Understanding the “gut instinct” of expert coaches during talent identification

Abstract

Coaches are an integral part of talent identification in sport and are often used as the "gold standard" against which scientific methods of talent identification are compared. However, their decision-making during this process is not well understood. In this article, we use an ecological approach to explore talent identification in combat sports. We interviewed twenty-four expert, international-level coaches from the Olympic disciplines of boxing, judo, and taekwondo (age: 48.7 + 7.5 years; experience: 20.8 + 8.3 years). Findings indicated that when coaches identify talent they rely on "gut instinct": intuitive judgements made without conscious thought, used to direct attention to particular athletes or characteristics. Our analysis revealed four major contributors to coaches' intuition: experiential knowledge, temporal factors, seeing athletes in context, and what can be worked with. Our findings demonstrate that i) athlete selections may be influenced by the coaches' perceived ability to improve certain athletes (rather than solely on athlete ability); and ii) "instinctual" decisions are the result of years of experience, time spent with the athlete, and the context surrounding the decision. Based on these findings, we recommend that future research focuses on the duration and conditions that are required for coaches to confidently and reliably identify talented athletes.

Pilot Study on the Reliability of the Coach's Eye: Identifying Talent Throughout a 4-Day Cadet Judo Camp

“…This indicates that having a single coach evaluate multiple athletes is not an ideal scenario, as coaches are unable to form a consistent opinion of an athlete's talent that they are comfortable with. This finding supports previous research by Roberts et al (2020), who found that coaches require time to get to know athletes before forming a confident evaluation of the athlete's future sporting potential. In this study, although the coaches had 4 days in which to evaluate the athletes, it appears that the number of athletes inhibited the coaches' capacity to survey the athletes in as much detail as they would require to make confident judgments and decisions.…”

“…For group analysis, rankings were used to sort athletes into three categories to conceptualize the talent identification process (Roberts et al, 2020). Therefore, the athlete rankings are presented in three groups -High ranking (athletes ranked from 1 to 8), medium ranking (9-16) and low ranking (17-24).…”

“…This reliance on coaches within scientific investigations, along with the multifaceted and dynamic nature of talent (Vaeyens et al, 2008), indicates that coaches do, and will continue to play a significant role in the identification of sporting talent, both in the laboratory and on the field. In fact, the forecasting of future athlete performance is considered a major part of the coach's role, evaluating all aspects of an athlete (on and off the field) to forecast, or predict, who has the potential to be a high performer within a given sport (Tromp et al, 2013;Johansson and Fahlén, 2017;Roberts et al, 2020). However, the validity of coach decisions during talent identification is extremely difficult to determine due to the prognostic nature of these decisions, and the inherent deselections that occur as part of the talent identification process.…”

“…There is limited understanding of how coaches determine an athlete's talent. Recent research has found that experiential knowledge plays a significant role in coach decision-making in strength and conditioning coaching and periodization (Till et al, 2019), during competition and training (Collins and Collins, 2016;Almeida et al, 2019), in return-to-play scenarios (Dawson et al, 2017) and talent identification (Roberts et al, 2020). If experience plays a role in these decisions, then it follows that coaches may identify and/or select athletes differently based on their own experiences.…”

Storm Clouds on the Horizon: On the Emerging Need to Tighten Selection Policies

“…These timelines present challenges for coaches to gather enough information to make informed decisions about whether or not an athlete has the skills necessary (presently) and can develop within the environment the coach creates (in the future). Thus, coaches can be forced to make decisions based on snap shots of athlete performance, and in turn, may rely on gut feeling and intuition 1 (Christensen, 2009 ; Jokuschies et al, 2017 ; Musculus and Lobinger, 2018 ; Roberts et al, 2021 ). Moreover, reduced resources could mean coaches are solely responsible for these selections without the support and guidance of other coaches and/or colleagues.…”