Multi Sport Athlete vs. Specialization

[basketballdad]

Due to increasing difficulty with scheduling and other issues wanted to check into my belief regarding the value of the multsport athlete. Did some cursory research and was reassured.

1. This is not a criticism of the single sport athlete if that is what they truly want. (personal opinion is that is rare for a youth but that is just an opinon)
2. This is not unique to soccer.
3. There was some reasearch that indicated the early exposure and specialization of an young athlete may have a small chance of increasing success in sports such as gymnastics and figure skating where elite status tends to occur much earlier.

Read about 10 articles and do not want to write much on here as I learned early about the error or doing that so here is a taste of a few different organizations and articles.

A. American Academy of Pediatrics Journal
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/119/6/1242
Fascinating topics in this journal include burnout, overtraining, the value of the multi sport athlete, weekend competitions. Fairly easy read.

B http://www.aap.org/advocacy/releases/june07injuries.htm  Short update.

C. http://www.sportsiplay.com/Soccer/Feature-Stories/Multi-Sport-Participation  Short article under soccer category that talks about multisport athlete.

D. http://www.familyresource.com/parenting/sports/problems-in-youth-sports Family Resource Site that discusses early specialization among other issues.

[ltg]

i think most parents would agree that the multi sport athlete is the best athlete. that doesn't necessarily mean playing multiple sports at the highest level as this is very hard to commit to. with that, good athletes in any sport are usually just good athletes and can take up other sports and excel at them rather quickly.  there is also the thought of jack of all trades master of none, and that is okay too.  sooner or later, not the physical training but the time commitments force kids to preference one sport over another.  there are athletes you read about that play in college in one sport but could have easily played in another they were so good.  but, many high school athletes get high school good at sports but step into the club level of that sport and they are  behind those kids that specialized.  and really kids that specialize in a sport like soccer, doesn't mean they don't play other sports, usually they play ball for fun with their friends and snowboard, play golf or tennis with their friends or even play softball on a competitive club team, but just chose to devote all their weekends and time away from home with the sport they hope to play after high school.  as adults they could easily fall into any of the sports they played in their youth as the competition is not there. my niece played div 1 softball , then transferred to div 2 and played both softball and soccer. she burned out after 3 years and only played softball her last year but now plans on playing adult club soccer and coaching softball.  she is just an all around great athlete and also ran track in high school.

[West Sider]

Bball-dad,

Thanks for sharing your research.  This is very useful.

Another key component for me is understanding my kid's motivation and the fulfillment she gets from each sport -- as DD grows older and a bit more articulate, my wife and I have begun to see that DD's relationship to soccer is very different from her relationship to basketball, which itself is different from softball and volleyball.  I expect, in the end this will determine if and when she'll specialize.

My kid loves soccer, but when pressed to describe what she loves about it, she mentions the "external" feedback: standings in leagues, success in tournaments and cups, selection for RTC / ODP / Regional, etc.  Basketball, meanwhile, shows up differently.  She brings the same intensity to the playing basketball, but it seems more self-directed -- she isn't pursuing "promotion" the way she is with soccer.

Looking back, this makes sense.  At U-11, DD started playing "up" with a premier club -- so she's with older girls she doesn't know well beyond their connection through soccer.  No wonder she's striving to "prove herself".  Her AAU basketball team is fairly intense, but it started as a CYO team made up of my kid and her classmates.  Basketball doesn't have as much structure or organization as soccer, and thus fewer distractions from the simple joy of crushing your opponents and driving them from the court in tears of playing with friends. 

I wonder if her zeal for "making it" in soccer will be fulfilling in the long-run.  I wonder if, at some point, she'll simply find more joy and pleasure in hoops.  Here's hoping she can continue to be the multi-sport athlete for a few more years -- and have enough time to sort out where her passion lies.

[basketballdad]

West Sider,

You are welcome. I completely agree with you as to the idea as they get older, more articulate, and more independent, they will begin to decide for themselves where their passion lies. I had one that almost did not play basketball two years ago. While I was disappointed I was prepared to let her pursue other things. She changed her mind by the time the season rolled around and excelled. Now she does not even think twice about it. We are in the process of taking an entire month off with nothing and they are playing soccer every day. (playing up with an older team in club in a tournament so practicing four days a week) They seem to really enjoy it and soccer is the highlight right now. Next winter and early spring it will be basketball.

Reading through the literature there are some common themes that run through much of it such as overtraining, burnout, rest and recuperation, etc. I have to remember to help my daughters follow them as they seem to be in their own best interests.

[bigb]

BBD,

I always look forward to the end of july...No Basketball for a month    DD plays for an AAU Basketball team and the Summer High School JV team and add that to Soccer and Middle school sports...The girl is a machine... I always worry about burn out, but she is the one who wants it...  So as long as she stays healthy and keeps 4.00 in school I will let her continue in multi Sports...   My big worry is when she finish High School /College will she feel something missing in her life?

[footie fan]

BigB,
The neat thing about these sports is that they can be played, by nearly everyone, beyond HS and College.  Almost every area has adult leagues, some of which are very competitive.  There is no reason she should miss out as she gets older.   Just as a side.  I have a sister that was a hoops player through college, where her teammates introduced her to golf (there is a life long sport, if we want to call it that).  Although she doesn't have the knees for hoops any longer, she still gets around the golf course.

I think the good thing about the multi-sport athlete is two fold.  Usually there are some transferrable skills between activities, and secondly, the broader base means more opportunities as you get older to participate if you miss the competition, or even if you don't.

The big problem with multi-sporters is that they may often miss an opportunity to develop highly in one sport.   But the caveat I give is that the specialization doesn't have to occur until much later.  This idea that we have U-10/11/12 playing year round, competitive and high travel, just burns people (parents and kids) out.   I believe the cream will nearly always rise to the top, regardless of club/league/coaching structure, in nearly every sport since the main ingrediant needed for success is the intent of the player.

[basketballdad]

Footie Fan,

Thanks for response. As to multi sport athlete not being able to develop highly in one sport don't tell the 1st round baseball pick in one of the articles listed who was a very good soccer player. Don't tell Michal Jordan who loved baseball also. (even though he wasn't great at it). Also Hakeem Olajawons, (NBA all star for years) first love was a a goalie in soccer. The list is endless. The idea of specializing in one sport is a relatively recent event. Go back not more than a couple of decades and you will see a difference in how many elite athletes played more than one.

[footie fan]

BBdad, I think you are talking about huge exceptions (I was thinking that Bo Jackson was about the best one).   When we speak about the top level athletes, they are usually passable in a lot of different sports.  But the truth is that technical skills are tougher to obtain the older you get, and you can't give experience in limited time.

With soccer's unique use of feet, it's tough to give touches to a 15 year old new player so that they become good with the ball.   Sure, you may help them become a defender, but they are not likely to be Messi.

This idea that overall atheleticism needs to be developed is exactly what some of the more dynamic trainers are using in the younger ages.  More speed and coordination exercises that often mimic body movement from other sports.

The days of the three sport athlete are nearly gone.  Younger players are getting better in every sport and those that specialize end up with better technical skills (which even the best athlete will have a tough time duplicating).   I think the main idea is that we need to expose our kids to a variety of events as long as we can, and then see if they choose.  If they don't, it's likely that they weren't meant to be a professional (perish the tought), or maybe they will just choose to go to the best college/university they can attend (instead of playing D-1).   

Just so we're clear.  I have a kid that does multiple sports as well.   Ultimately, we'll let her decide.  She may surprise us all and pick up some golf clubs.

[basketballdad]

Not sure that I would agree with you regarding the idea that specialization is producing more skilled players in all sports. Yes they are bigger, faster, and stronger I would agree. Most of that can be attributable to better ideas regarding nutrition, hydration, weight training, speed training, etc. As far as skill I will not concede that todays elite basketball players are more skilled. In fact, I would argue in many ways they are less skilled. Bigger, faster, yes in most cases but skill wise not agreeing with that. Can't comment on soccer as I did not watch soccer for 30 years like I have basketball.

I also disagree that the three  sport athlete is dying. I think it dropped off a cliff for a long time but think there will be a resurgence. No drop off at any B or single A school that is for sure.

[Driver]

 D1 coach told us the other day they didn't want single sport players = told the kids not to give up their other sports

[Rock27]

D1 coach told us the other day they didn't want single sport players = told the kids not to give up their other sports

I agree that they should be crosstrained so to speak, BUT when playing premier soccer how do you commit to another sport?  And if we're talking HS, what do you do if your DK isn't interested in anyother HS sport?  Is this coach talking about snowboarding, crew, mountain biking, etc. or just organized sports?

[footie fan]

BBDad,
No drop of in A or B schools because they wouldn't be able to form teams if any number of athletes dropped out.  There is a lot of pressure in these schools to have nearly every person turn out (which I think is pretty cool).

As for hoops, I think that since overall athleticism, coupled with some genetic components (height) seem to be the main requirements of the game, I would agree that gross technical skills may not have improved over the past few years.  I also don't think that hoops, or American Football, or Track and Field, have the number of single sport athletes you see in the Olympic Sports.   I believe that those children who participate in the Olympic Sports (Gymnastics, Swimming, Ice Skating, Hockey, etc.) are under more pressure to specialize early due to the more unique skills needed for most of those events. 

Some of this may also be influenced by cost.  A lot of the more "minor" sports have some expensive costs involved (Rink/Pool time, Available Gymnastic Equipment + Huge Insurance).

Please don't take this as me supporting specialization.  I don't.  However, I do believe, at least based upon my experience in soccer, that players need a lot of touches on the ball at a young age to get comfortable with the ball.  So a lesser athlete that gets more touches (when a multi-sport athlete is playing someithing else), is likely to be more comfortable and develop into a better soccer player.   But ultimately, at the highest level, you need to have a superior athlete who has developed the comfort with the ball.

Taking that all into consideration, I think that the best soccer players are going to be those that spend a lot of time with the ball at a younger age.  Soccer is likely their primary sport.  But they also become (Post-Puberty) more athletic than their peers.   In my world, I think that the specialization really can be held off until U-14/15 or so, and even then it shouldn't be done to the purposeful exclusion of other activities.   I can't see any reason a kid couldn't participate in lower levels of other sports.  But I do think it would be hard to play other HS sports.

[goldengoal]

Due to increasing difficulty with scheduling and other issues wanted to check into my belief regarding the value of the multsport athlete. Did some cursory research and was reassured.

1. This is not a criticism of the single sport athlete if that is what they truly want. (personal opinion is that is rare for a youth but that is just an opinon)
2. This is not unique to soccer.
3. There was some reasearch that indicated the early exposure and specialization of an young athlete may have a small chance of increasing success in sports such as gymnastics and figure skating where elite status tends to occur much earlier.

Read about 10 articles and do not want to write much on here as I learned early about the error or doing that so here is a taste of a few different organizations and articles.

A. American Academy of Pediatrics Journal
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/119/6/1242
Fascinating topics in this journal include burnout, overtraining, the value of the multi sport athlete, weekend competitions. Fairly easy read.

B http://www.aap.org/advocacy/releases/june07injuries.htm  Short update.

C. http://www.sportsiplay.com/Soccer/Feature-Stories/Multi-Sport-Participation  Short article under soccer category that talks about multisport athlete.

D. http://www.familyresource.com/parenting/sports/problems-in-youth-sports Family Resource Site that discusses early specialization among other issues.

I dont think it is always the specializing of a sport, but the training. I can see if in a sport the training always focuses on certain muscles or motor skills, but that is why you throw in different games and activities that encourage all muscles and other skills. I could be wrong, as I am no expert

[ltg]

really what you need to realized is what is the child's ultimate goal?  read sounderfans post today about forgoing or changing college soccer.(boys of course)  the thought is that college soccer is not conducive to becoming a pro.  and that may be true, but how many of us and our kids are really doing this to become a pro.  that subset  i will exclude from my thoughts.  a multi sport athlete is always a joy to watch and be around and will always have a choice at college to play whatever sport.  they probably won't be ucla or uw material if they have not concentrated by high school but the few exceptional athletes might.  but the multisport athlete can still be a valuable player to a div 2 or 3 school and then they can feel they had their cake and ate it too. we had a girl at our high school several years back who had 12 letters when she graduated.  yes, she was varsity in soccer,basketball and tennis every year in high school.  she did not play club soccer once high school started and i'm not sure if she kept up with club BB.  she was named all state in all sports.  but, she would not have made our B team in soccer and I can't attest to her basketball skills since i don't know.  she went to a big college and could not play on any of their teams but that is the college she wanted (BYU) so that was fine for her.  i think she could have played at a naia or div 3 school had she wanted to and probably all sports, but then when would she have time to do the other fun things that college is all about. ( no more parents)

[Driver]

Girls - top premier team national championship level, 3 varsity letters this year, all state soccer and bball, college of choice - amazing athlete great grades....fun to watch.

[EWSoccer64]

I coached a single A HS for a while.   Yes, it was a rural HS, but most single A and B schools are, and at the 1A level there is normally a serious number of players out for the popular sports.  Football, basketball, basebore, and soccer (in the right areas).   One year Connell HS (1A) had more players out for boys soccer than any but Pasco HS in the region, and at the time Pasco was one of the highest enrollment 4A schools in the state (#2? ).   I think that one must be careful with their generalities here. 

