[SFraser's Training Schedules for FM10]

What if, I started to look for youngsters who already has good physical attributes? .. then what?. I mean if i input something like, stamina + strength > 16, natural fitness > 14 .... and get some players, how would you train these? ... what is missing until 20, it shouldn't be a problem in a 10 year horizon. If physical attributes wouldn't be a problem no more, would it be easier to train technically and/or mentally?

[SFraser's Training Schedules for FM10]

I think I finally understood what SFraser has discovered . It took me 3-4 readings (although i know English quite well, it seems sometimes it's not that easy to understand).

So, if Sfraser can confirm that what I'm about to say is wright, perhaps i can try to solve this as a math problem.

So, what does the training do? :

1. A player ... plays in a match (hypothesis); if he plays ... he will receive a certain amount of CA (let's say x which for now, i set it to be real << that is, atm i don't know if x must be >0, i guess it can be, as well x=0, and perhaps it can't be x < 0>> i mean you can't get more stupid playing). The amount of CA is dependent of some factors (as i understand, it has to do with, age, morale, condition and especially with rating... you can correct me here).

2. You, now, have a certain amount x of CA.

3. Training schedules ... don't... "train" .... (in the sense of teaching), BUT .... in fact, distributes the amount X of CA ... ---- (i mean like if you know how to add, you know how to multiply; by understanding that 3*x = x+x+x; so you don't learn something new when you learn multiplying, in fact the teacher just distributes your knowledge of adding into multiplying).

4. Now, depending on age and position (and other factors, too, but with less significance) the player can "train" in certain areas, more easily.

The most "easy" area to learn, being physical attributes (in fact one can presume, that even if you don't train a young player in strength and aerobic, he will still have an increase in those attributes, just by playing in a match, and by simply ... aging; but with no training this process will be extremely slow).

Now, his age and position will have a direct effect upon the distribution of CA.

The game will "tell" the CA accumulated to go first into Age&Position specific area (like physical for youngster, mental for veterans; attacking for strikers, tactical or ball control to midfielders).

So, we can presume that if we don't train a player at all, he will accumulate CA through playing, but that CA won't go anywhere (after a certain amount, it won't accumulate at all ...perhaps? being to much). If we decide to train him, then the amount of CA will start to move!!! ... the golden question being... where?

5. If we were to know exactly what area will receive CA (and at what weight from total CA gained)... then we'd be happier.

As I understand so far, SFraser and other, made some assumptions. We can now say we know already what will receive each area depending on position and age. What we don't know in fact, unfortunately, is the weight... the exact weight.

In order to be sure, we understand each other, let's say a Youngster, age 17, Central Defender.

We know he will receive most CA in physical and in Defense (I, for one, don't know exactly what goes where... i still have to think about this), and perhaps less in attacking and set pieces (this is just an example, don't try to correct me).

Now we have a decision to take.... do we like this "natural" distribution" ... yes/no ... Depending on your answer, you now start to train the player, adding more or less intensity to specific training areas.

Another aspect here, is how inpatient we are. If we want the player to reach faster certain levels in certain areas, we start to intensify the training (as i understand SFraser doesn't like Line Theory, so for now i don't know how many notches should there be, in order to increase the speed of "increasing attributes", perhaps he will tell us again, i might have missed it in the topic... OR... there is not specific number of notches in order to do that.... the speed is dependent on certain factors too ... so one youngster of 17 might speed up faster then another).

6. Now that we know that training just distributes CA accumulated, and that age+position (+other factors too, but less important) forces this distribution too, we have to come up with a plan.

Before that, though, SFraser told us:

a) that, in order to... not lose attributes in other ares (of no interest) we have to have a balanced training schedule;

b) that if we don't balance correctly the training schedule we might have another problem (other then decreasing attributes), we may interfere with the process of distribution of CA.

