Training - Discussion (At what point do attributes increase)

[andre_costa]

Sorry to be annoying Rashidi, but i saw you mention that savefiles folder(s?) before but i can't find a link on any of your other threads (there's one for tactics & pkms in another thread though)

Also, agree with the definition of Low that vril posted, at least it has been like that in my case but my training regimes might be flawed (i do have good coaches and facilities though)

[Rashidi]

Oops sorry I stand corrected...yeah yeah you guys are absolutely right...low is decreasing..I was just looking at the charts to see how i set up my training. If you can see from Seabornes training session, he's a defender but his shooting was set to a light notch.which is low but at the highest notch..where it is still maintained.

Depending on which LOW you set it, you can either get no improvements or negative. At the right setting of LOW you can get attributes to maintain. And these have been done with Seaborne's example.

[Rashidi]

As far as coaches/potential ability and all that other stuff...Seaborne has little potential to improve and is playing with a club called Gloucester which has bad facilities.

I took the worst and i think with better facilities...anything is possible

Andre I agree with vril and Buxton to a point. it depends on which low setting you use.. if you see the example of seaborne..he had low shooting training...yet his attributes did not decline..one of them actually improved.

[andre_costa]

Yeah, i guess that's probably true, i usually just put them very low because i rather use those "points" to get the other areas near high.

I found a cool thing about training for youth that i don't think that was available on 2007, if you check on the training overview screen for one of your young players, the assman now recommends who he can learn from. I find that i get less personality clashes with this. (Then again this might have been there for 2007 and i never noticed it )

[drp!]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by vril:

I think, in this point you are wrong. In my opinion this is too optimistic assumption. I think it should be smth like that:

Low: Attributes do not increase and could decrease

Medium: Attributes do not increase but there is a small chance they could increase over the long term but at a slow rate

High: Attributes increase by c.a. 1 point for a season

Intensive: Attributes increase by at least 1 point for a season and there is a chance they could increase at a faster rate. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I agree with you but I think a players Age is also an important factor.

Players older than 24 generally increase and decrease their attributes at a slower rate than younger players.

So if for example you have a training schedule with two players in it, one is 18 years old and the other is 27 years old.

Setting the "Tactics" slider to low could mean the 18 year old will decrease in this area where the 27 old will just remain on the same level. Just some basic trainig is enough for the 27 year old to remain at the same level.

So I thinks its important to think about the training level and to keep the players age in mind.

Just my thoughts

[Rashidi]

I'm now thinking of finetuning these training programmes...how important is considering age and which areas do you guys think are important?

I used to think for young players improving stamina/aerobics were a must..but like all other sports..too much too soon, and you get long term injuries.

Is everyone inclined to keep their training on medium in as far as ensuring there is a gradual increase or do you guys like to push them a bit more, and drop the other areas to accommodate this?

[isuckatfm]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I would agree with the last assumption that putting a player on Low in training results in no increase and is likely to decrease. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I tested this out on 07 where I took an attackng midfielder and set his defending/set pieces to none and increased others over an 8 month period. He was 25 and more or less at his potential and I wanted to see if I could actually reshape him.

I tracked his attributes using FM modifier as this gives a finer scale between 1 and 100 (assuming it is accurate). Basically what I found was that there appeared to be a lower limit with respect to how far an attribute could fall. His defending/set piece attributes plummeted very dramatically but the other areas whose training was increased only showed small gains in the first 3 months of the new schedule. After that the attribute values seemed to reach an equilibrium point.

What I did note was that the CA model possibly distributes points based on a player's favoured positions. I based this on the fact that there wasn't a one to one correspondence between the decreasing attributes and the increasing attributes.

That's as much as I can remember off the top of my head.

Whether or not the same thing applies in 08 I don't know. Also the player development model appears different to 07 as players seem to be gaining attributes more readily (in the non patched version anyway).

Since I do this myself anyway figured I'd post it for others to digest. This on a non patched game and this is how Doudin evolved as a player from the beginning of the game in 2007 to May 2011. He was left on the default training regime. I've included pics and CA/PA changes but since Doudin has a random PA and randomly assigned attributes this won't really be a spoiler. But for anyone that doesn't like to know these things then don't read on.

