Tuesday, February 16, 2016

Simple discution on Linkedin

CLIVE

spam, redirecţionarea mesajelor, ştergerea etc.

Lista mesajelor din conversaţia activă

Se încarcă mai multe mesaje…

· Ieri

Amândoi sunteţi membri ai grupului Professional Swim Coach pe LinkedIn.

Dear Clive - American sistem of "'áge groups races""'is very good because 0fer to so many childrens one dream > ''try to be like 'michael'; but one very small group will comme true ''elite swimmers'''..., other childrens lost swimming and not rarely. have some frustration. For this childrens + old swimmers/adults I formulate one new concept to make swimming - effyciency+better technic (sorry, me inglish is very poor).

Please open this links:

http://swimmingpedia.blogspot.com/2012/11/about-best-concept-what-does-it-mean.html,

http://swimmingpedia.blogspot.com/2012/11/oh-wikipedia-mea-am-mai-gasit-unul-cu.html,

11:20

· Astăzi

Good morning Mircea, greetings. Where do I start? I really don't understand the point of the equations?

02:55

· Ooops! Sorry, I pressed something and it posted itself! Let's start again: Good morning Mircea, greetings. Where do I start?

· I really don't understand the point of the equations? Let me try to deconstruct the formula so that you can tell me if I have understood it correctly: K is your constant. What is it doing? It serves no purpose whatsoever. And you add it twice at separate stages – first when calculating the PSI and again when calculating the BEST score. Why not simply add 2*K somewhere?

· Why not simply omit it? L – is this in a ‘streamline’ position (i.e. arms extended as in a push off) or simply standing height measured for some reason while floating? Why floating?

· Weight and thorax circumference completely baffle me – why are they included? Thorax will show some indication of frontal area but so what? Weight will tell you how heavy you are when you’re NOT in the water. So what? When I do the calculations I find that the indexed effect of significant improvements in speed and/or cycle count are subdued because of the inclusion of the other factors. Surely effectiveness and efficiency are ONLY concerned with speed and cycle count? If the body length increases the BEST index rises. If the weight decreases the BEST index rises. If the thorax circumference decreases the BEST index reduces. If the time improves the BEST index rises. If the cycle count decreases the BEST index rises. So, in order to increase the index number the swimmer can become longer, lose weight, expand the chest, swim faster, or use fewer strokes. Who cares about three of those? Only two are of importance. Surely it is simpler to just time, say, a 200 and count the strokes? That will give you two ‘baseline’ numbers. Next time if the time is constant and stroke count has decreased then the swimmer is more efficient; if the stroke count is constant and the time decreases the swimmer is more effective. That’s it. What else does the swimmer or coach need to know? There is nothing else. Time and stroke count are all you need.

Bună dimineața Mircea, salutări. De unde să încep? Eu chiar nu înțeleg punctul de ecuațiile?
02:55
• Ooops! Ne pare rău, am apăsat ceva și ea însăși postat! Să începem din nou: Bună dimineața, Mircea salutări. De unde să încep? Eu chiar nu înțeleg punctul de ecuațiile?Lasă-mă să încerc să deconstruiască formula astfel încât să puteți să-mi spui dacă am înțeles corect: K este constantă ta. Ce o face? Acesta servește nici un fel de scop. Și tu adauga de două ori la diferite etape - prima la calcularea PSI și din nou atunci când se calculează cel mai bun scor. De ce nu pur și simplu se adaugă 2 * K undeva? De ce nu pur și simplu omite? L - este aceasta într-o poziție "Streamline" (de exemplu, arme extins ca într-o împingere off) sau pur și simplu înălțime măsurată pentru un motiv oarecare timp plutitoare în picioare? De ce plutitoare? Greutate si circumferinta toracelui șicane complet mine - de ce sunt ele incluse? Torace va arăta anumite semne de zona frontală, dar atât de ce? Greutate vă va spune cât de greu esti atunci când nu sunteți în apă. Şi ce dacă? Când fac calculele mi se pare că efectul indexate de imbunatatiri semnificative in viteza și / sau numărul de ciclu sunt supus din cauza includerea celorlalți factori. Cu siguranță eficacitatea și eficiența sunt doar în cauză cu o viteză și numărul de ciclu? În cazul în care lungimea corpului crește CELE MAI BUNE crește index. În cazul în care greutatea scade CELE MAI BUNE crește index.Dacă circumferința toracelui scade cel mai bun indice reduce. Dacă timpul îmbunătățește CELE MAI BUNE crește index. În cazul în care numărul de ciclu scade CELE MAI BUNE crește index. Deci, în scopul de a crește numărul de index înotătorul poate deveni mai, pierde în greutate, extinde piept, inota mai repede, sau de a folosi mai puține accidente vasculare cerebrale. Cui îi pasă de trei dintre cei? Doar două sunt de o importanță. Cu siguranță este mai simplu cu doar timp, să zicem, un 200 și numără accident vascular cerebral? Care vă va oferi două numere "de bază". Data viitoare în cazul în care timpul este constant și numărul de accident vascular cerebral a scazut, atunci înotătorul este mai eficientă; dacă numărul de accident vascular cerebral este constantă și intervalul scade înotătorul este mai eficientă. Asta e. Ce mai înotătorul sau autocarul trebuie să știți? Nu este nimic altceva. Timp și numărul de accident vascular cerebral sunt tot ce ai nevoie.

