Optimising training - constraints led approach - 6.2 Flashcards
what is the constraints led approach?
A style of coaching where the coach takes a technique, skill or tactic and isolates it in a small sided game
Players are encouraged to find their own movement solution
An ecological approach which incorporates exploration
CLA involves principled practice design
Not given instructions on how to perform the movement - put on constraints - limit the amount of options they have
Centred around autonomy for players - come up with their own movement patterns
Came from deciding one part of brain doesn’t control everything - the way we perform skills is more decided by the environment than our brain
Controversial topic
issues with traditional approach
Assuming that there is a ‘central controller’ just displaces the issue
Plenty of perceptual information in environment so why are detailed models needed?
If there is no central controller self-organisation becomes important
Self-organise our movements
development of CLA
- How can we account for organisation and behaviour without attributing it to an internal control structure?
- How can an organism produce behaviours that are stable but also adaptive?
CLA is designed to
Alter player behaviour
Introduce fun, competitive games
Help players find their own solutions
Tackle specific skills or aspects of the game
Only works if you give them enough time to come up with solutions
Younger (age) = takes longer
Constraints shouldn’t stop the skill looking like how it should
what are constraints?
Newell (1986)
Motor development not skill acq
Eliminates possibilities for action
Actions are not caused by constraints
Does not necessarily increase complexity
Vary in degree of time dependence
Constraints = facilitating type of behaviour
Actions don’t come from central processor
Can only perform a skill in a certain way depending on your environment - place limits on the way you can play
try and limit the options to help player make their own solutions
Manipulate the environment
Doesn’t have to make the action more complex - can make it easier
Limits the range of options available and so helps them to make good decisions
3 types of constraint
Organism
Environmental
Task
organism constraints
things within you - height, range of motions, max speed,
basic structural traits, how quickly your brain produces new connections
some can be trained
whether it’s a constraint might depend on the task
env constraints
level of light, anything that cannot be manipulated by
the coach
task constraints
goals, rules and equipment
interp is key
Original constraint = legs and arms had to move simultaneously and in synchrony - everyone assume they had to be under the water - imposed
own constraints based on a rule that didn’t actually limit them
learning objective –> learning activity
Decide on the goal and then design the session around the goal
Criticism - don’t remove cognition - it is possible to set a goal without telling them exactly how to achieve it
Abilities already tailored to their own sports - refine what they already
know
triangle diagram
Understand what info is available in the environment - what aspects
influence our behaviours
Represent circular causality - perception doesn’t cause movement and vice versa - interaction but not a causal relationship
dynamics of action
Development of a movement action is dependent on the perception-action cycle
Understanding perceptual information and affordance not enough
There is no general purpose solution for all tasks!
Need to take into account of ability to perform the skill
Doesn’t tell us how to use the information
Limited by our own abilities, environment, rules
behavioural dynamics (Warren, 2006)
Performer and environment – coupled dynamical systems
Interaction between performer and environment creates new dynamical system
Performer-environment interactions = self- organisation of movement
How learning occurs not really discussed
Information based control
Performers perception of capability not considered
Treat them as a pair
Used to predict what might happen in the future, why it happened in the past and understand some of the interactions
ecological dynamics
involves affordance based control
Takes action capabilities into
account
Also talks about affordances - perceived capabilities and how they interact
Different skills performed using different movements - biological degeneracy
High level cognition - do team have more defensive or attacking approach? - not how they find a solution
ecological dynamics key aspects
Education of attention
Education of intention
Skill performance arises from
environment/performer
interactions
Biological degeneracy
High level cognition
issues with research into CLA
Different methods used to evaluate
CLA very recent
Which constraints?
General constraints manipulations
Can’t make group analyses - learn at different speeds
Qualitative approach
Have to be trained in specific way - need to establish the effect of different constraints
Buszard et al.
Not unique to the constraints led approach
E.g. small child but full size basketball hoop - can’t learn effect movement pattern - scale to their size and age
Good evidence to support the use of scaling and more willing to perform the skills - keep them in the sport until they can use the proper equipment
Criticism - studies are not long term - studies also taken out of
context
CLA and implicit learning
CLA approach involves players finding a solution to movement problems on their own
Promotes implicit learning?
Doesn’t meet all requirements of implicit learning
Is similar to errorless learning - constraining options to be more successful - limiting things that could go wrong
Buszard et al. (2014)
They used dual task
Secondary task only disruptive when using full size equipment
Concluded using scaled equipment reduces load on memory and attentional demands required
Can we challenge performance in adult setting?
Scott and Gray (2010)
Adaptation to heavier bat different across Ps
Compared to own individual constraints - better able to handle weight - adapted by swinging with more force - less able - changed timing
Davids
Small sided games most commonly applied as a constraint - develop
technical and transferable skills - can be adapted in game situation
Removing opponents - simple passes - take away perceptual sources - only useful for creating movement patterns that can be used in situation
Don’t treat attacker and defender as separable aspects
Timmerman et al. (2017)
Players adapted to situation well - changes in rally length - changes in shots used - changes in percentage of successful serves
Barris et al. (2013)
Not able to explore variability of movements
Post - completed more dives and baulked less - greater consistency in diving scores and greater variability of movement in joints - ankles
Tan et al. (2017)
Higher clustering in herding condition and
Manipulation of rules can encourage or discourage herding
Preliminary evidence - nothing rock solid
Gray (2018)
Barrier set so ball had to be set with certain launch angle - progressive constraint
Used VR to create optimal feedback
CLA did better - more home runs, greater accuracy and angle - increased speed - low variability at start, high during training and low again at end -
exploring movement options
Ext focus next best and int worse
Timmerman et al. (2017)
manipulated game constraints on match performance in hockey
all constraints influenced performance positively