Doudin: Date CA/PA Profile

Aug 2007 110/177 http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/3692/doudin20070714gb5.jpg

Aug 2008 136/177 http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/6115/doudin20080802gn0.jpg

Aug 2009 154/177 http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/3807/doudin20090801ov5.jpg

Aug 2010 165/177 http://img246.imageshack.us/img246/3650/doudin20100814aq3.jpg

May 2011 174/177 http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/5804/doudin20110515zh3.jpg

Training Stars: Date Str/Aer/GK/Tac/BC/Def/Att/Shoot/Set Pieces

Aug 2007 2/2/7/3/3/2/3/2/2

Aug 2008 4/4/7/6/4/6/4/4/4

Aug 2009 4/4/7/4/7/7/4/4/4

Aug 2010 7/7/7/7/7/7/7/6/7

May 2011 7/7/7/7/7/7/7/6/7

Doudin Playing History

http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/285/doudincareerhistoryex8.jpg

Doudin Injury History

http://img222.imageshack.us/img222/5924/doudininjuryhistorymr2.jpg

So maybe people can compare the results of using the default schedule with their modified training schedules. Personally speaking I'd rather have a player available as often as possible than have an extra attribute point but miss a quarter of the season through injury. I guess it is just a case of finding a balance that suits you and the squad you have.

The one thing that pops out for me is that over the given time period the 'Shooting' schedule was kept at the same level. Yet the two attributes covered by those areas showed the following changes:-

Finishing: 15 to 18 +3

Composure: 12 to 17 +5

This seems strange but if you look at the key mental attributes for that position outside of the 'Shooting' schedule, decisions and anticipation, they also increased by 5 points. Maybe mental attributes require less to increase or maybe when combined with playing time a youngster with room to improve can gain substantially in mental attributes. Maybe player development is split between training and matches, and maybe the weighting assigned for mental attributes is higher for match based development?

For example: Mental Attributes = 70% Playing Time + 30% Training Time

So if a player makes no relevant appearances (maybe their age determines what level is determined relevant e.g. First Team, Reserve, U18. Maybe there is a secondary weighting applied to the match based benefit based on the level of the player and the level of the matches?) the most he can gain is 30% if his training is optimised and all other variables are held constant. To be honest the more I think about it the more complex I can imagine it is.

Even stranger was the three attributes covered by defending all changed by different amounts:-

Concentration +6

Marking +4

Tackling +2

Maybe this is evidence of the weighting of attributes relative to a position within the CA model as well as the weighting of different elements of a player's profile?

I know, more questions than answers but the number of variables involved makes it difficult to identify the optimal combination. After testing it out on 07 I came to this conclusion and decided to stick with generalisations, all of which have been mentioned by previous posters.

[FunnyBunny]

Doudin is a too easy example imo.

Its a talented player who is ment to be growing fast imo.

Fe. I got Cabral, a talented defender, for free in the beginning of the game. I didn't take care of my training but, after 2 years he already reached his PA. This is because he's talented and grows much more easily than the average player in FM imo.

It's more challenging to get a youngster with like 60-70 CA to his fullest PA (above 100) in a few years. With regular training he won't develop to his PA unless he's as gifted as a talented player (like Doudin) imo.

[eatontj]

Well, not trying to revive a dead topic but it seems as if the question of how best to develop youth training was asked throughout this one... yet never answered.

So far, I've largely ignored youth training as the intensity level must be so low that I'm not sure how much difference tinkering would make...

... that said, has anyone determined if there are benefits to increasing physical training for youths? Typically, my Assman's labeled "most promising" player is technically and mentally sound, but physically inept... I've thought it to be "unknown" whether a 15 year-old would turn into a strong/pacey player in his 20s but is it in fact something that can be trained?

I'd test this myself, but I have a very slow computer which allows for steaming through a few seasons impossible.

In previous FM games, I'd always thought the physical stats of youth players were largely set in stone and it was the mental/skill stats that were the focus of youth improvement... is it now possible to mold a reasonably athletic youth into a physical beast (possibly by sacrificing skill, if necessary)?... or no?

Thanks for the help, great topic.

[FunnyBunny]

yes physical attributes should be trained at youth.

almost all of my -17 played don't have good physical stats, but when u train it at youth or later in full training the physical stats will increase until they are bout 20 years old, then physical stats won't increase as fast as before but they still slightly will when trained.

That's my experience after 6 seasons.

[eatontj]

Well, I guess my question is is it better to emphasize physical training or skills/mental training for youth players?

Will emphasizing physical training for youths result in super fast adults?

[GAGA25]

I just want to know how to make Good Training Schedules that can develop my players well ?

[FunnyBunny]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eatontj:

Well, I guess my question is is it better to emphasize physical training or skills/mental training for youth players?

Will emphasizing physical training for youths result in super fast adults? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

no they already have to got a minimum rating of about 14 at speed

about 14 to become explosive

[eatontj]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by FunnyBunny:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by eatontj:

Well, I guess my question is is it better to emphasize physical training or skills/mental training for youth players?

Will emphasizing physical training for youths result in super fast adults? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

no they already have to got a minimum rating of about 14 at speed

about 14 to become explosive </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Okay, well that makes sense. Thank you.

[dreamsay]

I can't really understand that about Ever Banega with PA (-10) means between 170-200 and CA: 130; My Ass Man and scouts says he is close his potential. Why? My scout is good at CA:18 PA:19.

And second one: PA cover which attributes at which rate? I mean if CA is 130 which atrributes cover this 130. Or 130 just cover technical and physical attrbs?

Sorry for my english...

[Stephanie McMahon's Secret Lover]

Training is something I have NEVER paid attention too however, I seem to recall that once a player has reached his PA then he CAN'T get better in training, you can only maintain his stats.

Now my theory is that to improve a defender's stats (say) put him on crap attacking training so that his attacking stats go down then you can improve his defensive stats.

[Rashidi]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Stephanie McMahon's Secret Lover:

Training is something I have NEVER paid attention too however, I seem to recall that once a player has reached his PA then he CAN'T get better in training, you can only maintain his stats.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not entirely true...you can redistribute the points between attributes..so for example someone may have reached his theoretical cap in positioning, but you may decide you want him to be a better crosser..so your training shifts emphasis, then those "points" get redistributed.

[dreamsay]

Does someone know about which atributes total give us CA points?

[Leroy1883]

Interesting topic,

I have a question for rashidi.

When you first took over Gloucester City and were dealing with a semi-pro side how did you go about getting your players maintain attributes. As you know the time available for Part-Timers is a lot less than Full-Timers.

Any ideas?

[Ayanami80]

Does one need world class facilities and coaches in order for players to attain their PA? Or will that also happen in teams who aren't as lucky...just a lot slower?

[Rashidi]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Leroy1883:

Interesting topic,

I have a question for rashidi.

When you first took over Gloucester City and were dealing with a semi-pro side how did you go about getting your players maintain attributes. As you know the time available for Part-Timers is a lot less than Full-Timers.

Any ideas? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nonleague sides are slightly different when it comes to managing training. As far as possible you need to switch them to fulltime contracts. You may get one or two and the investment is well worth the effort of clicking through each one of them.

The challenge is the limited number of coaches, if I recall its only 3. So you need to determine where your emphasis has to be. I chose fitness/ defending and attacking.

The difference between a good non league side and a bad one is usually not going to be technical attributes (since they're all bad) but physical ones. So my focus was on general training for ALL players. Its my preferred approach.

The defenders and keepers had their own schedule. Injuries are going to be high so you can't afford to push them hard early, so having a lot of matches in preseason is good, then an emphasis on physical training. Towards the middle of the year I had their schedules all balanced enough to maintain physical performance. The goal was to ensure that they received improvements in those areas.

The same approach will work for part-timers..injuries are going to be a problem. A baker works 9-5 then comes to the pitch on weekends, you can't expect him to be on heavy training. So managing the OTL is vital. The number of fixtures is also crazy. Nonleague sides play more football matches than premiership sides, so you really need to watch the OTL

[Wayne\'o]

i would assume some attributes would effect overall chnage, but i dobt this may be the case.

take a human over all. some are born athletes, soem are strong, some has good stamina, others are fast and pacey,

when you look at stats, take the physical area, if a player has a low nateral fitness, surley this would effect his. strenght, stamina, work rate, team work etc. not for definate but a guide line.? and thers alo the agility and balance. these stats must increase with things like dribbling. to be a good dribler of the ball, you would need to be agile, have good balance, good first touch. over all good tecnical ability.

why also would a player have 20 for passing. yet not be able to be good at long shots, freekicks, penalties, shooting, your either good at striking a football or your not. In recent years Alan Shearer was great at it..

