SFraser's Training Schedules for FM10

[SFraser]

I have been using these training schedules for a little bit.

There is an issue I find.

I have a 22 year old Center Back, who is awesome for a defender, but also possesses a lot of other good skills. Not long after getting him, all these other skills have died to near nothing, the only skills which have stayed the same are the ones required by a CB.

That's not an issue with the schedules, it's an issue with CA change very likely caused by moving clubs. Large improvements or declines in attributes comes from CA going up or down, which has nothing to do with training.

I am not sure exactly what goes on when this happens, but quick improvements or quick declines in new signings are commonplace. I would guess Reputation, Adaptability, Playing Time has something to do with it, or all three. However it is not training at work, training does not have the power to produce rapid and large quantity declines in a player, especially if he is just recently signed and new to the schedule.

[RBKalle]

I'm having players getting injured every other day...

Mostly strains or pulls in reserve/U19 players. Maybe should I bring the overall workload back in the "medium" region?

Also most players are either unhappy with the heavy workload or are struggling to keep up with the training regime "despite being professional" [as my coach says about some players]

Is it normal having every schedule set on Heavy/Very Heavy?

Also, a dumb question... How am I supposed to use the "Test" schedule in order to create a custom schedule? How many "clicks" do I have to make in every category in order not to disrupt the balance of the schedule?

[Declyn]

I'm having players getting injured every other day...

Mostly strains or pulls in reserve/U19 players. Maybe should I bring the overall workload back in the "medium" region?

Also most players are either unhappy with the heavy workload or are struggling to keep up with the training regime "despite being professional" [as my coach says about some players]

Is it normal having every schedule set on Heavy/Very Heavy?

Also, a dumb question... How am I supposed to use the "Test" schedule in order to create a custom schedule? How many "clicks" do I have to make in every category in order not to disrupt the balance of the schedule?

Perhaps you should have read past the first post. The click numbers are:

STR-AER-GK-TAC-BAL-DEF-ATT-SHO-SET

3-5-0-5-4-3-2-3-5 (Outfield players)

3-6-7-6-1-0-0-0-0 (Goal Keepers)

Also, and that's for everyone: The tactics in the original posting are for the OP's tactic ONLY as different tactics require different attribute focuses. It's just an explanation of how training works in theory.

[mibsweden]

I am wondering if these training schedules would work well with Mr. Hough's latest tactic. Tug's training is working ok I guess, but the thought of using the same schedule for every player in each position does seem a little odd, not taking into account age etc.

And if it can be used, what training schedule would I use for the DM position in Hough's tactic?

[jimmyneutron]

I'll should guess the cm schedules for the 'anchorman' role.

I am wondering if these training schedules would work well with Mr. Hough's latest tactic. Tug's training is working ok I guess, but the thought of using the same schedule for every player in each position does seem a little odd, not taking into account age etc.

And if it can be used, what training schedule would I use for the DM position in Hough's tactic?

[ambi]

SFraser:

I use Riquelme as playmaker for my Wolfsburg team. He is doing brilliant but gets injured quite a lot and his physical stats suffer. Would you recommend putting him (he is 32 going on 33) on 1st choice AM or veteran AM schedule?

[SFraser]

SFraser:

I use Riquelme as playmaker for my Wolfsburg team. He is doing brilliant but gets injured quite a lot and his physical stats suffer. Would you recommend putting him (he is 32 going on 33) on 1st choice AM or veteran AM schedule?

Veteran, it is aimed at players that are losing physical attributes or are likely to lose them because of age.

[RBKalle]

Thanks for the previous reply...

However I still struggle with training injuries.

Every week or so at least one or two players got injured in training, usually it's strains [groin, calf, back etc...] causing a player to be sidelined for 3-4 weeks.

I checked, and my tram's Training Facilities are rated 15

My Fitness Coaches have Hardness 12 and 16. Out of the other nine coaches [none of them in charge of Aerobic/Strength training anyway] only two are 18 and 20.

So is it normal most of my younger players [both on U19 or Developing schedules] are picking up injuries every other day?

If I decrease the Workload to the highest Medium click, will the effectiveness of the schedules drop dramatically?

[shourov]

Well...... i believe it would help me to understand the whole thing if u could tell me how to train my following players

The following attributes are of a striker aged 17.....i want to create a huge growth on dribbling.. how do i do it... and i want to increase his motivation and i have Torres in the squad... so what learning do i choose?

And the following attributes are of a 19 year old DM .......... i want to increase his strength and marking ... so what would be the schedule for him?

guys please help me with this... i believe the end result will make me understant it better! thanx in advance!

[SFraser]

Thanks for the previous reply...

However I still struggle with training injuries.

Every week or so at least one or two players got injured in training, usually it's strains [groin, calf, back etc...] causing a player to be sidelined for 3-4 weeks.

I checked, and my tram's Training Facilities are rated 15

My Fitness Coaches have Hardness 12 and 16. Out of the other nine coaches [none of them in charge of Aerobic/Strength training anyway] only two are 18 and 20.

So is it normal most of my younger players [both on U19 or Developing schedules] are picking up injuries every other day?

If I decrease the Workload to the highest Medium click, will the effectiveness of the schedules drop dramatically?

No it is not normal to have youngsters injured every other day.

If you have applied the fix for the Strength and Aerobic counting errors I made, i.e. reduce Strength by 1 notch for every 4 notches in the schedule, and reduce Aerobic by 1 notch for every 6 in the schedule, then reducing the Overall Workload to a more acceptable level should maintain the overall balance of the schedule while reducing the likelyhood of injuries.

The best solution would be to design your own schedules based on the information and "theory" in this thread. This way you can design your own preferred balance for your players, and tweak the schedules you make according to your own needs.

I understand that designing schedules is difficult, but the simple way is to design schedules like you normally would, attempting to match and increase or decrease the categories you choose, just this time remember that the "equal" level for categories depends on the number of attributes in them, so notch 3 for Strength is equal to notch 5 for Tactics, and then pay attention to what has been explained about Physical-Technical-Mental attributes increasing at different speeds at different ages.

That's how I design my schedules, and that's how you can design your own based on what you want. If you want to train the 4 Ball Control attributes twice as fast as the 2 Attacking attributes, count how many notches Attacking is at then double it to get the number of notches for Ball Control at equal, then double it again to get twice as much training.

Obviously my method makes finding the balance in a schedule alot more difficult than any other theory, but then my method returns much more accurate changes according to what you wish to see. My method gives you control over training, at the cost of having to pay attention to individual attributes and age, and not just try to balance categories.

If you need any help designing a schedule, or a clearer explanation, let me know and I will do my best. It's a simple enough method once you understand it, but if I don't explain it well then it is a nightmare to try and understand.

[Jenko_EFC]

Been wondering SFraser, would I be right in thinking that when a player is injured he loses some CA? If so would at the end of his injury would be the perfect time for a schedule to re-distribute his attributes again if it's a significant change! Say I have a 27 year old player who has been injured for say 6 months, he is good defensively but not incredible and his physicals are still of a desired standard. Having a heavy bias towards defence could be a way to get CA in that area wouldn't it?

Or do they lose little to no CA and doing this would further decrease his physicals with the occassional defensive rise? Also, when a player breaks into a team would be the perfect time for heavy biases because he would get lots of CA coming in and a heavy bias towards attacking may increase these and are needed. Would this be a good 'plan'?

[Declyn]

Well...... i believe it would help me to understand the whole thing if u could tell me how to train my following players

Don't take my word for granted now but that's how I would set those schedules up:

Striker:

Focus of 4-3-0-4-5-0-2-5-1, in clicks that is 12-15-0-20-20-0-4-15-5

The Aerobic area already is extremely well covered beside from jumping and I guess he is player smaller than 1,85m, which qualifies him mainly for a quick poacher and counterattack striker. You should build on this by a focus of 3. However, his strength area is pretty bad so I'd choose a focus of 4 to encounter this. Less strength will give him a hard time against a strong defender and will certainly increase his risk being injured during play. However, a focus of 5 (or 15 clicks) increase his workload dramatically and also there's a higher risk of injuring while lifting weights in training. Also, his Stamina needs to be improved muchly, the strong focus on Strength reflects that.

Focus 4 on Tactics means early building on mental stats like Off The Ball which is essential for a striker like this. It also builds up Anticipation, again essential for a poacher to know beforehand where rebounds will go, and how opponents will react. Decisions will help to exploit this.

Ball Control - well, that's your desire, isn't it. Dribbling and Technique will make his game so much more beautiful and spectacular, and First Touch is an important stat to any player. With Shooting this area gains the highest focus to shape the player early to your needs.

Attacking and Set Pieces just get some attention since the player will need knowledge of Passing and Crossing, as well as the odd penalty. But please be advised, the highest gain for the player will certainly be match practice, so try and play him as often as possible.

I assume, after one season and about 20 games on his hand he will have a Strength around 8, Dribbling at 11 or 12, and Finishing at 16. For an 18year-old, that is a solid base to work on, and you'll be able to drop Shooting training by 1 Unit (3clicks) and distribute those points to where you see them fit.

Oh, and Torres is an excellent tutor, hope it works well. With 18(?) Determination you'll see some good performances of this young lad coming.

I think you should now present us the schedule for your DM based on what you just read regarding focus and thinking what suits best.

[shourov]

thanx Declyn

as u can see that he already started 11 matches before January............... and his current schedule is

focus : 3-2-0-1-6-0-2-3-1 >>>>>> 9-10-0-5-24-0-4-9-5 this is a youth schedule. i want to increase his dribbling to 16/17... coz with his pace, agility and balance this attribute will will make him a fierce runner with the ball and yes u r right, i want him to be fast striker.

is this schedule ok for what i want to acheive.... is it possible to increase dribbling skill from 8 to 16(double!) ?

whenever he signs a full time contract i will change his training schedule. i had torres as the ideal role to follow!(determination increased from 8 to 11)

and my DM is on this schedule...... he already played 8 matches ( 5 starts)...

[SFraser]

Been wondering SFraser, would I be right in thinking that when a player is injured he loses some CA?

Pretty much. When he is injured his Match Experience starts to drop which will eventually lead to drops in CA. The same thing happens with players who go on holiday at the end of the season, just before they come back for Pre-Season they start dropping in CA because their Match Experience is too low.

If so would at the end of his injury would be the perfect time for a schedule to re-distribute his attributes again if it's a significant change! Say I have a 27 year old player who has been injured for say 6 months, he is good defensively but not incredible and his physicals are still of a desired standard. Having a heavy bias towards defence could be a way to get CA in that area wouldn't it?

Or do they lose little to no CA and doing this would further decrease his physicals with the occassional defensive rise? Also, when a player breaks into a team would be the perfect time for heavy biases because he would get lots of CA coming in and a heavy bias towards attacking may increase these and are needed. Would this be a good 'plan'?

Not so much the "end of his injury" but more when he starts to gain CA. If the player is injured for six months then you know he will lose some CA and hopefully then get it back after he gets back to peak form. Once a player gets back into "light training" he will still be losing some CA, but will soon be returning to match experience (hopefully) and will soon improve back to his previous CA levels (hopefully), so "player in light training after injury" is basically an indicator that it is now time for you to manage his recovery through training.

You can use injuries this way in theory, but what tends to happen is that it is very difficult to control, the player doesn't actually train for a long time, and his Physical Attributes have the greatest risk of declining while also being incredibly hard to improve once he is fit. So in theory yes, you could do what you say but in practice you tend to always worry about Physical Attribute declines and so apply this method to his Physical Attributes. Remember that the older a player gets, the harder it is to improve or maintain physical attributes and eventually it becomes impossible to prevent them declining. Physical Attributes are a big deal for serious longterm playstyles.

[Declyn]

thanx Declyn

as u can see that he already started 11 matches before January............... and his current schedule is

focus : 3-2-0-1-6-0-2-3-1 >>>>>> 9-10-0-5-24-0-4-9-5 this is a youth schedule. i want to increase his dribbling to 16/17... coz with his pace, agility and balance this attribute will will make him a fierce runner with the ball and yes u r right, i want him to be fast striker.

is this schedule ok for what i want to acheive.... is it possible to increase dribbling skill from 8 to 16(double!) ?

whenever he signs a full time contract i will change his training schedule. i had torres as the ideal role to follow!(determination increased from 8 to 11)

Don't worry about dribbling that much yet, rather focus on physical stats first as those are the stats that really matter long-term. I would never ever let someone break into my first team side under a stamina of 15 if playing one of the 4 big leagues (La Liga, Seria A, Bundesliga and Premier League). Get him to Stamina 15 and Strength minimum 10, then switch over to a high BAL training focus.

Oh btw, the 3 options for tutoring only correspond to age and reputation. If you have 22yo first-teamer whom you'd want to learn from a star at your side, you'd probably choose "Learn from" instead.

and my DM is on this schedule...... he already played 8 matches ( 5 starts)...

Having Strength training that high is very brave of you, Mr Slavedriver. It bears a substantial amount of risk of long term injuries. The focus might be right in theory but remember young players train physical stats better anyways so I'd suggest lowering STR by 6 clicks to a focus of 6 and raise TAC and BAL by 5 and 4 clicks respectively, bringing them to a focus of 3 which is effectively lower due to mental stats being trained at a slower rate anyways. If the player isn't under 23 anymore forget everything I've said now, but by that age the player should have the required physical stats anyway or should be sold instead.

[Wuja]

SFraser, is it possible for you to put fixed schedules ( including new goalkeaper training) in opening post with small walkthrough how to edit them to get improvements in certain areas ?

I will be very grateful, thank you in advance.

[polskaGOLA]

Hi, I haven't been on this thread for some time, and I don't want to read through the last 3-4 pages, so is there any important updates I should know about to alter my tactics for the better?

Just completed the season with the modified (working) tactics from the OP(which btw, has been excellent, my players have really improved), that have been fixed at around page 4 or 5. Basically, I am wondering if there was any updates since then, what those updates are, and how I am going to modify my tactics to them?

[mp84]

Well,

Must say, it took almost a week and half, to almost 2 weeks, re-reading several posts, but with the help of ProZone's and Doc Sanders excellent excel sheet, I think I finally understand the whole aspect.

I plan to make my first true test on Jack Rodwell, I pretty much would like to mold him into an amazing Attacking MC, however in a 4-4-2 setup, so the basic question I have, is how Heavy Can I go with the training based on naturally the required attributes per tick.

For example, I noticed, when looking at the excel sheet, that all of SFraser's base have a workload of around 110, so is that ideal target I want to shoot for? Or am I allowed to go over that?

Or, Should I go under that because Rodwell is also going to be a significant First Team player in my 2nd season with Manchester United.

In case anyone is curious, this was the idea I was leaning towards in terms of Focus:

STR - 4

AER - 4

GK - 0

TAC - 4

BAL - 3

DEF - 2

ATT - 5

SHO - 3

SET - 0

Which would put him at an overall workload of 115, still 15 points below the limit, but again I'm worried if this would be too intensive for him in the end, even though he's only 19.

Anyway, hope I was clear enough, and hopefully any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

[shourov]

Don't worry about dribbling that much yet, rather focus on physical stats first as those are the stats that really matter long-term. I would never ever let someone break into my first team side under a stamina of 15 if playing one of the 4 big leagues (La Liga, Seria A, Bundesliga and Premier League). Get him to Stamina 15 and Strength minimum 10, then switch over to a high BAL training focus.

Having Strength training that high is very brave of you, Mr Slavedriver. It bears a substantial amount of risk of long term injuries. The focus might be right in theory but remember young players train physical stats better anyways so I'd suggest lowering STR by 6 clicks to a focus of 6 and raise TAC and BAL by 5 and 4 clicks respectively, bringing them to a focus of 3 which is effectively lower due to mental stats being trained at a slower rate anyways. If the player isn't under 23 anymore forget everything I've said now, but by that age the player should have the required physical stats anyway or should be sold instead.

thanx declyn and points noted. should submit the result at the end of the season.

about tutoring.......... what to do when i want my player to learn only the mental attributes from other senior player(determination,professionalism)

[polskaGOLA]

So I dicovered the Excel document made by Prozone. That is what I missed. Also, I heard there was some discoveries about GK training schedules. What is that all about?

Anyway, Here is an example of one season of SFraser Training:

[SFraser]

the basic question I have, is how Heavy Can I go with the training based on naturally the required attributes per tick.

For example, I noticed, when looking at the excel sheet, that all of SFraser's base have a workload of around 110, so is that ideal target I want to shoot for? Or am I allowed to go over that?

Or, Should I go under that because Rodwell is also going to be a significant First Team player in my 2nd season with Manchester United.

The 110 workload was no cleverly crafted or figured out "maximum" but just a level of workload that "looked right" to me.

The only downside of exceeding this level would be reduced condition recovery, perhaps a small negative morale penalty for the player, and perhaps an increased risk of injury.

I do not think that the workload has "theoretical maximums" or "best positions" or any other over complex positions, simply risk versus reward. More training equals more attribute movement equals faster changes according to your wishes, balanced by increased condition+morale penalties and potentially increased risk of injury.

Speaking personally, I tend to train youngsters quite hard in comparison to genuine First Team regulars or my veteran players. There are many reasons for this but the more important reasons are that injuries are far less of a concern in terms of immediate impact to the squad or longterm impact of lost CA while youngsters will benefit from every additional point of CA squeezed out of a heavy schedule, and because younger players even if first team quality in terms of attributes tend to be temperamental and have under-developed personalities that can still be mentored, meaning you don't want them becoming too important status wise and meaning you might find yourself having to rest, drop or discipline them.

If this doesn't apply to Rodwell, i.e. he is a key First Team player in all contexts, then you must balance the schedule according to condition recovery versus schedule intensity/rate of change versus risk of injury. Injuries will still not be a longterm problem like they would for a 30 year old player, but they will disrupt your first team, as will intense training that reduces condition recovery between games.

There is an alternative method to dealing with condition loss in players, and which method you choose will affect the players longterm career.

The alternative method is to invest training time and intensity into improving the players Stamina. Improved Stamina means the player will lose less condition during matches, meaning he will have to recover less between games, and will be able to play more often. This will become very important as the player ages and begins to reach the end stage of his career. His physical attributes will begin to decline, migrating into his Mental attributes, and how you develop a player when he is young will define how quickly his physical attributes each unplayable levels that cannot maintain his CA and how quickly his mental attributes will improve and reach maximum quality levels.

Investing in Stamina will extend a players career at the cost of a longer period of time where he deficient at the mental aspect of the game, and perhaps an overall career with slightly reduced mental levels untill right before his final seasons. He will still eventually reach the same period of declining physical and identical quality levels of mental stats, it will just happen at a later time because you invested so much in his Stamina, which will take up CA as well as prolong his career.

There are no set rules to how you choose to develop and train players, no "right" or "wrong" way. There are only options that you might not be aware of, but can play a significant role over longer periods of time. It is ultimately up to you what you want to do with the player.

[Declyn]

about tutoring.......... what to do when i want my player to learn only the mental attributes from other senior player(determination,professionalism)

All 3 options have the chance to adjust the scholar's attributes to the same levels as the tutor's. The difference seems just to be in a relationship with Player Reputation difference as well as Age of the scholar. With any tutoring the following stats are adjusted:

Determination

Professionalism

Sportmanship

Temperament

Controversy

Adaptability

Ambition

Loyalty

Pressure

...and of course the Player Preferred Movements (PPM). Beware that every additional PPM to learn has a lower chance than the previous one, and despite only 4 are displayed you can actually learn more of them. There's also a chance to forget about those PPM's which I believe comes from lacking match practice.

[polskaGOLA]

Isn't Bravery influenced by tutoring? Or is that false information?

[SFraser]

So I dicovered the Excel document made by Prozone. That is what I missed. Also, I heard there was some discoveries about GK training schedules. What is that all about?

For Goalkeepers I miscounted Strength by 1 attribute which had a pretty big overall effect on their attribute changes, with lots of big, buff tanks being produced. So I redesigned the schedule and you will find it in the following link:

http://www.mediafire.com/?njltnzt14jm

Anyway, Here is an example of one season of SFraser Training:

That's some really sweet distribution. Maybe a tad too much in Set Peices/Shooting but that could be down to you retraining him for a more advanced position. Or indeed down to your own preferences for attribute change.

Did you custom design the schedule based on my method or did you use one of my pre-designed schedules?

Isn't Bravery influenced by tutoring? Or is that false information?

It is the same "type" of attribute as those that change through tutoring, but apparently it doesn't change very much.

[polskaGOLA]

My old schedules were the OP's with the changes at around page 4 or 5, about the "discovery" that there was too much emphasis on Strength and Aerobic, and adjusted my schedules to what someone said.

I did notice the trend with all my defenders, that they increased a bit in Off The Ball, Finishing, which are offensive attributes. It wasn't my preferences. Although, I did train his position to get accomplished at DM. (It started at competent, so I thought "What the hell" )

Bravery doesn't change very much during a players career is true, but it is still influenced by tutoring. (I think)

EDIT: What is that GK schedule for? Developing/1st Choice/Veteran/Youth?

[SFraser]

I did notice the trend with all my defenders, that they increased a bit in Off The Ball, Finishing, which are offensive attributes. It wasn't my preferences.

It is not mine either. The problem is that you cannot seperate Positioning from Off the Ball when training, they are the same type of attribute in the same category and pretty much increase or decrease at the same rate no matter what you do.

Likewise you cannot seperate Finishing from Composure, although these are different types of attribute and this difference can be exploited.

We all have to work under SI's division of attributes into specific Categories. There could be some changes, like moving Positioning and Off The Ball into the Defending/Attacking Categories for greater and more logical control, but I do not know their reasoning and thinking so cannot accurately say whether it is an error or some deeply thought out issue of balance.

Personally, I would be inclined to question those two specific attributes. Everything else looks sensible and sound, but those two specific attributes do not seem to be distinct in Training when they are quite clearly distinct in gameplay. Moving Positioning and Off The Ball into the Defending or Attacking Categories not only seems to me to be very sensible in terms of gameplay effect and current training effect, but also in terms of making the categories themselves more balanced in terms of numbers of attributes and therefore making the whole Training issue far more easy to control and utilise without having to come to a thread like this for an indepth explanation of the fundamental mechanics.

If Positioning and Off the Ball were moved you would suddenly have a more logical distribution of attributes in terms of control, but you would also have a whole bunch of Categories now having 3 or 4 attributes each making the basic balance of each slider almost identical. You would no longer have to count the attributes in Tactics, Ball Control, Defending, Attacking and Shooting because they would all now have either 3 or 4 attributes making them almost identical.

This seems to me like something that would radically improve training, and I might try and bring this idea to the attention of SI if I can.

EDIT: What is that GK schedule for? Developing/1st Choice/Veteran/Youth?

It should actually replace all those schedules, it is much superior to all three.

However the Developing schedule that currently exists WILL boost physical attributes more, while the Veteran schedule SHOULD boost mental more. However all things considered this single goalkeeping schedule should be superior for almost all goalkeeping players no matter their age or attribute levels, barring any brutally obvious and huge deficiencies in Physical or Mental attributes.

Goalkeepers are tricky like this. They are an incredibly awkward set of players to develop and train and this single schedule that is slightly better should make a huge difference to all Goalkeepers.

Let me know how you get on.

[mibsweden]

This GK schedule is not the same then as in the spreadsheet?

[mp84]

ok thanks for the insights SFraser, I'll go ahead and lower his training a tad bit because he is going to be an important first team player for this season, and it's a risk I'd rather not take.

Although, I noticed that these heavy developing schedules, while I am modify some to my liking, it's perhaps not best to start them right away when they come back from Vacation for the start of the pre-season.

As I already had 2 DBs (Nobody really important for the first team though) get injured already. So I figured that I would lessen the loads of all players for the pre-season, then ramp it up once the season starts for all systems, so out of curiosity, do a lot of people do that?

Meaning, have a lighter schedule for the pre-season, then put them in their normal developing schedule you want when the season starts?

thanks everyone,

[LiMiT]

@SFraser I'm yet to use the schedules but the results look really promising. However, a few posts ago, when you explained the modifications for the schedules in the OP(-1 notch in STR and AER), you said nothing about flair and Ball Controll training. As far as i know flair can not gained through training, so it should be discounted from BC, thus leaving only technique, dribbling, first touch and heading. Did i miss something or you just forgot to mention this?

[ProZone]

This GK schedule is not the same then as in the spreadsheet?

Correct, it is not.

[Jay007]

I have made my own schedule for one of my young strikers. He plays every 1st team game and is the leagues top scorer. How long does it generally take before im likely to see an improvement if i have set up the schedule correctly? Or see his stats decline if i have set it up incorrectly? He's been on the same schedule for nearly 3 months and i have only seen one stat go up.

[jim morrow]

I have made my own schedule for one of my young strikers. He plays every 1st team game and is the leagues top scorer. How long does it generally take before im likely to see an improvement if i have set up the schedule correctly? Or see his stats decline if i have set it up incorrectly? He's been on the same schedule for nearly 3 months and i have only seen one stat go up.

Check his workrate, determination and if you can, find his professionalism attribute.

[Abaddon879]

Does anyone know if any part-time schedules have been created from this discussion of focus etc? If not I shall make an attempt at creating some basic category ones and make them available.

[Jenko_EFC]

I'm working on (almost completed), training by roles. I looked at the attribute's suggested by the TC, noted them down in notepad. Then designed schedules based on those and the position they play in.

Obviously I have made developing, 1st Team and veteran ones but I found it would either be too time consuming to do for eg; inside forward developing AMC then another AML because they're the same role and likewise for Trequartista and made one schedule for trequartista's. So I have for eg; Complete Forward Developing, Complete Forward 1st Team, Complete Forward Veteran etc so no duties either unfortunately. If anyone would like me to release them after further testing I'd be happy to if it's okay with SFraser.

[SFraser]

I'm working on (almost completed), training by roles. I looked at the attribute's suggested by the TC, noted them down in notepad. Then designed schedules based on those and the position they play in.

Obviously I have made developing, 1st Team and veteran ones but I found it would either be too time consuming to do for eg; inside forward developing AMC then another AML because they're the same role and likewise for Trequartista and made one schedule for trequartista's. So I have for eg; Complete Forward Developing, Complete Forward 1st Team, Complete Forward Veteran etc so no duties either unfortunately. If anyone would like me to release them after further testing I'd be happy to if it's okay with SFraser.

Sure go for it. Do try and test them before you release them though.

You could release them in this thread but they might get swallowed up by some of the discussion. I would make a post here, and maybe make your own thread explaining what they do and I will put a link to it in my OP.

[Jenko_EFC]

Erm, I was going to post them here because they're obviously based on your theory and would be kind of a spin-off version which I doubt would go very well as the popularity of this thread! Be really kind of you to put it in your OP though! I will test them alot though, I wouldn't release anything without knowing for sure how well they work though. Seem to do well though!

Quick question, I've made most of them and given the developing ones less physicals (still quite high depending on role of course), the 1st team in the middle ratio and veteran heavy. I've done the contrary for tactics though with developing getting the majority of them in the thinking developing players would gain little tactics so training intensively here would give a bit more increase whilst veterans would need more training in areobics and strength to build their physicals whilst developing players wouldn't need much training here to increase their attributes. Is that the correct way of thinking? I presume so in theory but would like your opinion before I go further. Thanks.

[SFraser]

Erm, I was going to post them here because they're obviously based on your theory and would be kind of a spin-off version which I doubt would go very well as the popularity of this thread! Be really kind of you to put it in your OP though! I will test them alot though, I wouldn't release anything without knowing for sure how well they work though. Seem to do well though!

Quick question, I've made most of them and given the developing ones less physicals (still quite high depending on role of course), the 1st team in the middle ratio and veteran heavy. I've done the contrary for tactics though with developing getting the majority of them in the thinking developing players would gain little tactics so training intensively here would give a bit more increase whilst veterans would need more training in areobics and strength to build their physicals whilst developing players wouldn't need much training here to increase their attributes. Is that the correct way of thinking? I presume so in theory but would like your opinion before I go further. Thanks.

It makes sense.

I tended towards the opposite view, lots of Physical early and Mental later, but that is just a personal opinion for the actual effect of the schedule. If the schedules you design take the opposite view to the ones I designed, then that's all the better for everyone who might have different needs, wishes and opinions themselves.

I totally understand the thinking behind it, and it is sound. If you train Mental earlier and I train Physical earlier, then someone wanting to boost a youngsters Mental can use your schedules. More options, more choices, better training for everyone.

Just make sure you explain the thinking behind each schedule. I forgot to do that in my OP and it confused alot of issues. The better the explanation behind the schedules the easier it is to find the right one, and tweak it slightly to suit your particular tastes.

I'm totally in favour of other people designing schedules based on this method. Saves me a lot of work for a start and might throw up some ideas and schedules I can use aswell.

[Jenko_EFC]

It makes sense.

I tended towards the opposite view, lots of Physical early and Mental later, but that is just a personal opinion for the actual effect of the schedule. If the schedules you design take the opposite view to the ones I designed, then that's all the better for everyone who might have different needs, wishes and opinions themselves.

I totally understand the thinking behind it, and it is sound. If you train Mental earlier and I train Physical earlier, then someone wanting to boost a youngsters Mental can use your schedules. More options, more choices, better training for everyone.

Just make sure you explain the thinking behind each schedule. I forgot to do that in my OP and it confused alot of issues. The better the explanation behind the schedules the easier it is to find the right one, and tweak it slightly to suit your particular tastes.

I'm totally in favour of other people designing schedules based on this method. Saves me a lot of work for a start and might throw up some ideas and schedules I can use aswell.

The opposite could work too I guess but I figured mentals would be the hardest to train whilst young so train intensvely there whilst physicals wouldn't take much training to increase so trained slightly lighter there.

Will definitely explain them in detail though. I was slightly confused at yours I must admit, but the very small amount of letters allowed made it quite dfficult I suppose!

[Sheffield Sunday]

Just a thought. Not read the whole thread but, if you had a Fitness Coach with high physiotherapy stat, would that lead to less injuries? I know in theroy it must do, but have not seen any evidence.

[John_Cro]

@ SFraser - the greatest mind for FM

Can you please tell me how much workload do you think is optimum for young developing players that are first team regulars and how much for those that aren't first team regulars?

Is it like 110 and 120 ratio or something like that?

Thank you, wise man

[donpost]

Been reading this thread for a couple of days now. It's really opened my eyes to training. Thanks to Sfraser and all others who have contributed.

I have some questions/thoughts on the application of these theories. I want to apply these training theories to younger players who I am developing. The first thing to consider is the way that different attribute types are easier to train at different points in a player's career. From what I've thread so far in this thread, I think this effect can be simplified and shown by this rather shoddy graph:

So we can see that for young players, it's easier to train physical stats. As the player gets older, these physical attributes get harder and harder to train, so best to train these attributes while the player is still young right?

My thinking therefore is that for a young player, I would like to have schedules that focus purely on physical stats, so lots of Aerobic and Strength training. I would have a schedule that has maximum Aerobic and Strength focus, with little or no training in other areas. I plan to have the young player train on this schedule, and only reduce Aer/Str training or increase other areas if I notice drops in non-physical attributes or too many injuries.

So I have my young player on this physically heavy schedule, hopefully seeing significant improvements in his physical attributes. I'm not really bothered too much about player condition as he is young a not a first teamer. He only has to get enough playing time to keep him at 100% Match fitness so his CA goes up at a decent rate. The next question is, when do I switch focus away from the physical stats? As far as I can see this would be determined by a few factors:

• When the physical attributes reach levels which you consider high enough for the league you are in/system you play
  
• How much ability is left (ie the difference between CA and PA). If you leave a player on physically intensive training until he reaches his CA, then you won't have any ability left for his mental/technical attributes and will have to rely on reshaping.
  
• Age - the older the player is the harder it will be to train physical attributes, and it might be time to refocus.
  
• How good his mental/technical attributes are - If they need a lot of training, you better get started on the sooner. If they are already in place, stick with physical for longer.
  

I haven't thought much about the middle/late period of a player's career yet. When I get a chance later, I'll try putting these ideas into practice on a player I have who is dubbed "the next Gary Neville", and report back.

[Jenko_EFC]

<Long Post>

That is what SFraser makes his based on however, I find the contrary to work well but I am still testing at the moment. I figured if mentals are hard to train whilst they're young and physicals when they're older, for a young player having lots of mentals and not so much physical training, the player still gets lots of increases in his physicals naturally but also develop their mentals more which provides the best of both worlds. This has yet to be fully tested though.

[DeadZone]

That is what SFraser makes his based on however, I find the contrary to work well but I am still testing at the moment. I figured if mentals are hard to train whilst they're young and physicals when they're older, for a young player having lots of mentals and not so much physical training, the player still gets lots of increases in his physicals naturally but also develop their mentals more which provides the best of both worlds. This has yet to be fully tested though.

To be honest, this line of thinking makes sense in theory, just a case of whether it works in practise

Might alter my training to go along these lines as well at some point

[Jenko_EFC]

To be honest, this line of thinking makes sense in theory, just a case of whether it works in practise

Might alter my training to go along these lines as well at some point

Just an idea I had because my young players were turning into Usain Bolt's with lots of physicals and becoming thick, I've tried with multiple teams in the EPL and am awaiting the results.

[donpost]

That is what SFraser makes his based on however, I find the contrary to work well but I am still testing at the moment. I figured if mentals are hard to train whilst they're young and physicals when they're older, for a young player having lots of mentals and not so much physical training, the player still gets lots of increases in his physicals naturally but also develop their mentals more which provides the best of both worlds. This has yet to be fully tested though.

It seems like you approach compensates for the different levels of difficulty in training physical/mental/technical, whereas the way that Sfraser (and what I posted) approach it is to exploit these differences. I think your approach would result in a player that develops in a balanced way across all of his important attributes, whereas the exploiting technique would lead to swift increases in physical, then technical, then mental attirbutes in turn. Which is best? I guess it would be better to have balanced growth, but the key would be finding the correct balance of training which could be difficult.

I think we need a way of evaluating schedules. I mean, what is a succesful schedule? What makes one schedule better than another? How do we test this?

From what I understand, the function of a training schedule is to affect the distribution of attributes. So I suppose the way to test the effectiveness of a schedule is to look at the attribute distribution of a player after spending a while on the schedule, or if specifically talking about training youngsters, the distribution of their attributes when they reach PA.

For example, imagine you have two schedules, A + B. You take a young defender and leave him on schedule A until he reaches his PA. Then you restart and leave the same guy on schedule B until he reaches his PA. Say schedule A left the player with 12 for every attribute, and schedule B left the player with 20's in tackling, strength, and other defender attributes, and say 6's in everything else. You would say B is the better schedule as the player's attribute distribution better matches the requirements of a defender.

[Jenko_EFC]

It seems like you approach compensates for the different levels of difficulty in training physical/mental/technical, whereas the way that Sfraser (and what I posted) approach it is to exploit these differences. I think your approach would result in a player that develops in a balanced way across all of his important attributes, whereas the exploiting technique would lead to swift increases in physical, then technical, then mental attirbutes in turn. Which is best? I guess it would be better to have balanced growth, but the key would be finding the correct balance of training which could be difficult.

That's the general idea, to compensate the attributes lost, or not have them lost in the first place .

I think we need a way of evaluating schedules. I mean, what is a succesful schedule? What makes one schedule better than another? How do we test this?

I'd go to the player's training tab, click on attributes and see the rises and falls, then I'd evaluate them and see if there are too many rises/falls in a specific category. That's how I'm currently evaluating mine when I get to January.

To actually say who's is the best is a matter of opinion, give the others options, do they want a schedule that is focused on keeping a nice balance with clever, not as quick players or one that gets fast players who are quite thick but when they're older will lose their pace and have more mentals. I'd prefer the former, I assume you'd prefer the latter. All different opinions.

For example, imagine you have two schedules, A + B. You take a young defender and leave him on schedule A until he reaches his PA. Then you restart and leave the same guy on schedule B until he reaches his PA. Say schedule A left the player with 12 for every attribute, and schedule B left the player with 20's in tackling, strength, and other defender attributes, and say 6's in everything else. You would say B is the better schedule as the player's attribute distribution better matches the requirements of a defender.

Not really what I am aiming for though. I am focusing on small physicals but not abandoning completely as that'd be quite stupid!

As a little taster of my schedules, here's Jack Rodwell, age 18 for Everton on my deep-lying playmaker developing schedule.

http://i47.tinypic.com/2ecfe4n.jpg

His strength. His strength has rose despite his lack of strength training. This is because of his age, his physicals will improve if given a slight bit of training regardless.

http://i45.tinypic.com/vzh5r5.jpg

His aerobic attributes. He improved agility, balance and jumping. Not bad for someone with a focus of 2 for aerobic eh!

http://i46.tinypic.com/14c4j5t.jpg

Improved positioning, off the ball and decisions. Again, if not for him being 18 he would have improved much more however, with less tactics training he'd have stayed the same but now he has sligtly better decisions which means as a key playmaker he'll pick decent passes. He really needs more off the ball as he had 8 but now has 9 but he still needs more if he is to pop up everywhere offering an easy pass. His positioning was also important because I play him DC and DMC.

http://i46.tinypic.com/1h2fl4.jpg

His ball control attributes. Improved technique, heading, first touch and dribbling, all trainable attributes in that category. He now boasts 15 for technique, first touch and heading which means at the back he'll win headers, not give the ball away with his first touch and be able to strike the ball very cleanly.

http://i49.tinypic.com/2ms3cc4.jpg

His defensive attributes. Not much to see here but an increase in concentration will prove useful.

http://i49.tinypic.com/1zz42t1.jpg

His attacking attributes. Boasting 15 for passing and 13 for creativity is brilliant! Imroved both.

http://i46.tinypic.com/2lvcug4.jpg

His shooting attributes. Improved finishing and long shots. Again, nice increases, was hoping for composure though.

http://i49.tinypic.com/hv54ld.jpg

Nice. Increases in penalty-taking, crossing, free-kick taking and corners! Not needed but quite useful.

Some great distribution I thought, set-pieces weren't needed but should be helpful. Unlucky about not getting composure any higher but 14 is still brilliant for him. Looks world class for a 18 year old anyway!

[SFraser]

The schedules you use/design are going to depend on the players needs or your wishes for the outcome. The key point being that to improve the Mental attributes in youngsters you need to compensate for their natural tendency not to improve. If a player is "Usain Bolt" in physical attributes but lacks even reasonable mental attributes, then you want to focus on them but it will require more intensive Tactics training that if you were training physical attributes, or training mental attributes in an older player.

What is important is being aware of the natural trends in players when you come to decide on the schedule you want.

His shooting attributes. Improved finishing and long shots. Again, nice increases, was hoping for composure though.

Some great distribution I thought, set-pieces weren't needed but should be helpful. Unlucky about not getting composure any higher but 14 is still brilliant for him. Looks world class for a 18 year old anyway!

That's the very thing right there. Because Finishing and Longshots are technical attributes while Composure is mental, those two attributes will always increase faster than composure in an 18 year old because they are in the same category. You can improve composure, but at his age finishing and longshots are likely to rocket up much faster.

You can't get past the age related natural increases in categories with multiple different types of attributes, but where you have categories of all one type then you can favour them and boost them more.

[Jenko_EFC]

That's the very thing right there. Because Finishing and Longshots are technical attributes while Composure is mental, those two attributes will always increase faster than composure in an 18 year old because they are in the same category. You can improve composure, but at his age finishing and longshots are likely to rocket up much faster.

You can't get past the age related natural increases in categories with multiple different types of attributes, but where you have categories of all one type then you can favour them and boost them more.

Hmm, I understand, I don't have high shooting for him though, focus of 2. I didn't really want finishing but needed composure because of his role and in general and as he is decent at long shots I wanted to improve them too. I know the technicals will improve faster but I think I did a good job on Rodwell and he now has some very good attributes in the right places.

Anyway, they should be ready soon! Need to test them with a few more teams and then I'll post the link.

[donpost]

That's very impressive Jenko! Certainly very balance stat increases.

I'm interested in this bit:

I'd go to the player's training tab, click on attributes and see the rises and falls, then I'd evaluate them and see if there are too many rises/falls in a specific category. That's how I'm currently evaluating mine when I get to January.

I have been doing something similar with one of my youth players. When you assess if there are too many increases in a certtain category, do you take the amount of attributes per catergory into account? For example do you look to see 5/3's as many increases in aerobic than in shooting, as there are 5 attributes in aerobic and 3 in shooting. Or do you look for equal amounts per category? Just curious as I've been keeping track of the changes in my player from April 2011; as soon as I reach 1st Jan 2012 I want to adjust the schedule but I wasn't sure on how to decide on what adjustments to make.

[Jenko_EFC]

That's very impressive Jenko! Certainly very balance stat increases.

Thanks. I was quite shocked myself when I seen it!

I have been doing something similar with one of my youth players. When you assess if there are too many increases in a certtain category, do you take the amount of attributes per catergory into account? For example do you look to see 5/3's as many increases in aerobic than in shooting, as there are 5 attributes in aerobic and 3 in shooting. Or do you look for equal amounts per category? Just curious as I've been keeping track of the changes in my player from April 2011; as soon as I reach 1st Jan 2012 I want to adjust the schedule but I wasn't sure on how to decide on what adjustments to make.

No, not exactly, every 6 or so months, I'll look at the attribute increases and have a slight tendency to adjust but I don't think I have to for Rodwell and I don't want to give any more players away before release .

I'll take a look at the categories and sort of put them into my 'order of priority' and if I want say a static playmaker and all his aerobics are going up then I'll tone it down a bit and stuff like that. Not a strict policy or anything just a way to ensure all the categories I want are being trained and not neglected.