The Great British Medalists Project A Review of C

Authors: Tim Rees Lew Hardy Arne Güllich Bruce Abernethy Jean Côté Tim Woodman Hugh Montgomery Stewart Laing Chelsea Warr

Publish Date: 2016/02/03

Volume: 46, Issue: 8, Pages: 1041-1058

PDF Link

Abstract

The literature base regarding the development of sporting talent is extensive and includes empirical articles reviews position papers academic books governing body documents popular books unpublished theses and anecdotal evidence and contains numerous models of talent development With such a varied body of work the task for researchers practitioners and policy makers of generating a clear understanding of what is known and what is thought to be true regarding the development of sporting talent is particularly challenging Drawing on a wide array of expertise we address this challenge by avoiding adherence to any specific model or area and by providing a reasoned review across three key overarching topics a the performer b the environment and c practice and training Within each topic subsection we review and calibrate evidence by performance level of the samples We then conclude each subsection with a brief summary a rating of the quality of evidence a recommendation for practice and suggestions for future research These serve to highlight both our current level of understanding and our level of confidence in providing practice recommendations but also point to a need for future studies that could offer evidence regarding the complex interactions that almost certainly exist across domainsWe identify what is known and what is thought likely to be true in relation to understanding the development of the world’s best sporting talent make recommendations for policy makers and practitioners to act on and suggest fruitful avenues for future researchExamining topics related to the performer the environment and practice and training our analysis highlights variation in the quality of evidence relevant to the development of the world’s best sporting talent such that the strength of evidence in some topics eg anthropometric and physiological factors is higher than in others eg birthdateWe provide an authoritative balanced comprehensive fully referenced and critical review of the literature which should serve as a key point of reference a for researchers in talent identification and development in sport as well as a guide to future research and b for practitioners and policy makers in sport seeking an overarching evidencebased understanding of the current state of knowledge in the area as well as a guide for translating that knowledge into actionWith the competition for medals at Olympics and World Championships intensifying there is greater investment than ever in sporting systems and structures to identify and develop exceptionally talented athletes The Australian Institute of Sport has been credited with boosting Australia’s medal haul from five medals in the 1976 Montreal Olympics to 60 medals in the 2000 Sydney Olympics Team Great Britain GB’s fourth position in the 2008 Beijing Olympics medals table was supported by a markedly increased investment £235M and this funding continued to support Team GB’s climb to third position in the 2012 London Olympics £261M When organizations such as UK Sport the UK’s high performance sports agency commit a further £355M of public funds to the Rio 2016 Olympic cycle it becomes increasingly necessary to be able to draw on an evidencebased understanding of the identification and development of the world’s best sporting talent to maintain the success that is expected with this expenditure This is the context for the present review which seeks to identify what is known and what is thought likely to be true in relation to understanding the development of the world’s best sporting talentIn September 2009 UK Sport invited all UK academic institutions to submit tenders to a “research and understand elements of identification and development to ultimately inform the prediction of future elite sporting talent” and b “conclude unique recommendations from the research that highlight key accelerants and retardants in the pathway development of elite performers” As part of the subsequent work the research team led by the two first authors drew together a panel of international research experts elite athletes coaches from the GB World Class Programme and expertise from UK Sport’s Research and Innovation and Athlete Development disciplines and UK Sport’s Senior Management Team An initial series of meetings presentations and workshops was held between April 2010 and January 2011 The topics highlighted and conclusions drawn from these sessions guided the development of a review/position statement with regard to current understanding of the performance and development of ‘superelite athletes’ This review/position statement was used both in strategic planning for Rio 2016 in March 2013 and to inform a separate research study which further explored the development of superelite athletes This process provided the initial guide for the present article which was subsequently further revised and updated through 2015 Of particular note was the first meeting of the collaborative team at UK Sport’s headquarters in Loughborough UK in June 2010 At this meeting contributors were asked to present on their key topics of expertise and calibrate evidence in relation to nonelite junior elite elite and superelite levels of performanceThere is a voluminous literature devoted to understanding the development of sporting talent In addition to numerous peerreviewed journal articles there are various academic books 1 2 3 4 reviews/position papers 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 governing body documents eg from the UK the USA and Australia 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 popular books 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 specific models of talent development 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 and other related works of note 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 With so much information and opinion across many subdisciplines of the sports sciences so many models and frameworks so many levels of performer such varied levels of empirical knowledge and much apparent truth popular wisdom and controversy the task of generating a clear understanding of the development of the world’s best sporting talent was challengingCategorization of the performance level of the study samples as nonelite juniors or seniors competing below national level junior elite junior national to junior international level elite senior international level or superelite Gold medalists at Olympics or World Championships1

Keywords: