Do elite athletes really need a coach?

[oiuyt]

Article from The Daily Telegraph (Sydney, Australia) on the topic of "Do elite athletes really need a coach?"

Woods, Federer consider going it alone

Comments?

-B

[JEC]

It is interesting to see how coaching at an elite level is able to resucitate a career. The prime example is Agassi. He was great at his early and late years but not in between. Getting coached by the "Winning Ugly" author, Brad Gilbert, made the difference.

[Allen Evans]

I have mentioned before that I find it odd that athletes performing at the level of Federer have coaches. As the article points out, who can tell Agassi how to hit a ball better than Federer can already? Yet, the article also points out -- as I have also observed -- that the relationship between an athlete and a coach matures over time. The coach may not be teaching an athlete anything new in terms of sport, but the coach can serve a valuable role as a sounding board, emotional safety net, and as an additional brain in scouting opponents -- among other things.

Of course, when we are talking about examples like Federer and Woods, we definitely are talking about ELITE athletes. There are few in their class.

AE

[Durando]

This is a fascinating subject that deserves quite a lot of thought. If you've read my posts at all you know that I'm an enemy of the notion of the absolute necessity of a coach for elite levels. Or even good levels. Somewhat self-aware athletes with good learning habits (like keeping training and results logs) can often out perform those with the luxury of too much money, time, and attention from a coach.

There are thousands of counterarguments, of course. Many of them are really good even. And I'm really mindful of Gilbert's exemplary rebuilding of Agassi. That was a rare combination of smart coaching and a very smart, self-aware athlete with character to spare.

Anyway, I like the idea of a coach as being someone who asks questions which provoke positive changes. Fencing coaches are far too often robots who put you through a series of actions and then ask you (or not) to discover the logic behind these sequences in combat.

[Inquartata]

What he said.

As for the "human" aspects of coaching, well, surely other high-level teammates and significant others can do those things.

I've always been a bit nonplussed by the emphasis we put on coaching in sports. I mean, we give them as much attention, and sometimes more, than we give the athletes who actually do the work of winning! What's that about? Is it just the cult of the 'leader'? Generals, Presidents and CEOs get the same sort of lopsided attention---is it because one man is easier to analyze and profile than a team, an army, a government or a company?

I am not at all convinced that our top fencers would suddenly begin a decline were they left coachless...

[Allen Evans]

When we toss out a name like Tiger Woods, we're discussing someone who has completely mastered the game and dominates the sport. For him -- and Federer -- going without a coach is probably just as much an economic decision as it is a practical one. Athletes at their level are not going to reduce their earnings by going without coaching, but almost certainly will if they continue to pay for a coach.

I'm very fond of the ideal: An athlete that you drop off in front of the convention hall and who wanders out eight hours later with a medal, with no help from the coach. I think, however, that this demands a level of "mindfullness" and self honesty that many athletes don't have. If we want to define "Elite" athletes as those WITH those qualities, then, yes, probably most elite athletes don't need a coach. But people with those qualities are very few -- at least in my experience. Yet, even so, athletes without these abilities can perform at an advanced level.

AE

[Craig]

I think that independence from a coach can be good even at lower levels.

There was a point in my fencing career where I had taken a year off and then got the competitive itch again. Rather than starting up lessons with another coach - and spending most of the year learning their system - I focused my training time on doing the drills I thought best and focusing on the fundamentals of my game in soft and hard bouting.

That year I ended up putting in some of my best results, despite not having a coach or taking a single lesson.

Did I get anywhere at Div I Nationals? No, but I did achieve most of my competitive goals for the year. For me, not having the pressure in my mind to put in a good performance for my coach freed me to perform at my best.

Will that approach work for everyone? No. The athlete needs a great deal of self-awareness and a broad base of the fundamentals of the actions and tactics in the sport.

Craig

[Inquartata]

I have had the same experience. I got my C without any coaching. Even now I still go through more or less lengthy periods where I don't take any lessons, because it takes precious time away from bouting...

But even if we're talking about elite-level competitors, do we mean Mariel and Becca, Keeth and Ivan? What about Ed Korfanty, who has been several times World Champion in V50MS? I wonder whether HE has a coach? Who is qualified to give him lessons? Can he coach himself?

[fencerwallet]

When Tiger Woods reworked his swing a few years ago, he went back to Butch Harmon. What about Jimmy Connors coaching Andy Roddick? In legal circles there is the saying that whomever represents himself has a fool for a client, which is absolutely true. While hard work will get you to a certain level, being able to objectively self-evaluate oneself is usually close to impossible if you are tying to go beyond that point.

[RITFencing]

I think that especially for younger athletes having a coach can be extremely important for competition on an elite level, and not just because the coach has a great deal of knowledge about the sport.

Often, younger athletes don't have the emotional maturity and mental toughness of their older counterparts, so having a coach there in training and on the strip/field/court/whatever not only helps them with corrections and strategy, but also helps to manage their emotional state and provide motivation when the student begins to run out of their own. The mental stresses of high level competition for, say, high school age kids can be enormous, and especially at that age, just having someone they trust in their corner to keep them calm and focussed can be absolutely huge.

Of course, this is true for adults as well, but adult athletes generally have the aforementioned toughness and maturity, as well as a depth of experience both in the sport and in life to draw on when they are in trouble, and so I think the role of the coach can shift a bit more to the actual activity at hand.

I realize this might be a bit of a thread drift (on fencing.net? shocking!) but I feel it is relevant to the discussion.

[stu]

I know that the Australian cricket legend Shane Warne was very scathing about the need for coaches at the level of international sport, suggesting that there was something very wrong if he and the others didn't know what they were doing by that point.

I notice though that he still kept phoning his 'mentor', Terry Jenner, for advice.

[Hauptman]

"Need" is a very subjective term here. Certainly anyone can benefit from having a coach, but as your skill level rises there will be fewer and fewer coaches who will be able to effectively improve your game. I'm willing to bet there are only a few people on the planet who could significantly improve on Tiger Woods' golf game

[mrbiggs]

The followup to this would be "are there any elite fencers right now who don't have a coach, or that reached the elite level first and then hired a coach to improve themselves?"


I can't think of any right now.

I remember reading an article a good 5-6 years ago, just when I was getting into fencing, about a fencer who learned from a book and practiced footwork in his home, then got top 8 in a (then open) NAC. Is this true? Does anyone know who it was? My memory of the article lacks details because I didn't have much knowledge of how national competition works at that point.

[Insipiens]

I remember watching the L8 of the ME world championships in Leipzig a couple of years ago. It was striking that Kolobkov who eventually won didn't have a coach coming up to him at the one minute break to offer advice. He just stood at the end of the piste all on his own.

Of course that doesn't tell you whether he had a coach at home, a coach in the team but not coming to speak to him during the bout.

Really the article implies more that the role of the coach is different for a sportsman who is the best in the world in his field than it is for the rest.

[D+F+P=Hadouken!]

Heres my opinion....

Almost all athletes can benefit from a coach. However, the role of the coach changes throughout the career of the athlete, or atleast it should if the coach is mindful of the status of his athlete.

Overall though, I believe that fencing coaches need to spend less time giving lessons and conducting drills, and more time building the financial and social structure of their organization.

Coach Krzyzewski is a good example of this. He nurtures the environment to create better athletes.

Build your house before you raise your kids.

[oiuyt]

Coach Krzyzewski is a good example of this. He nurtures the environment to create better athletes.

Collegiate coaching is a very different animal than non-collegiate elite-level coaching. Especially when one is looking at environment building. Most college athletes -- even the best -- are in a very different place in their lives than elite professional athletes.

-B

[Mo]

There are some really good points in this discussion.
When a US fencer is facing another US fencer in competition, they aren't coached (unless it is Naslmov.) The fencers still know what to do.
During team competitions it seems that the fencers know who can do what and how to get it done. They should have one of them be the team captain and decide amoung themselves who gets to fence whom.
Having someone standing near the strip screaming "Think Fencer" or "have a plan" really doesn't seem to do any good.
I've watched the girls on Saber overlook the coach and listen to Sada. She sure as hell knows what is going on.
The only thing an elite fencer really needs a coach for is to protect them from other coaches. A coachless fencer is a play thing like a seal is to a killer whale to the some like the Italians or Hungarians.
Who knows more what a truly top fencer needs than the top fencer? Some fencers like to have lessons all the time. My kid would rather not.
Not having to deal with an annoyed coach when the fencer is done would also be really nice. When you are done, you would have done what you did.
So be it.
If you are comfy with the performance then the coach should be too. Even if you're not, the coach shouldn't be making the fencer feel like a pile of doodie.
What to do...
The Momster