BBDad,
No drop of in A or B schools because they wouldn't be able to form teams if any number of athletes dropped out.  There is a lot of pressure in these schools to have nearly every person turn out (which I think is pretty cool).

As for hoops, I think that since overall athleticism, coupled with some genetic components (height) seem to be the main requirements of the game, I would agree that gross technical skills may not have improved over the past few years.  I also don't think that hoops, or American Football, or Track and Field, have the number of single sport athletes you see in the Olympic Sports.   I believe that those children who participate in the Olympic Sports (Gymnastics, Swimming, Ice Skating, Hockey, etc.) are under more pressure to specialize early due to the more unique skills needed for most of those events. 

Some of this may also be influenced by cost.  A lot of the more "minor" sports have some expensive costs involved (Rink/Pool time, Available Gymnastic Equipment + Huge Insurance).

Please don't take this as me supporting specialization.  I don't.  However, I do believe, at least based upon my experience in soccer, that players need a lot of touches on the ball at a young age to get comfortable with the ball.  So a lesser athlete that gets more touches (when a multi-sport athlete is playing someithing else), is likely to be more comfortable and develop into a better soccer player.   But ultimately, at the highest level, you need to have a superior athlete who has developed the comfort with the ball.

Taking that all into consideration, I think that the best soccer players are going to be those that spend a lot of time with the ball at a younger age.  Soccer is likely their primary sport.  But they also become (Post-Puberty) more athletic than their peers.   In my world, I think that the specialization really can be held off until U-14/15 or so, and even then it shouldn't be done to the purposeful exclusion of other activities.   I can't see any reason a kid couldn't participate in lower levels of other sports.  But I do think it would be hard to play other HS sports.

[tripleplay]

I recall but can’t find a quote by a European coach who said that the touch you had at 15 was the touch you ended up with. Going from that, we can conclude that the prime developmental years are ages 5-15. What you do in that period plus genes sets your upper limit as a player. If you want to be a world class player, you ought to be practicing several hours a day from the time you are 5. Read about Pele, Maradona, Messi etc. and you will find that is what they were doing.  Note that the 200 or so hours per year you spend at formal practice are almost irrelevant – there is a Ronaldinho anecdote about him honing his ball skills by playing keep away from his dogs after his friends went in for the day. This is not to say that nothing important happens after 15. First, higher level learning is still occurring and second, the genetic factors of how big and fast you become don’t fully manifest themselves until then. But basically the skills in your toolbox are set by what you do early on.

What’s the relevance to specialization?  If you really want to become the best player possible you not only have to sport specialize, you also have to life specialize. You have to make a decision to devote a big chunk of your life to the sport. That is not sensible for most people. Most people aren’t going to become pro and they are capable of playing at a much lower level and still getting a lot of enjoyment out of the sport. Most people aren’t competing against Messi. They are competing against someone pretty similar to themselves. What you need to do is determined by what circles you are in  and what your competition is doing.

[basketballdad]

Tripleplay,

I am assuming you are referring to soccer only in your post. If not let me know because I might disagree with you but for soccer I do not know enough about it to have a strong opinion on the requirements to be elite. In other sports even some of the not freakishly athletic players can mulit sport in high school and still play division 1. Size does play a major role in some sports while not so much in others. Example, show me the last time you saw a 210 pound division 1 offensive lineman regardless of strength and speed. How many division 1 posts in basketball are 6'4 regardless of skill. I listened to a division 1 basketball coach at a clinic respond to a question of why he recruited a kid with seemingly modest skills. His response was "he is 7'1 and I can't coach height but I can coach basketball.".

Size does not seem as relevant in soccer so it may not be as big a factor as in some other sports. That makes it similiar to other sports. My children have no aspirations to play professionally or even are thinking about college except as far as it related to additional schooling so we don't worry about it. Others I recognize are different and so if the player wants to specialize I think that is great.

[tripleplay]

Tripleplay,

I am assuming you are referring to soccer only in your post. If not let me know because I might disagree with you but for soccer I do not know enough about it to have a strong opinion on the requirements to be elite. In other sports even some of the not freakishly athletic players can mulit sport in high school and still play division 1. Size does play a major role in some sports while not so much in others. Example, show me the last time you saw a 210 pound division 1 offensive lineman regardless of strength and speed. How many division 1 posts in basketball are 6'4 regardless of skill. I listened to a division 1 basketball coach at a clinic respond to a question of why he recruited a kid with seemingly modest skills. His response was "he is 7'1 and I can't coach height but I can coach basketball.".

Size does not seem as relevant in soccer so it may not be as big a factor as in some other sports. That makes it similiar to other sports. My children have no aspirations to play professionally or even are thinking about college except as far as it related to additional schooling so we don't worry about it. Others I recognize are different and so if the player wants to specialize I think that is great.

Not sure I get your point. I'm not arguing against someone being a multi-sport athlete or saying that it is impossible to play more than one college sport or that there are things other than skills in all sports. I'm saying that there is pretty conclusive evidence that skill acquisition requires lots of hours starting very young. That would be relevant for soccer and  basketball (and golf too, footie fan - it's not just a cute story that Tiger Woods was playing at 3 or whatever, it's part of the reason for his success) But of course there are different levels and things besides skill in all sports too.  Now something like distance running (which isn't skill based) comes down to your genes and your last n years of training - there is no performance benefit to starting young.

[footie fan]

Tripleplay,
I think I hear what you are saying; a sport isn't a sport isn't a sport.  Some sports require more specialized technical skill development for the athlete to be successful.  Those sports tend to require more hours of preparation at younger ages.

I think we would have to agree that it is now very difficult for an athlete to participate (at a high level) in multiple sports that require a higher degree of technical skill development where the technical skills are not complementary (say soccer and softball pitcher).   But it is easier for sports that may not require as much technical skill (Track) to match up with soccer.

Sure we have kids that may choose to try multiple sports that require high technical skill attainment, but for a player to be highly successful is probably pretty rare.   The main factor, for some of this is likely size.  Consider that we still see (in HS) the american football and basketball player.   I guess a 6'5" linebacker can probably play power forward in HS and that most of the reason is likley size/speed/athleticism rather than technical skills.

Much harder for the 5' 10" male soccer player to be state ODP caliber also be hitting over .300 and pitching in baseball (yes, I know that they are in the same season).  The development of the technical skills for both would require more hours and becomes much harder.

[basketballdad]

My response to Triple Play was in reference to the 5-15 year old comment regarding soccer. I won't comment on soccer but don't necessarily agree with it in other sports. Puberty, size, speed, good coaching availability and exposure, and many other factors impact your upper level. In other sports I would not buy into the idea that by 15 your upper level is determined. I agree that the amount of practice has a direct impact on success but not necessarily limited to an age level.

[soccerpride]

Outlier... practice, practice, practice.

I recall but can’t find a quote by a European coach who said that the touch you had at 15 was the touch you ended up with. Going from that, we can conclude that the prime developmental years are ages 5-15. What you do in that period plus genes sets your upper limit as a player. If you want to be a world class player, you ought to be practicing several hours a day from the time you are 5. Read about Pele, Maradona, Messi etc. and you will find that is what they were doing.  Note that the 200 or so hours per year you spend at formal practice are almost irrelevant – there is a Ronaldinho anecdote about him honing his ball skills by playing keep away from his dogs after his friends went in for the day. This is not to say that nothing important happens after 15. First, higher level learning is still occurring and second, the genetic factors of how big and fast you become don’t fully manifest themselves until then. But basically the skills in your toolbox are set by what you do early on.

What’s the relevance to specialization?  If you really want to become the best player possible you not only have to sport specialize, you also have to life specialize. You have to make a decision to devote a big chunk of your life to the sport. That is not sensible for most people. Most people aren’t going to become pro and they are capable of playing at a much lower level and still getting a lot of enjoyment out of the sport. Most people aren’t competing against Messi. They are competing against someone pretty similar to themselves. What you need to do is determined by what circles you are in  and what your competition is doing.

[tripleplay]

My response to Triple Play was in reference to the 5-15 year old comment regarding soccer. I won't comment on soccer but don't necessarily agree with it in other sports. Puberty, size, speed, good coaching availability and exposure, and many other factors impact your upper level. In other sports I would not buy into the idea that by 15 your upper level is determined. I agree that the amount of practice has a direct impact on success but not necessarily limited to an age level.

Obviously there are sports in which success does not have much to do with skill acquisition. Don't want to get into the debate about which sports those are, but distance running is a pretty clear cut example of one. You won't get any payoff in teaching a 5 year old the "skill" of running marathons.  But I think it is typical in the skill sports that if you don't start early that you simply run out of time to get good. Think of the 10,000 hour rule - the ball park figure for the number of hours required to attain mastery of a skill or discipline.  I'd guess that the vast majority of NBA point guards started gaining their skills very early in life. I'm not saying that the ability to acquire skills completely disappears at 15 of course- after all we all learned how to drive. But I think there is a very strong case that the more difficult the skill, the more important an early start is.