt automaticity of thought and action. The key to making selftalk a skill and not a liability to an athlete lies in controlling its polarity (positive or negative), eliminating distracting elements, and keeping self-talk at an appropriate level/frequency given the complexity and newness of the task, and the athletic ability (skill level) of the athlete performing the task. Research has identified several ways to quantify selftalk, the first of which deals with polarity (positive or negative) (Hardy et al., 2005). Positive self-talk will enhance self-worth and performance whereas negative self-talk
will produce the opposite effect. Neutral self-talk also exists and is usually instructional in nature, which could also have an impact on performance. The second way to quantify self-talk is as either instructional or motivational. Instructional self-talk gives athletes attentional cues about the technical aspects of a physical skill. For example, a hammer thrower in the sport of track and field might tell himself before a throw, “long, long, push, push” as instructional self-talk to focus his attention on what to do on each turn of the throws. Motivational self-talk can help regulate arousal by making the athlete focus on the effort they put forth on a particular trial (Reardon & Gordon, 1999). Additionally, motivational self-talk helps reinforce self-confidence by providing the athlete with affirmations of their ability. Keeping with the example of a hammer thrower, motivational self-talk could be something like “I can execute a good throw” or “I can wait on the ball.” Self-talk also exists as either internal or external. Most research has focused on external self-talk because internal self-talk is much harder to quantify (Hardy et al., 2005). To measure internal self-talk, athletes would have to selfreport their internal self-talk, which is difficult for many reasons. First, athletes might not be aware of their internal self-talk. Second, they may forget their internal selftalk before they are able to record it or report it to researchers. Finally, the study of internal self-talk is a challenge because athletes may not accurately report because they may simply wish not to report their internal thoughts or feelings, even though most internal self-talk may be positive. In 2007, St Clair Gibson and Foster confirmed that most negative self-talk is external while the internal self-talk is usually positive in nature. Self-reported questionnaires and limited comparable data create difficulty in assessing result reliability (Alaranta et al., 2006) as answers may be intentionally answered falsely as the subjects being questioned may not wish to reveal their true feelings, even if anonymity and confidentiality are guaranteed by the investigators.
SELF-TALK CONTENT The content of self-talk varies by athlete and level of the athlete performing the task (i.e. beginning, intermediate or elite). The content of self-talk will also vary depending on the newness/complexity of the skill being performed. In general, it is best for athletes to focus on short phrases (mantras) that represent the key points of what could be a longer cue. Research has shown that planning and memorization of key words will result in a significant improvement in performance in as little as one week’s time (Ming & Martin, 1996). The hammer throw is an example of a complex skill that involves strength and power in the individual sport of track and field (Figure 1, pg 30). Referring back to the example of the hammer thrower, “long, long, push, push” is a cue abbreviated from a longer sentence of “Let the hammer go long to the left with long double-support phases on turns one and two, then push the knees closed on turns three and four.” The full sentence is far
AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
27
A M E N TA L P L A N
Figure 1. The hammer throw is an example of a complex skill that involves strength and power in the individual sport of track and field.
too long to focus an athlete’s attention appropriately on the cues that would be the most effective in assisting the athlete in achieving an optimal result. Content of self-talk also varies by the experience of the athlete and the complexity/novelty of the skill that is being performed. When a skill is new (and therefore more complex), or the athlete is inexperienced, longer self-talk that includes more details to facilitate mastery of the physical skill will need to be used. Conversely, experienced athletes, or those performing a skill that is simple, will not require as many cues; a single self-talk unit is most effective. Frequency of self-talk will differ depending on the nature of the sport being played. Athletes who play individual sports will use more self-talk than those in team sports (Hardy
30
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
et al., 2005). This phenomenon could be attributed to the timegoverned nature of most team sports that does not afford athletes the luxury to use self-talk. Athletes playing team sports are also more likely to use negative and external self-talk, but less overall self-talk than athletes in individual sports (Hardy et al., 2005). The “team� nature of some sports may be a reason why selftalk is predominantly negative or external amongst athletes. In a team sport, an individual may view himself/herself as only a small part of the equation. Team sport athletes could believe that their self-talk has little impact on the game or match because they have multiple teammates influencing the outcome. The appropriateness of selftalk in relation to the task being performed is also an important element to consider. Endurance tasks (i.e. long distance running) and strength/power tasks (i.e. weight lifting) will differ in their self-talk demands. One study examined the effect of motivational or instructional self-talk on four different tasks: a soccer pass for accuracy, a badminton serve, a 3-minute sit-up test (endurance), and a MVC on a leg extension (strength). The results showed that instructional selftalk impacts all tasks but is less effective on the endurance tasks. There were few differences in the effectiveness of the motivational self-talk among all tasks except KIRBY LEE PHOTOGR APH for the strength test. In the control group, self-talk proved to be much less effective. (Theodorakis, Weinberg, Natsis, Dourma, & Kazakas, 2000). This occurs because in a strength power test, a short burst of energy is required for performance and can be enhanced by motivational phraseology. Further study in the realm of self-talk will likely focus on its precursors such as how the events that precede the self-talk influence the internal/external dialogue of an athlete. Preliminary studies have focused primarily on the role of the coach as the catalyst of self-talk. One of the preliminary studies found that the level of supportiveness demonstrated by a coach was highly correlated with the use of positive statements, which then led to positive self-talk in athletes (Zourbanos, Hatzigeorgiadis, & Theodorakis, 2007). Given the
results of this study, coaches should have a positive attitude toward their athletes so athletes in turn will have a positive attitude toward themselves.