What do I mean... simply: we over-train ... if we do that, we'll tell CA to go somewhere but at a grater quantity that the game would "prefer" (perhaps the maximum amount of CA that can go into some area, is dependent on other factors too... if so, I don't know which ones).

Example: if one player doesn't improve jumping after a certain number, he won't be able to improve heading too .... (pls don't correct me here either...it's just an example, i already admitted that this is just a theory)....

What is the conclusion... the conclusion is: the "game" will distribute "an" amount of CA to where we want it, and after that it won't .... it will search for other areas where we established training, he will proceed to distribute there too. This will have 2 results:

a) Over-train for nothing, we surpass the amount decided by the game, then it won't distribute anything... OR

b) The game will start to distribute the remaining CA... to god knows where (random perhaps, but i doubt it).

7. Final conclusion, the main problem that keeps us far from perfect training, is that we don't know how to balance one training. Or if we are close... there are still many readers here who don't understand that training is something very dependable of many many things... so one man's training won't work for another man's game (player, save, whatever).

So what SFraser, and PRozone (i hope) can do .... is to direct us, to guide us to think for ourselves, and for those who still ask for training schedules already-made, I say to you... you still don't get it. What I think it can come out, of Sfraser and Prozone work, will be a general setup for a general position, one may say we would train for ordinary players, not stars. For any of us, to create a star, we need to understand this distribution, we need to write down, all his attributes, to see were he already has perfect stats, to look for bad areas, to connect them with proper training areas and in the end, to tell the game were we want him to distribute the CA gained.

In the end, I would like for SFraser to read my topic, to correct what ever mistakes i made in my judgment. After I know for sure that this is all correct, i can try to solve this as a math problem, something with simplex algorithm, trying to find base, feasible and optimum solutions to certain systems. I already know that we can write down some equations: Like alfa*strenght +beta*aerobic + gamma*tactic + delta*shooting + ...... = maximum workload training; and then somehow we need to set one training as a variable T and express all other according to this T. Example if Attack = T then Ball control = 2 T ... so we can rewrite the above equation replacing training names with variable T .... i don't know |NOW| how, i'll think about it after SFraser comments.

[SFraser's Training Schedules for FM10]

After reading the whole topic twice, there are still some things that i did not accommodate easily.

I understand the 1 notch per attribute theory; and i understand that are probably hundreds of other factors that must be accounted for, when you decide to train a player.

I think that SFraser's contribution has gone to maximum here, for those who still don't understand, he can't do much more then to repeat over and over again.

Now i wait for ProZone's contribution . (HY there! ... i think your analysis tool is absolute best, it helped me a lot in understanding each players position).

I use math and statistics as a job, daily, so i always was interested in this game and all it's aspects (since CM98/99) because this is the most math-based game i ever played.

Ok... now let's get to the point:

- I wish Prozone will find time and divine answers to create another analysis tool for training... and I mean... not one that contains CB,FB,DM,CM etc ... because it's quite useless to me; i wish for one that contains a base training for: limited defender, full backs with attack mentality, deep lying forward, poacher or target man .. etc ...that is my wish for the whole year .. and perhaps we wont have to wait for Christmas to get it (what do you say ProZone?)

- i still have some doubts about the bars in the training category, i now Sfraser explained them with what it seems to be the perfect answer .. but i think he thinks logically and I'm afraid that training is still bit illogically implemented in the game; there was a guy here with the an interesting theory (put all players 2-3 months on a medium training and then adjust accordingly to the height of the bars; height bar = desire of player to train); I believe that he may be on to something but not height = preference/desire of player but more of ... will of player... reaction of player if you'd like. Something like ... i love what you train me for, and i like that i played a game last week, and i'm so happy to be a Man Utd player, so here it is... maximum height bar ... and when he is not happy = he lacks will of training, and then ... with his own mind, will "refuse" (a little bit to strong, but i hope you understand what i mean) to train in that area... so he will train less so the bar will go down.

- i believe although the game, at times, seems to be not perfect, i believe as well that there are no functions implemented in the game without a certain purpose; so I would like to open up a discussion about REST function. I have tried for 15 games now the following: game finishes/continue/go to training/sort ascending along condition/seek out those below 92%/start to give them rest days (something like for <80% 3 days; <90% 2 days; between 90-93% 1 day). But this is only a theory. I can say that probably coincidentally i performed better in my games... but at the same time I test another 3 theories so my better performance then usual might come from any of them. So in conclusion i think we overlook rest to much...

- i remember a few years ago I got into an argument with Cleon about training; Back then we needed to calculate something that i don't remember what, but i know that the vast majority of community thought that on Sundays and Saturdays players still trained, although I said they don't. So we needed to increase overload during week time, in order to compensate the 2 days off. I still believe i was right , but that's not important now... what is important... is I think REST has a very important role to play.

Let's say a player plays 2 days a week; i know for a fact that i read somewhere (i don't remember now where), that when match is finished in that particular day, player will rest (it would be nice Cleon if you can find this for sure). So because this is not a perfect perfect game... let's consider it doesn't matter the hour when the game takes place... so we can't say for sure that the players has trained in the morning... or if it did... let's say out of 7 days per week, if he plays 2 ... he will loose 2 days of training. So that leaves us with only 5 days to train. If i am not right.... then consider the opportunity to do this... let's say we .. will give them 2 days off.

Now... it is worth considering how many days we would give a player to rest (will it be related to his condition? or... random... or personal belief) ... so if we start giving them resting days, their "overall workload" will drop... not in bars or anywhere visibly... but we will know that for that particular week he doesn't train at maximum time.... HOW WOULD WE GO ABOUT THIS?

I believe that some strategies can come out of this: combos between rest days and intense training related to condition or other factor; and for those who don't play so much... no rest... intense training. I don't know exactly how... that is why i give you this for thought.

- Another problem I have. I play with Man Utd (always did, always will)... i have many players... U18, Reserve, First Team. 2 ideas here:

a) does any of you have a plan in mind for who should be in first team??.... i mean has any of you considered that we don't "milk" enough the differences between this 3 forms of organization ?... perhaps we should consider some benefits for keeping some players in reserve team although they play quite often in first team? ... OR .. the other way around... keep them in first team, and make them available for reserve team. Does any of you know for sure that one player will gain/loose something (anything) for being in first team/reserve team?.... just being in there, not necessarily playing the games as well.

b) how do you keep all players fit???? I always hated that SI doesn't implement in game some way to make you assistant or first coach, to regularly arrange friendly games ( it would be a dream to have a function to give orders that in one month all teams <<reserve, U18>> must play at least 5 games. Now... i organize "friendly leagues", because this makes one team to play 2-3 games, or create tours in some country... but it gets pretty frustrating to keep in mind to always create them, for both teams .... and when some team refuses i go crazy... and i don't know if any of you experienced the following bug: select date, chose 1-2 teams... when i go to choose third team... my selected date disappears... i can no longer select those days to keep that friendly.... F*** frustrating.... Anyways... to go back to my question, how can you make sure that every player stay fit in order for them to gain maximum from their training????

Until Prozone will grant me my wish (oh god please!!!), how would you train a Limited Defender ( i chose this because it needs only 6 attributes). He needs: marking, tackling, positioning, determination, jumping and strength. That means: 2 attributes in defending; 1 tactical, 1 aerobic, 1 strength????

Should I go with CB developing SFraser and then add up + 2 * 3(notches) defending + 1 * 5 (notches) tactical + 1 * 6 (notches) aerobic + 1 * 4 (notches strength).

I mean like this:

STR 5

AER 5

GK 0

TAC 5

BAL 2

DEF 6

ATT 2

SHO 2

SET 0

If i do this i exceed the maximum overload... so it's obviously that i have to take down something else... but what???