1 stat must complient another. i wouldnt want a player with 20 for dribbling. if his agility and balance was under 10. he would end up falling over, and what would end product bring, if his composure was low.?

lots of different stats but at soem point they must gel together to work properly.

Then look at a players mental stasts. if he had low determination, in all honesty. how could he end up with high work rate or high team work etc.?

then theres the tecnical side of it, if a players tecnical value was low. surly he would ever be the best at Passing, shooting, dribbling etc.

[jaspies]

wheres a training cheat when you need it?

[jaspies]

too add to above. spoils the game for me as i dont enjoy messing around with the training and i am a lightweight player.

[Cleon]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by jaspies:

too add to above. spoils the game for me as i dont enjoy messing around with the training and i am a lightweight player. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Leave it to the assistant then and let him use the general ones.

[dreamsay]

I took my time to count notches in training schedules.

First of all;

Workload has : 130 notches

Individually each training has: 25 notches

Individually each training has an impact on workload as below:

Aerobic and strenght are: 53

Setpieces is : 8

And others shooting, attacking, keeping etc are: 20

Thats mean, if you give a player just strenght full intensive training, thats impact on total workload is going to be 53/130 = %40

Each of the individual training effects (if you full as intensive) on workload:

Strenght : % 40

Aerobic : % 40

Goalkeeping : % 15

Ball control : % 15

Defending : % 15

Attacking : % 15

Shooting : % 15

Tactics : % 15

Set pieces : % 6

My Training Schedule for CentreBack

Strenght : (12 notch) Workload effect: % 19,2 (25/130)

Aerobic : (13 notch) Workload effect: % 20,7 (27/130)

Goalkeeping : 0

Ball control : (12 notch) Workload effect: % 6,9 ( 9/130)

Defending : (23 notch) Workload effect: % 14,6 (19/130)

Attacking : ( 9 notch) Workload effect: % 5 (7/130)

Shooting : (5 notch) Workload effect: % 3 (4/130)

Tactics : (15 notch) Workload effect: % 9,2 (12/130)

Set pieces : (9 notch) Workload effect: % 1,5 (2/130)

Total Workload is: (105 /130) % 80

I don’t know that works as above or not but if so, I give my centreback players less defending training than strenght and aerobic.

That’s just an approach..

Thanks

[Martyrium]

Zapata has now reached 20 in heading, defending and tackling. Could i now lower his defensive training to the first notch of medium, to just maintaim his level, and train him harder in other areas?

[dreamsay]

My approach above is just for the workload issue. And I notice that percentages dont show more train areas or less, they are just show about worloads in general.

I said: ""I don’t know that works as above or not but if so, I give my centreback players less defending training than strenght and aerobic""

Simply, this is not true... I'm working on it...

[eatontj]

Now that I'm a few seasons in, it seems that my youth training isn't producing players that are physically able to get into my first team.

I based my strength and aerobic training levels off of the default general youth training (so both strength and aerobic on the third click of medium) under the assumption that youth players physical stats would improve more based on their "newgen DNA" than on upping their physical training.

I'm not concerned about the many youth players who never stood a chance of developing, but the youth players who started out with (seemingly good) physical stats in the lower teens (physical stats over 10, pace/accel/strength at 13/14) that have made at most improvements of 1 point in their physical stats and in many cases have lost points. These are players that started age 16/17 and are now about 20.

At the same time, these players other skills have gone up typically 3, but sometimes 4/5 points. These are in categories that they are being trained at the first notch of medium.

I have have top training facilities, top coaches, and I'm emphasizing physical training over all others and I still can't raise pace/accel/strength 2 measly points over 3-4 years of training? C'mon.

As best I can figure, either I'm:

1. Unlucky getting players that have already peaked physically at the age of 16-17.

2. Not training them hard enough (should I be training them on the high end of "medium"? or even the low end of "high") and further sacrifice technical stats.

3. Going after the wrong players because physical stats don't increase and I should make sure youth have the physical stats I want before acquiring them.

Am I just unlucky? or is anyone else suffering the same problems?

Is there a solution? (Should I move my youth players to senior training earlier (before they are 18?) or should I up my training levels?)

Has anyone got a grip on training youth's physical stats?