Reply To: Game Intelligence / Decision Training

[hockeygod]

TomM wrote:
Notre Dame Tournament Update:

We really couldn't have played much better but what happens is that when you are totally dominating a game the feeling is that you are up by about 5 goals and some carelessness creeps in and players lose a little intensity. I think we have all been in games you lose that you deserve to win and games that you win that you deserve to lose. After the first period I told my asst. coach that I had a bad feeling about the game. We played so hard in our first game of the day that we just weren't hungry enough on rebounds or walk ins to finish. When you have seen thousands of games you start to see patterns like a chess master when he looks at the chess board and recognize that something is amiss. I am to the point now that I can predict a goal about 3-5 seconds before because you see either the defense out of sync or the attackers creating something.

Their goalie had a great game and we didn't finish when we had many many chances. That is the problem with letting teams hang around even though the game is one sided. It is a real challenge for the goalie to keep focused when they are getting a shot every 5 or 6 minutes.

Tom,

I found your comment on being able to 'predict' a goal 3-5 seconds before it happens (as it happens) very interesting. In hindsight, I have had my share of those moments in the past too, but I never really attributed it to anything. I guess I just didn't think about or analyze them all that much. I just figured everybody feels them? When you likened them to the chess master who has played for thousands of hours and 'sees' things appearing on the board, it was a very interesting comparison and makes perfect sense to me! I wonder how many other people 'feel' this way? (Or the sense of relief when a 'sure thing' opportunity DOESN'T convert against you… or the feeling of OH CRAP I CAN'T BELIEVE WE MISSED THAT when your team DOESN'T convert!)

You comment on finishing… "…we didn't finish when we had many many chances." As a suggestion, using our Game Intelligence Model, we always keep score and then hold the kids (and goalies) accountable after the games. (Skaters or Teams compete against each other; goalies compete against each other). The winners get a drink; the losers do pushups and situps (numbers depend on how many 'teams' we are using… winner = 0; next best score = 5/5; 10/10; 15/15, etc.) Kids are naturally competitive and they really like playing these games – they always want to know the score! Holding kids accountable really increases their focus and desire / consistency to 'bear down' whenever they get scoring chances!

Although seemingly punitive in nature, it is to help train their fitness and we preface it this way. "You are getting better with every pushup and situp you do!" Sometimes, even the winners do some so they 'keep even' with the players who lose!

(Goalies – we might substitute 10 up / downs or pad stacks or sliding saves or crease patterns. Extra training to help make them better.) Everything we do is to help make the kids better. So similar to Bruce Brown's positive conditioning (intent is to get better) but with out own slant.

This leads me to what happened today. We did two sessions this morning where we played "The Time Machine" 3 v 3 (two games going x-ice at the same time) – one with 2000's, 2001's and 2002's (all Div 1-3 within the age categories) and one with Grade 7's (age? 1997's – all Div 3-7 within their age categories; so less skilled and a wider variety than our younger group). Each group requires 4 nets / goalies and we had 24 skaters – 8 teams of 3 players each – perfect! Once we gave them the parameters of the game and the "rules of engagement", you should have seen the focus and intensity of these kids! The kids are waiting impatiently for the scores at the end of the games!

It has taken years of experimentation (trial and error) but we have had incredible success with structuring the environment this way. (Smart Transitional Games – design and apply game-like, purposeful games; provide parameters; keep score; reinforce rules; accountability as to the scores; let the game teach the game; at the end, ask open-ended questions of the kids to see what they see / what they are learning (IMPLICIT LEARNING) – we don't TELL them… we want to create, encourage and nurture problem-solving, decision-training and independent athletes.)

Coaches who train the drill way or hybrid coaches struggle with our way; until they open their mind and give it a fair chance – several times. It has to become a habit to replace the old 'whole-part-whole' paradigm they have been taught – first as players and now as coaches.

Today's explicit coaches have a tendency to jump in and want to 'tell' / (yell) the kids how to do stuff… it takes practice to 'have patience', sit back, shut up while they are playing; and then use open-ended questions to guide kids to recognized the most important concept or two. It's tough when you are used to the current teaching model (developed as a byproduct of the Industrial Revolution – which in my opinion, and that of many others, is outdated! Watch Sir Ken Robinson's two presentations on http://www.Ted.com for more… or read Tony Wagner's "Global Achievement Gap"… we coaches / teaches need to adapt our training methodologies (or perish!) to reflect what the kids need… and want!

As for the "Time Machine" game description, amongst the hundreds of others, I am working on a book and when it is ready, I will let everyone know.

Dean
M.Ed (Coaching)
Ch.P.C. (Chartered Professional Coach)
Game Intelligence Training
"Great education depends on great teaching."