IMPROVING SELF-TALK One of the first steps to improving self-talk habits is becoming aware of self-talk. The relationship between one’s thoughts, feelings and behaviors can best be explained by looking at the fundamentals, or ABC’s, of self-talk (Ellis, 1962). According to Ellis (1962), thoughts are very important as we are what we think and when we repeat irrational sentences that we have devised or learned from our backgrounds, we disturb ourselves. It is important that athletes understand the impact their thoughts have on their performance. If an athlete has been habitually thinking negative thoughts, he or she probably won’t believe that the coach can change their way of thinking. This can be corrected, however, by recognizing the recurring thoughts and replacing any negative thoughts with more positive statements. When an athlete starts to notice the body’s reaction to detrimental thinking, he or she can start to become present, focus on how they want to react, pause, react calmly and analyze the situation. This is where the “challenge” step comes into play. Hardy, Roberts and Hardy (2009) tested the effectiveness of two different awareness interventions: the paperclip technique and the logbook. In Hardy et al. (2009), 73 participants completed a questionnaire on awareness of the use and content of negative self-talk, as well as the motivation to change negative self-talk. Participants were assigned to a control, paperclip or logbook group. Participants performed three typical training sessions over a three-week period. The logbook group completed a self-talk logbook after each session whereas the paperclip group carried out a paperclip exercise during each session. The paperclip exercise consisted of giving the athlete a bag of 50 paperclips and having them move one from their left to right pocket whenever they used any negative self-talk. At the end of the session they would then count the paperclips in their right pocket and, in essence, enhance awareness of their own negative self-talk (Hardy et al., 2009). Upon completion of the training sessions, the questionnaire was readministered. The logbook worked much better at increasing athletes’ self-awareness and content of negative self-talk than the paperclip technique. However, neither method demonstrated any significant impact on motivating the athlete to change his/her behavior. Self-instructions (sometimes called instructional self-talk), such as a hammer thrower saying to himself, “Eyes to the sky on the release,” can likewise be used during practice sessions to build a habit or immediately before a performance to serve as a cue. Again, due to an athlete’s limited attentional capacity, having a cue word (either instructional or motivational in nature) may have a positive effect on performance (Chroni, Perkos and Theodorakis, 2007). Instructional self-talk can be utilized on the day of competition. Effectively monitoring self-talk requires a focus on the positive aspects of performance, which in turn reaffirms positive self-talk (Reardon,
1995). Developing statements that remain positive and focused on the task at hand are important for reinforcing positive self-talk. As Gill (2000) points out, one effective strategy involves athletes developing pre-planned statements that produce positive thoughts and images. Athletes can develop and experiment with various statements in practice such as “I am mentally tough,” “It’s no big deal,” and/or “Stay relaxed.” Self-instructions or instructional self-talk, can likewise be used during practice sessions to build a technical habit or immediately before a performance to serve as a technical cue (Feltz and Landers, 1983). In a sport like track and field, the coach may not be within hearing range of the athlete on certain competition days and may have to use hand signals further emphasizing the need for easy and direct cue words. Many coaches get impatient with athletes because they cannot perform at full capacity during the season and the coach fails to realize the true cause of an athlete’s technical difficulties: their mental approach. The key is timing, sequence, and interaction of the mental and physical training stimuli to allow optimum adaptive response in pursuit of specific competitive goals. The goal of final preparation in the competitive phase is to maximize fitness and skills and minimize distractions on the day of the competition. Many athletes under-perform on competition day because of a number of mental obstacles. The most successful elite athletes have mastered the ability to approach the competition in a unique way by changing their mental process and internal dialog. Four-time U.S. Olympian in the hammer throw and current head coach at Ashland University, Jud Logan, utilizes this novel way of approaching important competitions by reframing the way he views competition in his mind (Cannon, n.d.). According to Logan, “When I was an active thrower I did not compete to win. I competed to reward myself for training hard” (J. Logan, personal communication, Dec. 13, 2010). Reframing is the process of creating an alternative frame of reference or a different way of looking at a situation. According to Gauron (1984), reframing allows you to acknowledge the issue or thought but allows you to view the event from a different perspective. Coach Jud Logan is adamant that a competition should be thought of as a reward for the hours of hard training. According to Logan, “each thrower is rewarded at least three throws (trials) and the possibility of an additional reward of three more throws (finals) for the countless hours of dedicated throwing and weight lifting” (J. Logan, personal communication, December 13, 2010). Practicing and developing the skill of reframing will assist the athlete with controlling his internal dialogue or self-talk in a positive and useful manner, and much of the anxiety and pressure of competition will be lifted. Ravizza (1977) reported that athletes who compete without fear have a narrow focus of attention, full immersion in the activity, and a feeling of being in absolute control. Reframing is an effective method of achieving this state of mind (Cannon, n.d.). Utilizing methods of reframing can help ease the angst that sometimes accompanies competition for track and field athletes in all events.
AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
31
A M E N TA L P L A N
INCLUDING POSITIVE SELF-TALK IN A PRE-COMPETITIVE ROUTINE Incorporating concentration, composure, and confidence into an athlete’s training and competition regimen will maximize the opportunity for positive self-talk. The pre-competitive routine is a necessary element of the training and competitive plan (Reardon & Gordin, 1999). The biggest challenge that competitive athletes and their coaches face is how to put the continued development of psychological skills into the training program (Judge et al., 2010). The way you practice is essentially the way you will compete. The process of mental skill acquisition begins in the preparation phase with the emphasis on proficiency in concentration and composure.
32
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
This encompasses skills such as deep breathing and relaxation, focusing techniques, developing the skill of breathing control and arousal management. Also, skills such as attentional control and attentional endurance as well as transitional flexibility are necessary in the early stages of skill development. These fundamental and specific skills, encompassed by concentration and composure, lay the base for the development of higher-level skills such as visualization, imagery, and self-talk management. The concentration and composure skills seem less directly related to performance, but what becomes apparent when viewing high-level performance or performance breakdown is that breakdown
occurs most often in the areas of concentration and composure (Reardon & Gordin, 1999). The application of psychological skills to competitive situations requires developing an effective pre-competition routine, a sound pre-performance routine and a sound recovery/refocusing routine for use in competition (Reardon, 1992). All of these routines need to be developed, utilized and applied in a practice situation in order to be able to effectively implement them in a competitive situation (Judge et al., 2010). Elements of a competition day mental plan include:
Energy Management Skills Checklist For Competition Day Mental Plan Chronology The principle of specificity is very important to keep in mind when designing physical training programs and is equally important in the development of psychological skills. A pre-competition routine for a hammer thrower may include a planned warm up, positive self-talk, a focus on performance goals, a relaxation strategy, controlling the type and amount of interaction with others, a nap earlier in the day, and monitoring fluid and food intake. The competition day mental plan in Table 2 was utilized by American record holder (in the women’s hammer throw) Erin Gilreath. Ultimately, athletes need to experiment with the pre-competition routine in practice with the guidance of the coach.
CONCLUSION The concept of self-talk has several important implications for athletes and coaches. Dedicated and driven coaches seeking success must know how to incorporate not only the physical aspect of training, but also the mental aspects as well. Sport psychology has emerged as the latest tool for helping coaches prepare athletes for competition, but few coaches take full advantage of psychological skill preparation. Psychological training for any athletic undertaking is a complex process that involves learning, practicing, and applying numerous psychological skills (like the previously mentioned skill of self-talk). Psychological training must be part of the periodized plan and must be programmed as such. Although this article has focused specifically upon selftalk for the throwing events in track and field, the basic psychological concepts and practices noted have application in numerous other individual and team sports. One of the most important skills for learning to deal with stressful situations is to identify self-talk the internal dialogue occurring within the mind. The “stress-log,” covering the A’s, B’s, and C’s of the situation, is a useful tool to help uncover the negative or unhelpful aspects of thinking. Replacing those negative thoughts with more reasonable and helpful thoughts is key to optimal results. All events in track and field and other sports can benefit from the development of a psychological training plan that is sequenced and that unfolds in harmony with the physical training plan. The gap between the science used to develop the training program on paper and the art of implementing the program to maximize the performance
in the competitive and practice venues separates good coaches from great coaches. All coaches strive for the ability to have their athletes perform in an uninhibited, relaxed, and skillful manner. Various personalities, team chemistries, motivations, and attitudes coalesce to create a series of variables for the coach to juggle. With the daily practice plan in hand, the coach steps out onto the field and begins practice where a multitude of unexpected variables can occur. Implementing and successfully executing the plan may very well be the biggest challenge. It does not matter what is on paper if the coach cannot execute the plan effectively. Understanding each individual athlete and knowing what motivates him or her is the crucial element of understanding self-talk and creating an environment for great performance. Inadequate mental preparation can easily undermine an excellent physical technical preparation. Flow, which many experts in the field call “being in the zone,” is a primary goal of athletes and coaches alike. A coach who utilizes a plan to train the mental skills along with the physical skills throughout the year will minimize the unknown variables and better prepare their athlete’s ability to perform in competitions. Developing a strategy for mental preparation will help your individual athletes and/or team realize their full potential and enjoy the post event celebration on the awards stand. The hard work pays off! Dr. Larry Judge is an Associate Professor of Physical Education at Ball State University and the Throws Chair for the USATF Coaching Education Program. Erin Gilreath was a 2004 Olympian in the Hammer Throw and competed in two World Championships.
REFERENCES Alaranta, A., Alaranta, H., Holmila, J., Palmu, P., Pietilä, K., & Helenius, I. (2006). Self -reported attitudes of elite athletes towards doping: Differences between type of sport. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 27(10), 842-846. Cannon, N. (n.d). The psychology of hammer throwing: Jud Logan. Retrieved from: http://hammerthrow.org/training-resources/articles/psychology-jud-logan/ Chroni, S., Perkos, S., & Theodorakis, Y. (2007). Function and preferences of motivational and instructional self-talk for adolescent basketball players. Athletic Insight, 9(1). Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York City, NY: Harper & Row. Ellis, A. (1962). Reason and emotion in psychotherapy. Secaucus, NJ: Citadel Press. Feltz, D. L., & Landers, D. M. (1983). The effects of mental practice on motor skill learning and performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Sport Psychology, 5, 25-27. Gauron, E. F. (1984). Mental training for peak performance. Lansing, NY: Sport Science International. Gill, D. L. (2000). Psychological dynamics of sport and exercise. Champaign, IL: Human Kinetics. Hardy, J., Grammage, K., & Hall, C. (2001). A descriptive study of athlete self-talk. The Sport Psychologist, 15, 306318.
AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
33
KIRBY LEE PHOTOGR APH
A M E N TA L P L A N
Hardy, J., Hall, C. R., & Hardy, L. (2005). Quantifying athlete self-talk. Journal of Sport Sciences, 23(9), 905-917. Hardy, J., Roberts, R., & Hardy, L. (2009). Awareness and motivation to change negative self-talk. The Sport Psychologist, 23, 435-450. Hatzigeorgiadis, A., & Biddle, S. (2008). Negative self-talk during sport performance: Relationships with pre-competition anxiety and goal performance discrepancies. Journal of Sport Behavior, 31(3), 237-253. Hatzigeorgiadis, A., Zourbanos, N., & Theodorakis, Y. (2007). The moderating effects of self-talk content on self-talk functions. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 19, 240-251. Holliday, B., Burton, D., Sun, G., Hammermeister, J., Naylor, S., & Freigang, D. (2008). Building the better mental training mousetrap: Is periodization a more systematic approach to promoting performance excellence? Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 20, 199-219. Judge, L. W., Bell, R. J., Bellar, D., & Wanless, E. (2010). Developing a mental game plan: Mental periodization for achieving a “flow” state for the track and field athlete. The Sport Journal, 13(4), ISSN: 1543-9518. Ming, S., & Martin, G. L. (1996). Single-subject evaluation of a self-talk package for improving figure skating performance. The Sport Psychologist, 10, 227-238.
34
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
St Clair Gibson, A., & Foster, C. (2007). The role of self-talk in the awareness of physiological state and physical performance. Sports Medicine, 37(12), 1029-1044. Ravizza, K. (1977). A subjective study of the athlete’s greatest moment in sport. In Proceedings of the Canadian Psychomotor Symposium, Psychomotor Learning and Sport Psychology Symposium (pp. 399-404). Toronto, Canada: Coaching Association of Canada. Reardon, J. (1992). Incorporating mental skills into workouts: Learning how to “go with the flow.” American Athletics, 3, 54-55. Reardon, J. (1995). Relaxation: A necessary skill for competition. American Athletics, 3, 50-53. Reardon, J., & Gordin, R. (1999). Psychological skill development leading to a peak performance “flow state.” Track and Field Coaches Review, 3(2), 22-25. Theodorakis, Y., Weinberg, R., Natsis, P., Douma, I., & Kazakas, P. (2000). The effects of motivational versus instructional self-talk on improving motor performance. The Sport Psychologist, 14, 253-272. Zinsser, N., Bunker L., & Williams, J. M. (2010). Cognitive techniques for building confidence and enhancing performance. In J. Williams (Ed.), Applied Sport Psychology: Personal Growth and Peak Performance (305-335). New York City, NY: McGraw-Hill.
mental imagery By Sterling M. Roberts 36
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
KIRBY LEE PHOTOGR APH
COACHES ARE ALWAYS SEARCHING FOR WAYS TO GIVE ATHLETES ANY EXTRA ADVANTAGE OVER OTHER TEAMS AND ATHLETES. One edge that has been the focus of much research is the enhancement of athlete confidence for the potential effects of heightened confidence on performance. In recent literature, studies by Craft, Magyar, Becker, and Feltz (2003) and Mamassis and Doganis (2004) found that of the indices measured by the Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2 (CSAI-2), self-confidence best predicted performance in athletic events. Bandura (1997), considered to be an expert on self-efficacy and related topics such as confidence, concluded that while self-efficacy was not a substitute for physical talent, it was surely one of the co-determinants of athletic prowess and in contests of evenlymatched opponents, “Perceived efficacy emerges as the sole determinant of overtime performance” (p. 383). It would appear, therefore, that while a coach’s primary job is to instruct athletes on the finer points of the sport itself, one of the most helpful things a coach could do for the athletes’ overall performance would be finding ways to improve their selfconfidence and self-efficacy. Upon closer investigation into sources of sport self-confidence, it was apparent that mental preparation and, more specifically, motor imagery were major determinants of athletes’ sport confidence levels (Cumming, Olphin, & Law, 2007; Hays, Maynard, Thomas, & Bawden, 2007; Thomas, Maynard, & Hanton, 2007; Short & Short, 2005). Motivational General-Mastery (MG-M) imagery was defined as imagery which focused particularly on an athlete’s control and confidence in a difficult situation (Hall, Mack, Paivio, & Hausenblas, 1998). The purpose of this inquiry, therefore, was to determine whether weekly use of MG-M imagery exercises by NCAA Division III track athletes
would enhance the sport confidence of those athletes, as quantified by Vealey’s (1986) Trait Sport Confidence Inventory (TSCI), which was found to be a valid and reliable measure of sport confidence in previous research. The goal was to develop a mental imagery routine that coaches and athletes could use to build athletes’ confidence, and therefore improve performances, in their athletic endeavors now and in the future.
METHODS OF RESEARCH PARTICIPANTS Ten collegiate track and field athletes from a rural Division III institution volunteered to participate in the imagery sessions. They ranged in age from 18 to 21 years, consisting of five males and five females with seven being Caucasians and three being AfricanAmericans. The athletes competed in the sprinting, jumping, hurdling, and throwing events in track and field, comprising a wide range of competitive events. Results were gathered for seven total participants after three athletes elected to discontinue their participation. All athletes followed the intervention and procedures as detailed below until they eliminated themselves from the study.
INSTRUMENTS In this study, the quantitative instrument of measure was the TSCI (Vealey, 1986), which assessed subjects’ sport confidence. The inventory consisted of 13 items answered using a nine-point Likert scale, with “1” representing “low” confidence and “9” representing “high” confidence. Before responding to the items, instructions directed athletes to base their responses on how confident they “generally feel” when competing in sport. Instructions also indicated that athletes were to compare their confidence levels to the “most self-confident athlete” they knew. The test-retest reliability of the TSCI was found to be very high (r = .86), and the inventory was shown to be valid with significant correlations to other measurements of selfconfidence among athletes.
AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
37
M E N TA L I M A G E RY
In addition, a qualitative component was added for more detailed results. At the end of the study, during an individual session scheduled with the researcher, athletes responded to the following prompt: Do you feel that the imagery exercises in which you have engaged throughout the course of this study had any effect on your levels of confidence in your specific event or sport as a whole? Explain in detail the extent to which the imagery had an effect on your confidence. In addition, please indicate whether or not you intend to continue the use of imagery on your own following the conclusion of this study and your reasons for doing so or not. Athletes were given as much time as needed to respond in as much detail as possible.
PROCEDURES Pre-intervention. Before beginning imagery exercises, an initial TSCI was administered to each athlete. Participants received instructions on which types of imagery they should focus on and on how much time they should devote to the exercises each week. They then underwent a preliminary, researcher-led relaxation and imagery session, in order to experience the techniques and types of imagery to be used throughout the six-week intervention. Finally, the researcher answered any questions the athletes had regarding the study before the intervention period began.
38
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
Intervention. Participants in the study were required to engage in weekly MG-M imagery exercises associated with control and confidence. The researcher explained that MG-M imagery involved imaging the entire process associated with mastering a difficult situation in a specific event, including specific details, such as the weather, the scenery and feelings and emotions that may occur during the event. Athletes were told to engage in relaxation techniques before going through any imagery exercise. The relaxation techniques involved finding a quiet, comfortable location to sit or lie down. Athletes were told to follow a relaxation script provided to them in audio and in written format (Price-Evans, 2010). The relaxation script involved deep breathing exercises meant to release tension and calm the athlete prior to their imagery session. After a five- to 10-minute relaxation session, athletes would begin their MG-M imagery exercises, using as much detail as possible. Athletes followed this general intervention procedure at least four times each week for six weeks. The athletes were required to provide details about personal imagery sessions at least three times each week in a provided imagery journal. The journals served to immediately reinforce the athletes’ imagery. To ensure that the athletes understood the goals of the imagery exercises, they scheduled one structured imagery session each week with the researcher to go through the intervention procedure and imagery session as well as to
RESULTS Following a six-week intervention, all qualitative and quantitative data were analyzed to determine whether weekly use of motor imagery exercises by the athletes had any effect on their levels of confidence in track and field. Following separate analysis of the quantitative and qualitative results, triangulation was used to compare the two sets of results and determine whether the results supported each other and whether past research supported the results of this investigation.
QUANTITATIVE RESULTS
review and discuss the imagery journal. This time served to ensure that the athletes were properly following the procedures and were using correct MG-M imagery techniques and situations. Post-intervention. Immediately following the last scheduled structured imagery session, athletes were instructed to submit their imagery journals so that the researcher could verify the frequency of the participants’ individual imagery sessions. The TSCI was administered again, and the athletes were given as much time as they required to respond to the reflective prompt. Athletes who had not recorded at least three personal sessions each week throughout the six week intervention were excluded from the results, which were analyzed in detail following the post-intervention procedures.
Before beginning motor imagery, the median TSCI score was 87 (N=7; M=83.3; SD=18.5). Following the sixweek intervention, the athletes took the TSCI again to determine whether the program had any influence on their sport confidence. After six weeks of motor imagery, the median TSCI score rose to 99 (M=92.3; SD=15.5), a difference of 12 (See Figure 1 for a graphical representation of participants’ pre- and post-intervention TSCI scores). Upon further investigation, it was discovered that one participant was a significant outlier, negatively skewing the mean and distorting the standard deviation. Following a re-analysis of results and the removal of the outlier from both the pre-intervention and post-intervention TSCI scores, the pre-intervention TSCI score mean was 89.3 (N=6; SD=10.2), which was closer to the overall median score of 87. The post-intervention score reanalysis resulted in a mean score of 98.3 (SD=6.0), also much closer to the overall median score of 99. These results showed an average increase of 9.0 on the post-intervention TSCI scores compared to the pre-intervention baseline scores, an improvement of nearly one standard deviation (Z=0.88; see Table 1 for complete pre- and post-intervention TSCI score results). Individual results showed that six of the seven participants scored higher on the post-intervention TSCI than their initial score, and the only athlete that did not show improvement scored only one point less on her post-imagery TSCI.
AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
39
M E N TA L I M A G E RY
Additionally, more than half of the participants improved by a zscore of 0.55 or greater, with three athletes having improved by a z-score above 1.0. Despite the small number of participants, the improvements still resulted in a marginally significant 0.057 pvalue. These quantitative results were mirrored by the responses of the athletes to the qualitative reflective prompt.
QUALITATIVE RESULTS The qualitative results stemmed from participant responses to the reflective prompt. Athletes were asked if they believed imagery had an effect on confidence and whether they intended to continue imagery in the future. Athlete responses to the two parts of the prompt were analyzed separately by searching for common themes and subthemes. All athletes responded that they felt imagery had a positive influence on their levels of confidence. Athlete responses to why or how imagery affected confidence were grouped into physically- and psychologically-based reasons (See Table 2 for the complete analysis of why participants believed imagery enhanced their confidence). All seven participants noted at least one psychological explanation for why they believed imagery positively influenced confidence compared to only four who believed their confidence was physically based. In addition to the unanimous agreement that imagery had an influence on sport confidence, all athletes responded that they planned to continue using imagery in the future. Again, reasons were grouped into the categories of physically and psychologically based as well as a generic category for unspecified responses or those that did not fit into either of the main categories (see Table 3, pg 42 for the complete analysis of why participants planned to continue imagery use). Again, athletes overwhelmingly stated that they intended to continue their use of imagery for psychological reasons over the relaxing physiological response.
TRIANGULATION OF RESULTS Following the separate analysis of the quantitative TSCI results and the qualitative responses to the reflective prompt, 40
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
the two sets were compared. The qualitative responses that athletes experienced positive influences on their self-confidence from the imagery were supported by the fact that TSCI scores increased by a significant margin during the six-week imagery program. In addition, the unanimous response that all athletes intended to continue their use of imagery following the conclusion of the intervention period indicated that the exercises were working and enjoyable to the participants. The concurrence of the quantitative and qualitative results in this study was no surprise, as previous research made similar findings. In a qualitative study, Hays et al. (2007) found that a majority of athletes found mental preparation, including imagery exercises, to be a source of confidence. In an implementation of a mental training program, which included extensive use of imagery, during the competitive season, Thomas et al. (2007) found this mental training had a significant effect on both the athletes’ frequency and intensity of self-confidence. In studies focusing solely on imagery, similar to this one, Short and Short (2005) and Cumming et al. (2007) found that imagery was consistently correlated with high scores in self-confidence. Despite the small number of participants in this study, the results were supported by the findings of past qualitative and quantitative research, which further validated the findings of this study.
DISCUSSION Of seven participants who completed the six-week mental imagery program, six achieved higher sport confidence scores on the TSCI following the intervention (M=98.3 compared to M=89.3). Additionally, five of the seven scored at least one-half of a standard deviation higher (SD=10.2) on the post-intervention TSCI than they had prior to the imagery program. The only athlete that did not experience an increase in sport confidence scores saw a decrease of only one point. The results were only marginally significant (p=0.057), possibly due to the small number of participants involved in the study, but still suggested that the consistent use of MG-M imagery by athletes could increase their sport confidence overall.
The triangulation of the quantitative and qualitative results further validated findings that the use of MG-M imagery could positively influence an athlete’s sport confidence. Both sets of results showed that the intervention program led to increased confidence, so much so that 100% of the participants intended to continue their use of imagery following the study. Previous research made similar findings (Short and Short, 2005; Cumming et al., 2007; Hays et al., 2007; Thomas et al., 2007) further strengthening implications that regular use of MG-M imagery could enhance sport confidence in athletes. Overall, this study appeared to accomplish its goals.
RECOMMENDATIONS
KIRBY LEE PHOTOGR APH
Despite the apparent implications of this examination of imagery and confidence, it is important to note that this study was conducted at one institution, with a limited number of volunteer participants, over a sixweek period of the preseason conditioning portion of the track and field season. In addition, the athletes knew and interacted with the researcher on a daily basis outside of the imagery study, which could have altered their responses to the TSCI and the reflective prompt. These factors could have impacted the results of the study, and further investigation would be necessary in order to make broader generalizations regarding the impact of MG-M imagery on overall sport confidence. One recommendation for future research would be to conduct a similar investigation at a larger NCAA Division I or II institution. Generally, these larger institutions put more of an emphasis on athletics than Division III institutions and are better funded in this area, including the allowance of athletic scholarships. More controls could be put in place to further validate the findings, such as funding for an imagery expert to conduct the imagery sessions instead of a coach with limited imagery experience and a relationship with the study participants outside of the imagery sessions. Additionally, perhaps these athletes, some of whom would presumably be on scholarship or competing to earn a scholarship in the future, would take more seriously elements that could potentially improve their performance, such as imagery. It would be interesting to see whether a similar study conducted at one of these higher divisions would result in similar findings and whether the implications differ due to the nature of athletics within the various divisions of the NCAA. Another recommendation would be to investigate the effects of imagery use over a longer intervention period, especially one which would include the competitive season. The physical and mental changes that occur during the season
The reflective responses provided by the athletes following the intervention also suggested that MG-M imagery was an effective and enjoyable method of increasing athlete sport confidence. Participants unanimously responded that they experienced a positive impact on self-confidence due to the imagery exercises and that they enjoyed the intervention enough to continue imagery sessions in the future. Participants noted that their sources of confidence were psychological in nature rather than physical, substantiating that their main reasoning for continuing the use of imagery were also psychological. This was expected, due to the psychological nature of confidence itself and that imagery is an exercise that takes place solely in the psyche.
AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
41
M E N TA L I M A G E RY
could affect the imagery used by the participants, which could have effects on the overall results of the study. In addition, more prolonged regular use of imagery could show whether the positive impacts on confidence increase or eventually plateau. These results would be useful in determining the optimal length of an imagery training program and perhaps in determining when such a training program would be most beneficial to the athletes. Perhaps the strongest recommendation (and potentially the one with the most implications) would be a study with a larger population sample, including athletes from different sports and multiple institutions. These results would be more valid across a larger cross section of the population and could be used to promote imagery training sessions for athletes in many sports. In addition, the inclusion of participants from multiple institutions could be used to validate the findings for athletes from colleges and universities of all sizes and divisions in different parts of the country. This research would be necessary to further conclude that regular use of MG-M imagery could be generally effective at enhancing the sport confidence of all athletes.
CONCLUSION The purpose of this project was to determine whether regular use of MG-M imagery by athletes over the course of a six-week intervention period would have any impact on their sport confidence as measured by Vealey’s (1986) TSCI. Both the quantitative TSCI and the qualitative subject responses suggested that imagery use enhanced athlete sport confidence within the parameters of the study. Several recommendations were made which could further the literature in the area of imagery and sport confidence, including expanding the study to include a larger sample of athletes from various sports who attend different institutions across the country. Such research would be beneficial in advancing the understanding of the link between imagery and confidence, which is essential for a high level of performance for athletes. This understanding could be vital in enhancing the methods of coaches in any sport in order to provide their athletes with the highest opportunities for success. Sterling Roberts has spent the past two years as the graduate assistant jumps/hurdles/sprints coach at Defiance College in Defiance, Ohio, where he recently earned his Master of Arts in Education with a Concentration in Coaching. 42
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
REFERENCES Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman. Craft, L., Magyar, T., Becker, B., & Feltz, D. (2003). The relationship between the Competitive State Anxiety Inventory-2 and sport performance: A meta-analysis. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 25(1), 44-65. Retrieved from SPORTDiscus with Full Text database. Cumming, J., Olphin, T., & Law, M. (2007). Self-reported psychological states and physiological responses to different types of motivational general imagery. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology, 29(5), 629-644. Retrieved from SPORTDiscus with Full Text database. Hall, C., Mack, D., Paivio, A., & Hausenblas, H. (1998). Imagery use by athletes: Development of the Sport Imagery Questionnaire. International Journal of Sport Psychology, 29(1), 73-89. Hays, K., Maynard, I., Thomas, O., & Bawden, M. (2007). Sources and types of confidence identified by world class sport performers. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 19(4), 434-456. doi: 10.1080/10413200701599173 Mamassis, G. & Doganis, G. (2004). The effects of a mental training program on juniors pre-competitive anxiety, self-confidence, and tennis performance. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 16(2), 118-137. doi: 10.1080/10413200490437903 Price-Evans, P. (2010). All about depression: Online relaxation exercises. Retrieved from http://www.allaboutdepression.com Short, S., & Short, M. (2005). Differences between high- and low-confident football players on imagery functions: A consideration of the athletes’ perceptions. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 17(3), 197-208. doi: 10.1080/10413200591010049 Thomas, O., Maynard, I., & Hanton, S. (2007). Intervening with athletes during the time leading up to competition: Theory to practice II. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, 19(4), 398-418. doi: 10.1080/10413200701599140 Vealey, R. (1986). Conceptualization of sport-confidence and competitive orientation: Preliminary investigation and instrument development. Journal of Sport Psychology, 8(3), 221-246. Retrieved from SPORTDiscus with Full Text database.
DEVELOPING YOUR HIGH SCHOOL TRACK & FIELD PROGRAM BY DON HELBERG
I
’ve been coaching track and field for 27 years and have been the Boys Head Coach for the past 20 years. I was very fortunate to have great coaches as my mentors in high school and college. The former Head Coach of my program stayed on as a coach when I took over the program, giving me
encouragement and insight. Wheaton North has 2100 students. I continually have 100 plus boys out for track each year. We compete for spring athletes between five other boys sports and the never-ending club sports. This is what I do to promote our program at Wheaton North High School.
YOU’RE INVITED! Dan McQuaid WHAT: Track and Field informational meeting WHEN: This Thursday November 18th at 2:30 in the Auditorium WHO WILL BE THERE: All the athletes who want to regain the DVC title WHAT IF I CANNOT MAKE THE MEETING: See Coach Helberg (room 810) WHAT SHOULD I BRING: A friend if you have one!
RECRUITING
ALWAYS BE POSITIVE
Let’s face it, we need to recruit kids. When baseball has tryouts, hundreds of kids show up without any recruiting. I once saw a cross country t-shirt saying “our sport is your sport’s punishment”. I liked the shirt but, I thought, maybe that’s how athletes view track and field. I wanted to change that attitude. I never wanted an athlete to feel I didn’t want him in my program.
It’s too easy to find the negative in any situation. Don’t fall into that trap and dwell on the negatives. Always look for the positive in your situations (especially when it’s not easy). Whenever you need to correct an athlete, start off with something they’re doing correctly/well, then zero in on what needs to be corrected. Finish up with another positive. The athlete will be more willing to adapt when you approach them in a positive manner.
• Send every freshman an invite to your informational meeting • Send every returning athlete an invite to your informational meeting • Talk to an athlete who quit last season to see if he wanted to return. • Send every wrestler/basketball player an invite to your program when their season ends. Personally talk to the really good ones! • Get names from soccer and football coaches, then personally talk to those players. • Get names of athletes who have been cut from baseball and volleyball • Get middle school names • Have current members help recruit • Get a bulletin board to post pictures and information about your program
• The athletes will reflect you and your staff’s personality • Get excited about every athlete’s PR • Develop trust, so that the athlete is not afraid to fail if he tries something different • If your #1 athlete cannot compete, exude the attitude that now another athlete gets a chance to develop in this situation.
COACHES I have been blessed with outstanding coaches on my staff. All of them have been clinic speakers and/or award-winning coaches. There are five paid coaches for the 100 plus boys, plus I have up to five additional volunteer coaches.
• All of the coaches on your staff MUST have the same philosophy,
AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
45
DEVELOPING YOUR HIGH SCHOOL TRACK & FIRLD PROGRAM
so the athlete does not get mixed messages. • Head coach needs to meet with different event kids periodically so they hear the same message from different people (not just their event coach). • Have a coache’s social with spouses before/after season • Meet weekly with your coaching staff or communicate with them about goals for the upcoming meet (emphasize individual events vs. relays…moving kids up, trying to win the meet, using it as a workout, dealing with Prom…) • Must allow asst. coaches to be their own head coach and make their events their own, but they should clear new strategies/ techniques with the head coach first so that it is consistent with the team’s philosophy. • Insist that they continually better themselves by attending clinics/speaking at clinics. • Volunteers…Make sure they know their role in the program and that they have the same philosophy. Make them feel important and include them. Treat them as one of the paid coaches and recognize them as often as possible. ACKNOWLEDGING ACCOMPLISHMENTS Everyone likes to be recognized. Take the time to give an “atta boy” as often as possible. It doesn’t cost anything and goes a long way to make the athlete feel good about themselves.
•Recognize PR’s (in team meeting after a meet by a show of hands) • Send weekly e-mails to parents about all the great things that happened at the last meet, including Gray Shirt winners. • Display Record Boards • Post top 10 performances in each event (all time) • Post State Meet Placers (all time)
GRAY SHIRTS We started this tradition 27 years ago. We bought simple gray t-shirts that said “Wheaton North Track and Field” on them and gave them out to athletes who really distinguished themselves in one way or another. We only awarded about 12 year. When I became head coach, I decided that I would get a lot of them and have every athlete (or most) try to earn one. We developed a criteria for the boys to earn a Gray Shirt (see below). They wear them as badges of honor around school, at practices, and meets. They cannot buy them, they must earn them. Every year I have one of the varsity athletes design the shirt so it’s different every year. We award them at team meetings after each meet. Each coach talks about the shirt winner and how they’ve earned the shirt.
GRAY SHIRT CRITERIA
• Good week of practice, good meet effort (usually a Personal Record (PR)). • Represents Wheaton North Track and Field in a positive manner both in and out of the classroom • Allows themselves to be coached • Unselfish with their talents (puts the team before any personal agendas)
46
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
• Post results and/or top marks for the season (weekly) on the bulletin board • Get names of athletes in daily announcements if possible when they win or break records MEETS During the indoor season, Wheaton North runs 1 meet/week and during the outdoor season 2 meets/week. We have a Tuesday dual/triangular meet where everyone competes and the weekend meet is an invitational with limited entries. Many of our meets are “non-scoring.” The only meet we try to win every year is our conference meet.
•Our goal for EVERY meet (including the state meet) is for everyone to get a PR. Team points will take care of themselves if everyone gets a PR. •Get as many kids into meets as possible…your stars will shine anyway and you won’t overuse them (they need to get to the end of the season healthy). • Enter meets/develop meets that have a lot of participation (we developed a Best 4 Invitational where each team enters their “Best 4” in each event (except relays, only one relay) and treat each level like a separate meet with one grand team total). This way the #3 and #4 athletes (which usually don’t get into invites) feel that they’ve contributed to the teams performance. Surround yourself with good people and let them help you develop and maintain your program. You cannot do it all by yourself. It takes a lot of time and energy to develop and maintain a quality program, but the lives you impact by teaching them lifelong lessons are well worth it.
USTFCCCA SUPPORTERS Through their ongoing support of the U.S. Track & Field and Cross Country Coaches Associaton, these companies demonstrate their strong commitment to the sports of Track & Field and Cross Country. The USTFCCCA strongly encourages each member to purchase products and services from these supporters.
www.FTTF.com www.benyonsports.com
www.mondousa.com www.mfathletic.com
www.ucsspirit.com www.vsathletics.com
www.ucsspirit.com AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
47
2011 USTFCCCA OUTDOOR NATIONAL COACHES & ATHLETES OF THE YEAR DIVISION I
Sheila Reid Villanova Women’s Track AOY
Ngoni Makusha Florida State Men’s Track AOY
Tina Sutej Arkansas Women’s Field AOY
Will Claye Florida Men’s Field AOY
Pat Henry Texas A & M Women’s Head COY Men’s Head COY
Craig Carter Arizona Women’s Assistant COY
Dick Booth Florida Men’s Assistant COY
DIVISION II
Shannon Gagne New Haven Women’s Track AOY
Leford Green Johnson C. Smith Men’s Track AOY
Lindsay Lettow Central Missouri Women’s Field AOY
Nick Jones Abilene Christian Men’s Field AOY
Jerry Baltes Grand Valley State Women’s Head COY
Roosevelt Loften Abilene Christian Men’s Head COY
Cory Young Grand Valley State Women’s Assistant COY
Joe Lynn Grand Valley State Men’s Assistant COY
DIVISION III
Ruby Blackwell Methodist Women’s Track AOY
Mike Spain North Central Men’s Track AOY
Holly Ozanich UW-Oshkosh Women’s Field AOY
Eric Flores Cal Lutheran Men’s Field AOY
Pat Ebel UW-Oshkosh Women’s Head COY
Frank Gramarosso North Central Men’s Head COY
Guy Mosher Mahesh Narayanan Central North Central Women’s Assistant Men’s Assistant COY COY
AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
49
DIVISION I 2011 USTFCCCA OUTDOOR REGIONAL COACHES & ATHLETES OF THE YEAR GREAT LAKES REGION
Christina Manning Ohio State Women’s Track AOY
De’Sean Turner Indiana Men’s Track AOY
Beth Rohl Michigan State Women’s Field AOY
Michael Hartfield Ohio State Men’s Field AOY