Wrong?

Google Tra

My luck was that someone wrote to me on Linkedin and so I saw your answer (I do not really use Linkedin network...)

It’s been a while since I supported the BEST Concept and here I try to objectively justify myself, with a reasonably applied and logically approved mathematics.

You put your big heart in this - your answer makes it clear that you had good will and you managed to read the whole text - congratulations ...

I will try to explain, but please have patience ...: This formula was designed especially for children who are not as smart as the adults ....

So in short -

If you do as you have remarked (correctly!) ... the total sum of the number of seconds plus the number of tempo - their value will be the better the higher the result is below ...; I think children cannot understand this ("a lower result will be good ..."), and this is why I have introduced theoretically, formally, constant 'K' (= 100) which enables the result calculated to have a positive value. I admit that I used this at the release of the BEST Concept (1983) and it was forced and unrealistic; so I admitted that the introduction of the constant 'K' is artificial and searched to replace it with another constant ... thus I reached PIG (Personal Index of Gliding ...?) in 1999 (there were decades of searching until I found it ...).

-------------------------

We all know that everyone has a personal capacity to glide. This capacity results from some biological indicators, which vary from one individual to another but have a special meaning in connection with the body which moves through the water ....

I will explain right away ... but until then I hope you accept that a good PIG value is important in achieving a high speed (a) and is a constant value, at least for a year (b).

If I decrease the value out of the PIG constant ('Time' + 'Tempo'), the more you have a smaller value ... I will have a higher and therefore credible constant (PIG) in the mind of my beginner... + for me is a value which definitely say about what my swimmers’ efficiency is and so I can start a 'negotiation' of his way to swim... ..

I hope I have cleared up on my judgment that takes into account the need to provide a child credible numbers (A), that can show what is the mathematical value of the efficiency of the movements in water (B) by using the technique of a swimming stroke, as required by FINA regulations / TSC (4 basic strokes).

Thus, I assume that the values of 'Time' and 'Tempo' accepted by two of us, I mean that that if you mathematically decrease their sum out of the PIG constant, the value gives us an idea about the effectiveness of the person who is swimming. Do not forget that we talk about all kind of people, some fat, some taller, etc.

------------------------

So PIG is calculated (once a year ...) as follows:

'L' = is the longest that a swimmer’s body can have in the water, ie floating ventral float ...; to be more simple I can take, only the Height as you propose, but by doing I will be deprived of two important milestones for swimming = 'long hand' and 'foot size'; So I prefer the constant value of the body stretched out in the water from which I will decrease (just like the calculation of efficiency) the sum of the body weight - Gr. (out of the water) plus the number of centimeters of the circumference measured under arms -Q.

"Gr" = is body weight out of the water but we know that in the water this weight will drop and the body, according to Archimedes' principle, it will be lighter so it will float easier; a heavy body will have difficulty to float and glide ... a light one will be favored. To calculate the 'specific weight’ of a body in the water, requires a large hassle, this is why I chose the easiest way ....

'Q' = represents a landmark much linked to movement, meaning that the water can oppose resistance against the progress of the body (theoretically, even shipbuilders, admit that resistance will be smaller.. as the ratio between the body length and overall width has a value given by Froude, Reynolds' formula, ie radical in length / width - but these calculations are simply impossible to do for a simple coach ... even for Bob Bowman (sic), so I chose a significant and natural value - Circumference measured under arms (like a tailor who makes a suit)

Finally PIG equals value 'L' amount minus the number of kilograms 'Gr' plus the number of centimeters (Q), so PIG = L - (Gr. + Q) .... constant values for at least one year.

Anyway, thanks for the opportunity you gave me once again to plead for 'eureka' My life coach - BEST concept dated when writing about something not in any work for swimming (1983)

With great sympathy

Mircea, 80 old, 19 Nov. 2015 Bucharest @ <Scanave@yahoo.com>

Atash_ my CV ....

CURRICULUM VITAE

Name : OLARU, forname - MIRCEA, romanian ;

Diplomat – teacher : phisical education / swimming coach

BIRTH DATE/PLACE: 16 Mai 1936, Bolgrad (later Romanien Basarabia);

FAMILY: wife: Olga Olaru (1947), informaticien at RNC/ Internet National Center of Romania

Daughter: Ana Maria Gunsel/Olaru (1969): Prof. lecturer at Cukurova Univ. Adana Turkey [Ilhami –1967, husband Museum Curator, Oxford Univ. Master, Jan Paul, 2000, student]

POSTAL ADDRESS: Romania: 011455 Bd Averescu Nr.1, bl 1, sc A, ap 20, Bucharest;

@mail scanave@yahoo.com

EDUCATION + ACTIVITY:

[Graduate (9,20%) ICF/ actual A.N.E.F.S Bucharest -1963 , 1st degree ph.ed. teacher (1982)]

1963 – Resercer al Central Institute of Sports-Research, Buc., Romania;

1968 – Swimming trainer at Sports School Club Nr 1 PAJURA Bucharest; coach ctg:1-st/’70;

1974 – Swimming coach at I.Y.I.K Istanbul, Turkey;

1976 – Swimming coach at National Swimming High-school in Bucharest, Romania;

1982 – Federal coach al Romanian Swimming Federation (elected by the vote of coaches!)

1986 – Swimming trainer al Sports school Club nr 1 Buc , Romania;

1990 – Counselor trainer of the Turkish Swimming Fed., Ankara, Bolu, Kastamonu, a.a.;

1995 – Prof. asociat at Univ. Ecologica Bucuresti, swimming manual lessons, seminars;

1998 – pensioned: after 37 age-old in coaching-sport areea with aprox. 25.000 subiect learn-swimming, many generations of romanian champions (I was federal coach responsable to degree of the best romanian swimmers, lake: Carmen Bunaciu, Anca Patrascoiu – JO Los Angeles/1984, also, for Tamara Costache: she was first WR of 50m free in Madrid CM / ‘86 with 0.25,28; also I coached with great succesfuly some turkysh swimmers, for ex. 1974: 200 IM male – 2.14, 00 or 100m Breastroke- 1.10,00, two swimmers;

1983 – I start to make know in the swimming-world the my ‘BEST-formul’/’Biomechanical Efficiency Swimming Test’ (she can be calculate very easy BEST = 100 – (Time+Strokes), one new practical methode to testing and clasification of the swimming-efficiency matter, also,(see Mag. EFS 1983/2, p.25)***

In Sept. / 99, I imaginate one other formul ‘Personal Gliding Index’ / PGI = L – ( Kg. + Q)

this mean: L= the Body lenght in gliding position (with the arms stretched forward); Kg.= Weight; Q = Nr. of Cm. between the under-armpit circumference (or other antropomophic measurmeants - angle, degree s.a –see Froude, Reynolds Nr.in hidrodinamics laws).

PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITY:

1950-1961 : component of the National Swim-Teams: 100m fly-1.06,10 / 1954, Nov., Rostock/25m, ex-DDR [the 5ft. Top.WC In that moment]

1959 – 1963 – student of the National Sport Institute ICF , Bucharest, Ro.. grd. 9,20%

1963-1968 : 5 years, experiments a new-methodical line of the fast+corectly swim teaching - “Research Center” – Viitorul, Bucarest;

1970 – publishes 1stt ‘swimming-learning broshure ’ (75.000 ex., color);

1971 - Manual ‘Swimming Lessons’, 120 pg., (10.000 ex);

1982 – Swimming - Methodical Manual’ (5000 ex);

1984 – 2nd ‘swimming-learnig brochure’ (25000 ex);

1988 – 2nd manual ‘Swimming Lesons’ / Don`t be afraid for the water (5000 ex);

1993 – Manuals and leson plans (2) for student of Univ. Ecologica- Bucuresti;

1995 – 4 color posters with “swimm-strokes’ dedicate to explain the BEST new concept,

the all 4 posters in colaboration with Canada Swim/Natation – Trevor Tiffany, 4000 ex..

1999 - mag.'Stiinta Sportului', ed CCPS, Referat - ‘Un nou concept in pregatirea inotatorilor'.

2007 - swimbook ‚Despre inot ... cu Mircea Olaru1 (About swimming... with Mircea Olaru), a small sport-enciclopedia, 1000 ex Sponsorized by InfoTurism Buchrest, promotional book

1965-1999: published tens of scientifical articles, paperin, inventor of some swimming apparatus ....;

*** This 2 new ‘instruments’ (the ‘BEST’ and ‘PGI’ formuls) can be use in one new kind to make testings and classification among the swimmers in to 50m Events; the all competitors / series, will be organisates by the one ‘PGI-annual-card’, combinated both: PGI – (T + S) this is one method to make the control of the moving efficincy and the organisation in the equall series among the swimmers without age and sexes criterions, only by the PGI –annual Card who can by easy recalculate in every years....

==================

Text de raspuns pt Clive…..

====================

Norocul meu a fost ca cineva mi-a scris pe Linkedin si asa ma vazut raspunsul tau (eu nu prea folosesc reteau Linkedin…)

De mult timp nu am mai sustinut cauza Conceptului BEST si iata ca incerc sa ma adun pentru a ma justifica in mod obiectiv, rational sub o forma matematica aplicata si admisa ca logica.

Ai pus suflet mare in corespondenta ta, este clar ca ai avut bunavointa si ai reusit sa citesti totul - te felicit…

Incerc sa ma explic, dar te rog sa ai rabdare…: aceasta formula a fost destinata, mai ales, copiilor si a celor care nu sunt asa de destepti precum suntem noi adultii….

Deci, pe scurt -

Daca fac asa cum ai remarcat tu (corect !)…, suma numarului de secunde plus a numarului de tempo, valoare lor va fi cu atat mai buna cu cat rezultatul este mai mic…; eu cred ca copiilor poate sa li se para neconvingator (“un rezultat mai mic sa fie unul bun…”), de aceia am introdus theoretic, formal, constanta ‘K’ (=100) care facea posibil ca rezulatul calculului sa aibe o valoare pozitiva, in crestere…; recunosc ca acest lucru l-am folosit la debutul lansarii Conceptului BEST(1983) si era fortat si nerealist, am admis ca introducerea constantei ‘K’ este artificiala si am cautat s-o inlocuiesc cu alta constanta…, asa am ajuns la PIG (Personal Index of Gliding…?)in 1999 (au fost zeci de ani de cautari pana am gasit remediul…).

-------------------------

Toti stim ca fiecare om are o valoare personala a capacitatii de a aluneca. Aceasta valoare rezulta din niste indicatori biologici, care variaza dela un individ la altul dar care au o insemnatate aparte in legatura cu corpul care inainteaza prin apa….

Mai voi explica imediat…, dar pana atunci sper sa accepti ca o valoare buna PIG este importanta in realizarea unei viteze cat mai ridicata(a) si este si o valoare constanta, cel putin pentru un an de zile(b).

Daca scad din constanta PIG suma (‘Timp’+’Tempo’), cu cat voi avea o suma mai mica… imi ramane o constanta (PIG) mai mare si deci credibila in mintea incepatorului meu… + pentru mine este o valoare care imi spune cert cam ce eficienta are sportivul meu la inot si asa pot incepe o ‘negociere’ a felului sau de a inota…..

Sper ca te-am lamurit asupra rationamentului meu care are in vedere nevoia de a oferi unui copil cifre credibile(A), si faptul ca acestea pot arata care este valoarea matematica a eficientei de inaintare in apa(B) folosind tehnica unui stil sportiv de inot, asa cum prevede regulamentul FINA/TSC (cele 4 stiluri de baza).

