Talent Identification Testing

[Mrs H]

What do people think of this initiative - particularly the bit about no prior experience - do you think it could work? I'm inclined to be a bit sceptical as it seems to be targeting people who want to be in a talent development programme rather than people who want to go orienteering - if that's the motivation might there not be bigger and better funded sports to go for - or could it just be a question of sweeping up the left overs. anyway - read it and see what you think.

Talent Identification Testing
The Performance Programme will shortly be launching an exciting initiative to find the next generation of ‘World Class’ athletes who have the drive and passion to succeed in orienteering. Athletes need to be aged between 14 and 17 years old, have a background in competitive sport and want to become part of a talent development programme.
No prior experience in orienteering is required as we are looking for raw sporting talent with the capacity to develop under the guidance of British Orienteering’s Performance Director and National Talent Manager.

[MIE]

Catchy acronym

[Mrs H]

Ha ha ha

[awk]

It'll be interesting to see how they assess that talent.
It's certainly worked for other sports. Our local sporting heroine, Lizzie Armitstead, was found just this way, picked out by a British Cycling talent team at school.

[DIDSCO]

Its a good idea but why is it limited to 14-17 year olds? A sport like orienteering is an extreme sport in terms of the technical/physical skills involved, the earlier the groundwork for the future perfection of these skills is started the better. The age bracket should be much lower.

[awk]

Its a good idea but why is it limited to 14-17 year olds? A sport like orienteering is an extreme sport in terms of the technical/physical skills involved, the earlier the groundwork for the future perfection of these skills is started the better. The age bracket should be much lower.

I assume because predictive physical testing younger than that age is unreliable? (Dredging up what I've largely forgotten from coaching/teaching days).

[DIDSCO]

Awk wrote "I assume because predictive physical testing younger than that age is unreliable?"

Agree, but thats a chance you probably have to take if you want to find and develop a future world champion. However I still think you're far more likely to find and a develop a future world champion in orienteering from the kids already involved in the sport, but nothing is impossible......

[SeanC]

It might be good publicity. Presumably this will involve coaches, elite, ex-elite orienteers etc talking to those in this age group and selling the sport as a serious sport to get into (as opposed to the 'compass+ramble pastime it's not a sport' image that is around). The paragraph from Mrs H. doesn't give any details away.

[MIE]

Mrs H's extract is from the Performance newsletter at
http://www.britishorienteering.org.uk/i ... ssue_1.pdf

about 1/3 of the way down -- written by Sarah Hague. There is a further item below it relating to it.

[Duncan]

I had two thoughts on this:

Firstly I'd be interested to know where we are going to look for this pool of "talent". Those who "have a background in competitive sport" may well already be heavily engaged in another sport (e.g. cross country, athletics...) so I'd ask how are they going to be tempted over to orienteering instead (with less prize / prestige potential, worse image, people in baggy lycra / pyjamas etc.). Maybe the "and want to become part of a talent development programme" is important, i.e. there is no point us arbitrarily identifying talent for orienteering if they aren't interested in pursuing it.

Secondly, at the weekend I read the first few pages of "Bounce: The Myth of Talent and the Power of Practice" by Matthew Syed. Admittedly I only read ~30 pages (and it wasn't my book so I can't read more unless I buy it!), but it seemed to be questioning whether or not there was such a thing as *raw talent*. What is important is *practice*, and the talk of 10 years or 10,000 hours to be world class. When we think we are identifying "talent", what we are actually identifying is those who have had appropriate opportunities at a young age and have already got some practice under their belt. If that is all true, then what would seem to be far more important than identifying current "talent" levels is identifying those who are likely to go the distance and dedicate 10 years to mastering the sport (regardless of how good they are right now). Of course I have no idea how you can identify these traits in a 14-17 year old....