Karen Dennis Ohio State Women’s Head COY
Dennis Mitchell Akron Men’s Head COY
John Newell Ed Beathea Michigan State Ohio State Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY
Casimir Loxsom Penn State Men’s Track AOY
Chelsea Carrier West Virginia Women’s Field AOY
Dwight Barbiasz Maryland Men’s Field AOY
Sean Cleary West Virginia Women’s Head COY
Fred Samara Princeton Men’s Head COY
Steve Dolan Chris Miltenberg Princeton Georgetown Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY
Mookie Salaam Oklahoma Men’s Track AOY
Mara Griva Nebraska Women’s Field AOY
Erik Kynard Kansas State Men’s Field AOY
Steve Rainbolt Wichita State Women’s Head COY
Larry Wieczorek Iowa Men’s Head COY
Joey Woody Dana Boone Iowa Oklahoma Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY
Miles Batty BYU Men’s Track AOY
Ifeatu Okafor Texas Tech Women’s Field AOY
Julian Wruck Texas Tech Men’s Field AOY
Patrick Shane BYU Women’s Head COY
Dion Miller Cliff Felkins Mark Robison Texas Tech Texas Tech BYU Men’s Head COY Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY
MID ATLANTIC REGION
Sheila Reid Villanova Women’s Track AOY
MIDWEST REGION
Diamond Dixon Kansas Women’s Track AOY
MOUNTAIN REGION
Amanda Mergaert Utah Women’s Track AOY
50
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
NORTHEAST REGION
Kate Grace Yale Women’s Track AOY
Leonard Korir Iona Men’s Track AOY
Rebecca O’Brien Buffalo Women’s Field AOY
Robert Golabek Buffalo Men’s Field AOY
Bill Morgan Connecticut Women’s Head COY
YNathan Taylor Cornell Men’s Head COY
James Garnham Buffalo Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant CO
SOUTH REGION
Ti’erra Brown Miami Women’s Track AOY
Kirani James Alabama Men’s Track AOY
Kimberly Williams Florida State Women’s Field AOY
Will Claye Florida Men’s Field AOY
Caryl Smith UCF Women’s Head COY
Mike Holloway Florida Men’s Head COY
Dick Booth Adrian Ghioroaie Florida Southern Mississippi Women’s Assistant Men’s Assistant COY COY
SOUTH CENTRAL REGION
Jeneba Tarmoh Texas A&M Women’s Track AOY
Barrett Nugent LSU Men’s Track AOY
Tina Sutej Arkansas Women’s Field AOY
Marquise Goodwin Texas Men’s Field AOY
Dennis Shaver LSU Women’s Head COY
Pat Henry Texas A&M Men’s Head COY
Rolando Greene Arkansas Women’s Assistant COY
Mario Sategna Texas Men’s Assistant COY
SOUTHEAST REGION
LaKya Brookins South Carolina Women’s Track AOY
Sam Chelanga Liberty Men’s Track AOY
April Sinkler Clemson Women’s Field AOY
Marcel Lomnicky Virginia Tech Men’s Field AOY
Lawrence Johnson Clemson Women’s Head COY
Dave Cianelli Virginia Tech Men’s Head COY
Greg Jack Kevin Jermyn Virginia Tech Duke Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY
WEST REGION
Jordan Hasay Lea Wallace Oregon Sacramento State Co-Women’s Track AOY Co-Women’s Track AOY
Elliot Heath Stanford Men’s Track AOY
Anna Jelmini Arizona State Women’s Field AOY
Colin Dunbar Long Beach State Men’s Field AOY
Jason Dunn Craig Carter Fred Harvey Stanford Arizona Arizona Women’s Head COY Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY Men’s Head COY AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
51
DIVISION II 2011 USTFCCCA OUTDOOR REGIONAL ATLANTIC REGION
Neely Spence Shippensburg Women’s Track AOY
Leford Green Johnson C. Smith Men’s Track AOY
Xahnn George-Reid Johnson C. Smith Women’s Field AOY
Orolando Duffus Saint Augustine’s Men’s Field AOY
Dave Osanitsch Shippensburg Women’s Head COY
George Williams Saint Augustine’s Men’s Head COY
Steve Spence Larry Moore Shippensburg Johnson C. Smith Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY
CENTRAL REGION
Photo Not Available
Kristi Buerkle Bemidji State Women’s Track AOY
Photo Not Available
Keith Barnier MSU Moorhead Men’s Head COY
Jim Vahrenkamp Mike Turgeon Augustana Winona State Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY
Derek Bredy MSU Moorhead Men’s Track AOY
Mary Theisen Winona State Women’s Field AOY
Dane Tobey Neb.-Kearney Men’s Field AOY
Tracy Hellman Augustana Women’s Head COY
Evan White UMass Lowell Men’s Track AOY
Alyssa Hudgins Georgian Court Women’s Field AOY
Diwani Augustine Southern Connecticut Men’s Field AOY
Kevin LaSure New Haven Women’s Head COY
Nick Lara Mustafa Abdur-Rahim John Wallin Southern Connecticut Southern Connecticut Southern Connecticut Men’s Head COY Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY
Dustin Emerick Southern Indiana Men’s Track AOY
Sam Lockhart Grand Valley State Women’s Field AOY
Kurt Roberts Ashland Men’s Field AOY
Jerry Baltes Grand Valley State Women’s Head COY
Joe Lynn Cory Young Jeremy Croy Grand Valley State Grand Valley State Tiffin Men’s Head COY Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY
EAST REGION
Shannon Gagne New Haven Women’s Track AOY
MIDWEST REGION
Monica Kinney Grand Valley State Women’s Track AOY
52
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
COACHES & ATHLETES OF THE YEAR DIVISION II SOUTH REGION
Photo Not Available
Camille ClemmonsJames Benedict Women’s Track AOY
Photo Not Available
Daniel Kirwa Harding Men’s Track AOY
Antoinette Oglesby Fort Valley State Women’s Field AOY
LaQuan Priest Claflin Men’s Field AOY
Steve Guymon Harding Women’s Head COY Men’s Head COY
Kasia Williams Nova Southeastern Women’s Assistant COY
Bryan Phillips Harding Men’s Assistant COY
SOUTH CENTRAL REGION
Photo Not Available
Judith Riley Lincoln Women’s Track AOY
Desmond Jackson Abilene Christian Men’s Track AOY
Lindsay Lettow Central Missouri Women’s Field AOY
Nick Jones Abilene Christian Men’s Field AOY
Victor Thomas Lincoln Women’s Head COY
Roosevelt Lofton Abilene Christian Men’s Head COY
Chris Richardson Neb.-Omaha Women’s Assistant COY
Tom Dibbern Angelo State Men’s Assistant COY
SOUTHEAST REGION
Kate Griewisch Lenoir-Rhyne Women’s Track AOY
Maurice Eubanks UNC Pembroke Men’s Track AOY
Katherine Davis UNC Pembroke Women’s Field AOY
Will Byars Anderson Men’s Field AOY
Matthew van Lierop Mount Olive Women’s Head COY
Larry Rodgers UNC Pembroke Men’s Head COY
Jason Bryan Anderson Women’s Assistant COY
Adonis Stanley UNC Pembroke Men’s Assistant COY
WEST REGION
Sarah Porter Western Washington Women’s Track AOY
Alfred Kangogo Alaska Anchorage Men’s Track AOY
Na’i Leni Cal State LA Women’s Field AOY
Josh Como Cal State LA Men’s Field AOY
Karl Lerum Seattle Pacific Women’s Head COY
Kirk Freitas Chico State Men’s Head COY
Issac Frederick Octavious Gillespie-Bennett Western Oregon Cal State LA Men’s Assistant COY Women’s Assistant COY AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
53
DIVISION III 2011 USTFCCCA OUTDOOR REGIONAL ATLANTIC REGION
Brian Lang Rochester Men’s Track AOY
Emma Dewart Ithaca Women’s Field AOY
Craig Van Leeuwen Ramapo Men’s Field AOY
Jennifer Potter Ithaca Women’s Head COY
Colin Tory RPI Men’s Head COY
John Izzo Ed Jaskulski Rochester SUNY Brockport Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY
Kevin Janata Nebraska Wesleyan Men’s Track AOY
Janey Helland Gustavus Adolphus Women’s Field AOY
Ethan Miller Central (Iowa) Men’s Field AOY
Marcus Newsom Wartburg Women’s Head COY
Joe Dunham Central (Iowa) Men’s Head COY
Guy Mosher Derek Frese Central (Iowa) Nebraska Wesleyan Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY
Kevin McCarthy Wabash Men’s Track AOY
Elizabeth Evans Rose – Hulman Women’s Field AOY
Kevin Phipps Baldwin – Wallace Men’s Field AOY
Bret Otte Calvin Women’s Head COY
Clyde Morgan Wabash Men’s Head COY
Jarrod Davis Matt Wackerly Baldwin – Wallace Ohio Wesleyan Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY
Eric Woodruff Moravain Men’s Track AOY
Abigail Schaffer Moravain Women’s Field AOY
Thomas Masterson Delaware Valley Men’s Field AOY
Mark FitzPatrick Washington and Jefferson Women’s Head COY
Tom Donnelly Haverford Men’s Head COY
Jay Dunn Gary Aldrich Johns Hopkins Carnegie Mellon Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY
Miriam Khan TCNJ Women’s Track AOY
CENTRAL REGION
Keelie Finnel Coe Women’s Track AOY
GREAT LAKES REGION
Joanna Johnson Oberlin Women’s Track AOY
MIDEAST REGION
Jacqueline Guevel Carnegie Mellon Women’s Track AOY
54
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
COACHES & ATHLETES OF THE YEAR DIVISION III MIDWEST REGION
Christy Cazzola UW- Oshkosh Women’s Track AOY
Mike Spain North Central (Ill.) Men’s Track AOY
Holly Ozanich UW – Oshkosh Women’s Field AOY
Ben Harmon Washington (Mo.) Men’s Field AOY
Frank Gramarosso North Central (Ill.) Men’s Head COY
Pat Ebel Mahesh Narayanan UW- Oshkosh North Central (Ill.) Women’s Assistant Men’s Assistant COY Women’s Head COY COY
NEW ENGLAND REGION
Photo Not Available
Portia Jones MIT Women’s Track AOY
Ben Scheetz Amherst Men’s Track AOY
Kelly Curtis Springfield (Mass.) Women’s Field AOY
David Ples Bates Men’s Field AOY
Halston Taylor MIT Women’s Head COY
Al Fereshetian Bates Men’s Head COY
Joel Williams Lisa Wallin Williams Tufts Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY
SOUTH/SOUTHEAST REGION
Ruby Blackwell Methodist Women’s Track AOY
Kevin Cunningham McMurry Men’s Track AOY
Ashlynn Chavis Methodist Women’s Field AOY
Richard Roethel Christopher Newport Men’s Field AOY
Duane Ross Methodist Women’s Head COY
Dan Graber Maddy Outman Barbara Crousen Centre Emory McMurry Men’s Head COY Women’s Assistant COY Men’s Assistant COY
WEST REGION
Photo Not Available
Kimber Mattox Willamette Women’s Track AOY
Marcus Fortugno La Verne Men’s Track AOY
Kelly Young Occidental Women’s Field AOY
Photo Not Available
Photo Not Available
Eric Flores Cal Lutheran Men’s Field AOY
Kendra Reimer Claremont-MuddScripps Women’s Head COY
Mike Schmidt Redlands Men’s Head COY
Eloise Cappellano Jason Romero Whitworth Claremont-MuddMen’s Assistant COY Scripps Women’s Assistant COY
AU G U S T 2 0 1 1
techniques
55
IS THERE A REQUIRED MINIMUM GPA FOR CORE COURSES TO BE ELIGIBLE? Yes. The minimum is 2.000 or better on a 4.000 grading scale for both NCAA Division I and II.
WHAT ARE THE AMATEURISM REQUIREMENTS?
Updates from the NCA A Eligibility Center BY JOHN PFEFFENBERGER
ach year, the NCAA Eligibility Center attempts to provide as much outreach and communication as possible as it relates to NCAA rules and regulations for initial eligibility in Divisions I and II. That being said, the NCAA Eligibility Center can sometimes be a place of confusion and frustration for athletes and coaches alike. I thought that I would use this column to explain some of the very basic elements of NCAA initial eligibility, and what aspects are important to know for both athletes and coaches.
E
WHAT IS INITIAL ELIGIBILITY AND WHY IS IT SO IMPORTANT? Initial eligibility rules are in place to ensure that college-bound student-athletes have met NCAA academic and amateurism guidelines. College-bound student-athletes cannot participate in any sport for an NCAA Division I or II college or university without this certification.
WHAT ARE THE TEST-SCORE REQUIREMENTS? In Division I, the NCAA uses a sliding scale that combines the core-course GPA (see below for more on core courses) and ACT/SAT scores to determine eligibility. Division II requires a minimum SAT score of 820 for the critical reading and math sections only or a minimum ACT sum score of 68. For more information about the NCAA Division I and II academic requirements, please visit www.eligibilitycenter.org.
WHAT IS A CORE COURSE AND HOW MANY DO I HAVE TO COMPLETE? Core courses are primarily English, math, foreign language, social studies and science classes with an emphasis on college preparation. To play in Division I, high school graduates must complete 16 core courses. Currently, Division II college-bound student-athletes must complete 14 core courses, but that will change to 16 core courses beginning in 2013.
56
techniques A U G U S T 2 0 1 1
The online registration process includes questions relating to a prospective student-athlete’s sports-participation history. The information provided will be reviewed by the NCAA Eligibility Center’s amateurism staff, and a determination will be made as to whether the individual’s amateur status should be certified. Individuals with questions about their amateur status should contact the NCAA Eligibility Center at 877-262-1492.
WHEN SHOULD PROSPECTIVE STUDENT-ATHLETES REGISTER WITH THE NCAA ELIGIBILITY CENTER? The NCAA Eligibility Center staff recommends that prospective student-athletes that wish to attend an NCAA Division I or II institution register at the beginning of their junior year of high school, or international equivalent.
WHAT WILL I BE ASKED TO PROVIDE WHEN I REGISTER WITH THE NCAA ELIGIBILITY CENTER? Prospective student-athletes should first create an account by going to www.eligibilitycenter.org. After a prospect has registered his or her account, three basic sections will need to be completed. About Me – In this section, a prospect will answer some basic demographic information such as name, date of birth, gender and where he or she lives. My Coursework – Prospects will be asked to enter the name and location of his or her high school (currently attended), along with information about summer school or any additional schools the prospect may have attended. My Sports – This is the section where a prospect will provide information related to his or her sports participation history. The NCAA Eligibility Center will ask about high school and/or club teams, as well as high school and post-high school events.
HOW MUCH DOES IT COST TO REGISTER WITH THE NCAA ELIGIBILITY CENTER? Accounts will be eligible for processing with a payment of the application fee. This fee is currently set at $65 for domestic prospects and $95 for international. Hopefully this article provided some basic Q&A about general information as it relates to the NCAA Eligibility Center. With that, I will leave you with a few tips for those incoming high school seniors to stay on top of the game when it comes to obtaining your NCAA eligibility for fall 2012: Take the SAT and/or ACT again, if necessary. The NCAA Eligibility Center will use the best scores from each section of the ACT or SAT to determine your best cumulative score. Continue to take college-prep courses. Check the courses you have taken to match your school’s list of approved core courses. Review your amateurism response and request final amateurism certification on or after April 1 (for fall 2012 NCAA enrollees). Continue to work hard to get the best grades possible. Graduate on time (in eight academic semesters). If you fall behind, use summer school sessions before graduation to catch up. After graduation, ask your guidance counselor to send your final transcript to the Eligibility Center with proof of graduation. John Pfeffenberger is the Coordinator of Amateurism Certification for the NCAA Eligibility Center and can be reached at jpfeffenberger@ncaa.org