Astfel, presupun ca valorile ‘Timp’ si ‘Tempo’ sunt acceptate de noi doi, adica daca scad mathematic suma lor din constanta PIG, valoarea ne da o ideie despre eficienta celui care inoata. Sa nu uitam ca vorbim despre fel de fel de oameni, unii grasi, altii inalti, etc.

------------------------

Deci PIG se calculeaza ( o singura data pe an…) astfel:

‘L’ = reprezinta lungimea cea mai mare pe care o poate avea un corp de inotator aflat in apa, adica in plutire ventrala intinsa…; pot sa iau, simplu, doar Talia, Inaltimea cum propui tu, dar facand asa ma lipsesc de doua repere importante pentru inot = ‘lungimea palmei’ si ‘marimea labei piciorului’; deci eu prefer valoarea constanta a a corpului aflat intins in apa din care voi scadea (exact ca la calculul eficientei) suma Greutatii corporale- Gr. (pe uscat) adunata cu Numarul de centimetri a circumferintei sub axilare -Q.

“Gr” = reprezinta, firesc, greutatea corpului pe uscat dar stim ca in apa aceasta greutate va scadea iar corpul, conform principiului lui Arhimede, va fi mai usor si deci va pluti mai usor; un corp greu va avea dificultati la plutire si inaintare…, unul usor va fi avantajat. A calcula ‘greutatea specifica’ a unui corp aflat in apa, presupune o mare bataie de cap, de aceea am ales cea mai simpla cale….

“Q” = reprezinta un reper mult legat de inaintare, adica de rezistenta pe care o poate opune apa impotriva inaintarii corpului ( theoretic, chiar constructorii de nave, admit ca rezistenta va fi cu atat mai mica.., cu cat raportul intre lungimea corpului si latimea sa maxima are o valoare data de ‘formula Froude-Reynolds’, adica radical din lungime/latime – dar aceste calcule sunt imposibil de facut pentru un simplu antrenor.., chiar si pentru Bob Bowman(sic), asa ca am optat pentru o valoare semnificativa si fireasca - Circumferinta sub-axilara / ca la croitor cand iti faci un costum de haine)

In final PIG este egal cu valoare ‘’L’ minus valoare sumei Numarului de kilograme ‘Gr’ adunat cu Numarul de centimetri(Q), adica PIG = L –(Gr.+Q)…. puncte constante timp de minimum un an calendaristic.

------------------

Asa ca azi, in 2015…, Formula BEST, in ultima sa varianta…(nu uita ca materialul trimis tie dateaza din 2010, asa am impresia…) este asa:

BEST = PIG – (Timp+Tempo)… puncte de eficienta

DAR, iti spun ceva care nu-l spun nimanui. Este ‘cadoul secret’ oferit celor care cred in Conceptul BEST….

I/ Sa stii ca cei care inoata avand conduita de a sprinta folosind economie de vasliri…. reusesc sa PERFECTIONEZE admirabil tehnica. Deci Conceptul BEST poate fi folosit, mai ales, pentru a avea un bun inotator cu tehnica perfecta.

II/ La fel, Conceptul BEST poate fi util celor din categoria ‘masters’; sunt foarte multi oameni care au invatat sa inoate dar nu au ajuns campioni olimpici…, cei mai multi.

Acestia, daca adopta conduita de a inota repede cu miscari putine vor ‘deveni proprii lor campioni’, ei isi vor imbunatati tehnica…, isi pot calcula mental valoarea prestatiei la un moment dat…., + PIG, valoarea sa, poate fi folosita de arbitri, la alcatuirea unor serii de intrecere perfect egale din punct de vedere somatic si deci pline de ‘faire-play’

Eu incerc sa dau acest text, destinat tie, la un traducator bun de limba engleza (multi nu cunosc terminologia noastra..), sper sa reusesc. Daca TU ai incerca sa-l traduci si sa-l faci inteligibil pentru vorbitorii de engleza… vei avea dela mine tot ce doresti…. Succes si Doamne ajuta !

Oricum iti multumesc ca mi-ai dat ocazia, inca odata, de a pleda pentru ‘evrika’ vietii mele de antrenor – Conceptul BEST, datat cand despre asa ceva nu se scria in nicio lucrare de inot (1983)

Cu mare simpatie

Mircea, 80 old, Bucharest 2015 19 Nov. @< scanave@yahoo.com>

Atash_ my CV….

==================

Friday, February 5, 2016

Dacă tinerii ar trebui să se specializeze într-un sport competitiv la o varsta frageda ............

The Science of Sport

Welcome to the Science of Sport where we bring you the second, third, and fourthlevel of analysis you will not find anywhere else.

Be it doping in sport, hot topics like Caster Semenya or Oscar Pistorius, or thedehydration myth, we try to translate the science behind sports and sports performance. Consider a donation if you like what you see here!

==================

Talent ID & Management Part 5: Early vs Late Specialisation?

02 Feb 2016Posted by Ross

Category: High performance management, Talent vs training, Training theories, Uncategorized

Like this:

Abstract

Dacă tinerii ar trebui să se specializeze într-un sport competitiv la o varsta frageda, sau să exercite o gamă mai largă de sporturi in timpul adolescentei este un subiect de o dezbatere (Baker, Cobley, si Fraser-Thomas, 2009) și este fundamental în cadrul politicii de sport si practica de coaching . Scopul acestui studiu a fost de rechemare retrospectiv pentru a identifica dacă specializare devreme sau diversificarea sportive (eșantionare) de-a lungul copilăriei și adolescenței poate influenta niveluri de performanță înainte de maturitate. Un chestionar online a fost folosit pentru a colecta istoriile de participare sport de 1006 Marea Britanie oameni de sport, care au fost apoi comparate cu cadrul de dezvoltare oferit de model de dezvoltare de participare Sport (DMSP, Cote si Fraser-Thomas, 2007). O asociere semnificativă între numărul de sport a participat la la vârsta de 11, 13, și 15 și a fost găsit standard de concurență între 16 și 18 ani. Persoanele care au concurat în trei sporturi cu vârste cuprinse între 11, 13, și 15 au fost semnificativ mai multe sanse de a concura la nivel național, comparativ cu standardul de club cu varste cuprinse intre 16 si 18 ani decat cei care practică un singur sport între. Constatarile raportate aici oferi un suport empiric pentru modelul cale DMSP performanță de eșantionare într-un context Marea Britanie.

· Full text HTML PDF

Cuvinte cheie

· prelevare de probe, sport, atlet, specializare, diversificarea

Articole similare

Vezi toate articolele referitoare

Yesterday I posted a video in my Talent ID and management series in which I introduced the concept of the 10,000 hour rule, and I explained how some of the foundational work in that area didn’t account for the possibility that ability drives practice, rather than the other way around, and also how 10,000 is clearly neither necessary, nor sufficient, to attain expert performance.

In fact, I’d go so far as to say that if it is going to take a person 10,000 hours to reach expert level, then they are probably a “bad investment” in a world where resources are scarce and where competition is so great.

In that video (which you can view below), I mentioned the detrimental implications of a 10,000 hour “dogma” more than once, and this video, Part 5 of the series, discusses one such potential downside.

That is, the preoccupation with logging those 10,000 hours feeds the idea that people must specialise early and be dedicated to a single sport. How, for instance, can a person who takes up football or ice-hockey achieve the required 10,000 hours if they get distracted by other sports, which takes away their training time?

This is an argument, word for word, that I have heard presented at high performance and talent development conferences. Every hour spent on Sport Y is an hour less spent on Sport X.

But what does the research say? What does common sense say? We know a fair amount about specialisation vs sampling/diversification, and this video is my attempt to explain some of those concepts to you.

Below you can view Part 5: Specialisation, and immediately below that, is Part 4 on the 10,000 hour dogma, because the two are, as you will hopefully recognise, closely linked.

Enjoy, and remember to share, and I’ll be back soon with Part 6, tackling the Relative Age Effect.

https://youtu.be/UKhX4keAIQ0,

https://youtu.be/JVXUWWFEXQQ,

Thanks for watching. Here are the posts from Parts 1 to 4 of the series!

1. The strategic and tactical fundamentals of Talent – the budgeting decision

2. Acceptable inefficiencies

3. Ineffective tools and the unbearable uncertainty of the “bet”

4. The 10,000 hour rule, talent and false dichotomies

Ross

PS: Here is that study I describe in the paper, discussing sampling vs specialisation: