Jump to content

SFraser's Training Schedules for FM10


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 1.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

As far as I know there were no new downloadable updates. There were some miscounting of attributes that were rectified earlier in this thread. I think that the purpose of this thread was to use this theory to create your own schedules. If recommend downloading ProZone and DocSander's excel spreadsheet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

SFraser (or anybody else), I need to design a training schedule for a 30 year-old central defender. Just want to maintain his defensive attributes and slown-down the decline in his aerobic-attributes (pace). Would it help to give him intensive aerobic training?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just want to thank SFraser for all his hard work in researching/testing to really figure out how training works. I've been a fan ever since I've read his first ideas about it and have followed the theories to develop my own schedules. The results have been quite amazing to say the least. Here's a pic of just one of the players whom I've managed mold into exactly the type of player I wanted, just by creating a custom schedule that focuses on specific areas where I wanted him to improve:

denisgoncharenko.png

It's almost hard to believe, but when I initially bought this player, some of his mental stats, such as anticipation, were only 10 or below. He made remarkable progress since then.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DirtyACE

Looks like you have done a very good job developing that striker. Out of interest though, what was his stamina and natural fitness like when you got him? Not trying to pick holes but I would say that these are the only real areas where this striker is lacking. Having 12 for both would mean that he would struggle to last a whole game, and would struggle to recover in time to play successive games in a week (which is a real shame considering his obvious outstanding qualities). I would be interested in how he started out and whether you have focused on developing these key physical attributes? Cheers.

Link to post
Share on other sites
DirtyACE, that player is... wow, godlike!

I haven't seen a striker as good as that before.

It's actually a bit misleading as to why he looks so good. The reason is his one foot-edness. It's a common occurrence with players like these. Their stats will look very impressive due to having only one strong foot. Having ability with both feet takes up CA points. If he had that, then his stats wouldn't be as high, though he'd still be an absolutely top class player.

DirtyACE

Looks like you have done a very good job developing that striker. Out of interest though, what was his stamina and natural fitness like when you got him? Not trying to pick holes but I would say that these are the only real areas where this striker is lacking. Having 12 for both would mean that he would struggle to last a whole game, and would struggle to recover in time to play successive games in a week (which is a real shame considering his obvious outstanding qualities). I would be interested in how he started out and whether you have focused on developing these key physical attributes? Cheers.

No problem. The training schedule was by no means perfect. I had to make some sacrifices as well. When I initially bought him, he was quite well developed in his technical stats, but physical stats, and especially mental stats definitely needed a lot of work. I decided to focus more on his mental training, while at the same time giving him aerobic training in sufficient quantity. I left the strength training (which trains stamina, natural fitness, and strength) on a lower setting, though he still improved in those areas as well, more or less naturally. I don't remember what his natural fitness was, but his stamina was 10 when I got him. Though the biggest increase he received from strength training was in actual strength. There I think he gained 4 points. With aerobic training I wanted to increase his pace and acceleration, which I've accomplished successfully. Acceleration has increased by 3 and pace by 2, which was pretty much my target for him.

Plus, I wasn't really too worried about him not having enough stamina or natural fitness due to my squad planning. I made sure to have a lot of depth, so he always has a backup/alternate whenever the situation calls for it. I've never had problems with him not being able to finish games or not being able to recover for the next game. That's again due to squad depth.

So to summarize, I put a lot of emphasis on tactical training first, the second area of focus was aerobics, which I didn't set as high as tactics because I also counted on him developing in that area naturally to some extent, which he did.

Here's a pic of another player I've moulded:

robertopenuela.png

He was actually less developed than the first striker I posted. Though you can see, somehow, I wasn't able to increase his natural fitness or jumping beyond what it is there, even with high settings of strength and aerobics. But again, in my overall scheme of things, it doesn't actually affect anything because I have plenty of backup for him. Plus I've been lucky with this particular player as he seems to be rather injury resistant.

After many seasons in many different careers, I'm more and more coming to the conclusion that every player has a certain prevalence toward the type of player he becomes. There's some players that I simply could not increase their stats in certain areas, no matter how much emphasis I put into training them there, while other areas would develop quite easily, almost on their own. For example, I also have an amazing right fullback who's natural fitness is only 9, but his stamina is excellent. Why there is such a huge discrepancy between stamina and natural fitness, I can only guess.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just want to thank SFraser for all his hard work in researching/testing to really figure out how training works. I've been a fan ever since I've read his first ideas about it and have followed the theories to develop my own schedules. The results have been quite amazing to say the least. Here's a pic of just one of the players whom I've managed mold into exactly the type of player I wanted, just by creating a custom schedule that focuses on specific areas where I wanted him to improve:

denisgoncharenko.png

It's almost hard to believe, but when I initially bought this player, some of his mental stats, such as anticipation, were only 10 or below. He made remarkable progress since then.

That is the kind of result that makes this all worthwhile and shows I am not on a fools errand here. Thank you for taking the time to put these ideas into practice in what looks like immense detail, and thanks for sharing the screenshot.

I might download it and whip it out whenever anyone mentions the "Training Line Theory" :D That's great stuff. And it shows that just like Tactics, if you put in the time and the effort to do things properly and in detail then it actually works.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DirtyACE can you show a pic of that strikers training schedule. I've been developing my own but so far nothing as good as yours. If you could point me to the right direction that would be great.

Link to post
Share on other sites
That is the kind of result that makes this all worthwhile and shows I am not on a fools errand here. Thank you for taking the time to put these ideas into practice in what looks like immense detail, and thanks for sharing the screenshot.

I might download it and whip it out whenever anyone mentions the "Training Line Theory" :D That's great stuff. And it shows that just like Tactics, if you put in the time and the effort to do things properly and in detail then it actually works.

Thanks SFraser. I really appreciate all the work you've put into developing your training theories. I say "theories" because I don't think any of this has been actually confirmed by SI? Perhaps I'm wrong. However, it really makes no difference because they work, and there are the results. Please feel free to use the screen shots I've posted for any proof that this system works :) Unfortunately though, I don't have any screen shots of these same players before I put them on their custom schedules. Would have been great to have the "before" and "after" pics.

DirtyACE can you show a pic of that strikers training schedule. I've been developing my own but so far nothing as good as yours. If you could point me to the right direction that would be great.

To be honest, there would be little point for me to post them because I don't use one specific schedule for all my strikers. Each one of them has their own schedule, which is set up depending on where I feel they need improvement. Plus, I change the focus for their schedules whenever I think they've achieved enough improvement in the areas I was focusing on originally. So my schedules in one year can be very different from the schedules in the following year.

I simply use the system SFraser outlined. I've memorized how many and which attributes each of the training sliders are responsible for, and then I simply adjust them to give the the schedules a specific focus. I also keep in mind that some attributes develop naturally as well. For example, the physical attributes will do that when a player is young. So it's not always necessary to put all youngsters on intense physical training. Some do need it however, because they might have very under-developed physicals to begin with.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Firstly I like to say I am an avid fan of your threads (Sfraser) and tend to follow your theories within the tactics and am enjoying the game as a result. Now I have been using your training regime however I seem to be a bit fit as I still do not quite understand the parameters that I need to change if I want to develop a player for a certain attribute. I have this young player German Pacheco, he has bags of talent but he has a dreadful first touch, passing and decisions, now I would like to work heavily on his first touch and passing without it being detrimental to his physical stats as you can see below his fitness etc is not exactly the greatest. Please could you or someone in the know suggest a training schedule for him and if it would not be too much bother if you could explain (or point me in the right direction) on the clicks that are sacrificed etc to increase another attribute.

I hope this screen shot works...

He is currently on your Developing WF (wide forward) schedule and I want to develop him in to a pacey goalmachine striker.

<a  href=http://img8.imageshack.us/img8/6913/pachecol.jpg' alt='pachecol.jpg'> Uploaded with ImageShack.us[/img]

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd suggest you give him heavy tactical and ball control emphasis in his schedule, first and foremost.

Here's the way I would design one for him:

Strength: 9 clicks

Aerobics: 15 clicks

Goalkeeping: 0 clicks

Tactical: 25 clicks

Ball Control: 20 clicks

Defending: 0 clicks

Attacking: 4 clicks

Shooting: 9 clicks

Set Pieces: 0 clicks

He should also be able to gain some additional physical improvements through natural means because he's still pretty young.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd suggest you give him heavy tactical and ball control emphasis in his schedule, first and foremost.

Here's the way I would design one for him:

Strength: 9 clicks

Aerobics: 15 clicks

Goalkeeping: 0 clicks

Tactical: 25 clicks

Ball Control: 20 clicks

Defending: 0 clicks

Attacking: 4 clicks

Shooting: 9 clicks

Set Pieces: 0 clicks

He should also be able to gain some additional physical improvements through natural means because he's still pretty young.

Thank you for your reply. I had a good read through page 2-3 about the focus and baseline and I think I have a grasp for it. I have just designed a schedule for him before I saw your post, please tell me what you think..

Strength: 12 clicks

Aerobics: 15 clicks

Goalkeeping: 0 clicks

Tactical: 20 clicks

Ball Control: 20 clicks

Defending: 3 clicks

Attacking: 10 clicks

Shooting: 12 clicks

Set Pieces: 0 clicks

I can see that I have given far more clicks to my attacking than what you suggested, the reason being is that I want to greatly increase his passing and his creativity could also do with gaining a couple of notches. However it seems that my total clicks are 92 compared to your 82 and I am wondering if this will be a bit intense for him. The total workload is showing as Heavy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for your reply. I had a good read through page 2-3 about the focus and baseline and I think I have a grasp for it. I have just designed a schedule for him before I saw your post, please tell me what you think..

Strength: 12 clicks

Aerobics: 15 clicks

Goalkeeping: 0 clicks

Tactical: 20 clicks

Ball Control: 20 clicks

Defending: 3 clicks

Attacking: 10 clicks

Shooting: 12 clicks

Set Pieces: 0 clicks

I can see that I have given far more clicks to my attacking than what you suggested, the reason being is that I want to greatly increase his passing and his creativity could also do with gaining a couple of notches. However it seems that my total clicks are 92 compared to your 82 and I am wondering if this will be a bit intense for him. The total workload is showing as Heavy.

You know, I don't pay as much attention to work load anymore. As long as it is overall not too heavy, or not too heavy in physical training, but this is mostly for my first team players. I have some players on work load at around 70 and others close to 100. It's all about how you want to mould the players. What areas they need improvement in the most, or the areas you wish to see improve. You can see some of my own results from the screen shots I've shown a few posts up.

Your schedule looks fine to me for the most part. The one I posted was simply what I would have done. For example, because I want my strikers to have increased anticipation, decisions, and off the ball, I decided to put a lot of emphasis on Tactical training. Plus looking at Pacheco, it's pretty clear he is really lacking in some of these areas.

I didn't put as much emphasis on Attack training, because you've stated that you wanted a quick, goal scoring type player. Essentially a poacher or possibly advanced forward. I decided to sacrifice the attack training to some degree in order to focus on other, more critical areas. Plus attack training is responsible for only 2 attributes, so it's not necessary to give so much focus in this area. In my opinion, you've given too much emphasis to attack in your schedule, mainly because of the type of player you want to develop. That is unless I've misunderstood you.

The other small thing, is that players also have a certain prevalence for the type of player they become. So for example, you can train someone in Attack training as much as possible, but you'll see only a small or medium increase in passing and creativity, at best. While other players will develop these areas to high levels naturally, with less training. I've seen it happen all the time with my own players. I have some strikers with excellent passing, while other with pretty terrible passing, but they all had the same level of attack training.

Link to post
Share on other sites
You know, I don't pay as much attention to work load anymore. As long as it is overall not too heavy, or not too heavy in physical training, but this is mostly for my first team players. I have some players on work load at around 70 and others close to 100. It's all about how you want to mould the players. What areas they need improvement in the most, or the areas you wish to see improve.

I would very much go along with that. For "ten clicks" of Workload to be important you would really have to be quite obsessive over one or two points of Condition a week or 1-2 points of CA a season. Where Workload plays a role that is going to matter to most people is Morale.

Workload does affect Condition, it does affect CA gain, but these are very small issues that might make a difference over the course of a season, but not a massive difference. Morale though is the area where it can have a large short term effect. If players are Unhappy over Workload then you have basically a weekly Morale drop in those players ontop of all other Morale modifiers.

So for the purpose of "good and sound training in general" that goes along with gameplay without trying to micromanage every available issue, giving players a schedule that keeps them happy at the same time as being the shape you want these players to change according to is the ideal.

I think that's how the majority of people have always approached Training, but the problem is knowing how to define the shape you want properly. That's the issue this thread is meant to address, finding out how to "design the shape" properly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
In my opinion, you've given too much emphasis to attack in your schedule, mainly because of the type of player you want to develop. That is unless I've misunderstood you.

Thank you for the advice I will look to make a couple of midifications. The reason why I had more clicks for 'Attack' was due to how low the passing and creativity was on my player. Not so much the creativity being an issue as you so rightly stated that I am wanting a pacey poacher however his passing is only 2 and I need this to be at least 11 as he will need to make lay offs. I am unsure if you factured this in so if not what would you suggest?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Thank you for the advice I will look to make a couple of midifications. The reason why I had more clicks for 'Attack' was due to how low the passing and creativity was on my player. Not so much the creativity being an issue as you so rightly stated that I am wanting a pacey poacher however his passing is only 2 and I need this to be at least 11 as he will need to make lay offs. I am unsure if you factured this in so if not what would you suggest?

Here, I'll show you a pic of one of my other strikers:

petersimpson.png

Look at his passing. It's quite terrible, and his creativity is rather average at best. However, he is a poacher/advanced forward type that I tried to create. He still gets plenty of assists though. Last season he got 18 in 30 appearances in the league.

When I trained him, I sacrificed his attack and defense training for other areas. He is a very deadly attacker now, even with composure of only 14, which I've tried to compensate for by having him learn to shoot with power. Still scores tons of goals. I'll also admit that I probably should have trained him at least a little bit in defense, if only to increase his concentration a bit, but all in all, I'm pretty happy with how he turned out. And he plays in a way that fits really well within my overall tactical scheme.

This is what I imagined you'd want Pacheco to become, hence the schedule I suggested. As I said before, I would only train him in attack on either 4 or 6 notches, but no more. In my opinion, it would just be a waste to go any higher. He needs improvement in other areas that are much more critical for his position.

I believe SFraser would also agree with this assessment. Or at least with most of it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Dirtyface - I have now adjusted it however I still have more clicks overall and he seems happy with his workload. My question now is this: Would he improve quicker in the areas I want him by having less clicks on other areas or does this not factor in? So for example I have 25 clicks on Tactics and 8 clicks on attacking but if I were to reduce the attacking clicks to say 6 would this mean that his area of improvement would be more beneficial for the tactics?

Link to post
Share on other sites

"Making Layoffs" is far more about Creativity and Flair than Passing Accuracy. A brutally clever pass that is miles away from being inch perfect can still be lethal a lot of times, but if the player can't see the pass or doesn't want to try it then all the accuracy in the world is irrelevant.

Personally, for Strikers and Forwards, I find accuracy to be far less important than vision and speed of mind and technique. No point being able to knock the fluff off a cappuccino from 40 yards if you can't see the cappuccino let alone the fluff.

Link to post
Share on other sites
@Dirtyface - I have now adjusted it however I still have more clicks overall and he seems happy with his workload. My question now is this: Would he improve quicker in the areas I want him by having less clicks on other areas or does this not factor in? So for example I have 25 clicks on Tactics and 8 clicks on attacking but if I were to reduce the attacking clicks to say 6 would this mean that his area of improvement would be more beneficial for the tactics?

When you increase or decrease the clicks, you're changing the emphasis of the schedule. So having tactics on 25 clicks and attacking on 8 clicks, means you're putting in equal focus into those two areas. If you lower one of them, like attacking to 6, then you're making the schedule focused more on tactical training. More CA points will be allocated to attributes linked with tactics. That's the way I understand it. However, the thing is with Tactical and Attacking training, is the vast difference between them in terms of how many attributes each of them is responsible for. Tactics is responsible for 5 attributes, while attacking only for 2. So it also make more sense to give Tactical training more priority anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
"Making Layoffs" is far more about Creativity and Flair than Passing Accuracy. A brutally clever pass that is miles away from being inch perfect can still be lethal a lot of times, but if the player can't see the pass or doesn't want to try it then all the accuracy in the world is irrelevant.

Personally, for Strikers and Forwards, I find accuracy to be far less important than vision and speed of mind and technique. No point being able to knock the fluff off a cappuccino from 40 yards if you can't see the cappuccino let alone the fluff.

This is a great explanation of what I was kind of trying to get across as well. I usually keep all my strikers on pretty much minimum attack training, as I don't really worry about their passing, and their creativity seems to usually increase a bit on its own anyway.

Link to post
Share on other sites
"Making Layoffs" is far more about Creativity and Flair than Passing Accuracy. A brutally clever pass that is miles away from being inch perfect can still be lethal a lot of times, but if the player can't see the pass or doesn't want to try it then all the accuracy in the world is irrelevant.

Personally, for Strikers and Forwards, I find accuracy to be far less important than vision and speed of mind and technique. No point being able to knock the fluff off a cappuccino from 40 yards if you can't see the cappuccino let alone the fluff.

Yeah I understand what you mean with that and I agree. What I was meaning about layoffs, was the simple pass, for example the ball is feed in to Pacheco he has the full back in support who is 10 yards and free but Pacheco because of very low passing stat will mess up his pass or perhaps he has the amc in support who is 5 yards away but he mis-hits his pass due to the low passing stat. That's the kind of thing I was thinking of..

When you increase or decrease the clicks, you're changing the emphasis of the schedule. So having tactics on 25 clicks and attacking on 8 clicks, means you're putting in equal focus into those two areas. If you lower one of them, like attacking to 6, then you're making the schedule focused more on tactical training. More CA points will be allocated to attributes linked with tactics. That's the way I understand it. However, the thing is with Tactical and Attacking training, is the vast difference between them in terms of how many attributes each of them is responsible for. Tactics is responsible for 5 attributes, while attacking only for 2. So it also make more sense to give Tactical training more priority anyway.

Thank you I have taken all of this on board and will further reduce some clicks so that it concentrates on the main things I need for him. You both have been of great help.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah I understand what you mean with that and I agree. What I was meaning about layoffs, was the simple pass, for example the ball is feed in to Pacheco he has the full back in support who is 10 yards and free but Pacheco because of very low passing stat will mess up his pass or perhaps he has the amc in support who is 5 yards away but he mis-hits his pass due to the low passing stat. That's the kind of thing I was thinking of..

If he's making short passes, then the accuracy comes into even less of an issue. Him mishitting it has more to do with technique, and perhaps first touch, if he's doing a one-touch pass, but it's mostly technique.

Thank you I have taken all of this on board and will further reduce some clicks so that it concentrates on the main things I need for him. You both have been of great help.

Hopefully it's a bit clear for you now. With time and practice you'll become much more comfortable with these ideas and how to create a specific balance within schedules.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for a very informative thread. I have two questions:

1. Is there a hard cap on players atribute, eg. player a can never have a pace over 12, and

2. How do you know when a player have 100 % match experience? Is it when there "fitness" line says "match fit", or when it says "in suberb condition", or has that line nothing to do with it.

Thank you / K U

Link to post
Share on other sites
So if im not wrong you can actually create a completely different set of schedules for different tactics

Well, I personally, create schedules to mould players into more or less specific types. I don't worry as much about tactics when designing schedules though. My players usually turn out to be pretty balanced overall, so they'll fit different types of tactical set-ups.

It's entirely up to you, what you want the schedules to accomplish.

Thank you for a very informative thread. I have two questions:

1. Is there a hard cap on players atribute, eg. player a can never have a pace over 12, and

2. How do you know when a player have 100 % match experience? Is it when there "fitness" line says "match fit", or when it says "in suberb condition", or has that line nothing to do with it.

Thank you / K U

1. In my own experience, there's like a prevalence for each player in terms of what type of player they can become. So in a way, yes, there are certain limits as to which level, certain attributes, can rise to. However, again, this is just something I've noticed from experience, but could be wrong. Perhaps SFraser has a better explanation.

2. Usually when a player is above 91% condition, it will say Match fit. Once his condition reaches 100%, then it could still say Match Fit, but after a few more days, it increases to Fully Fit, and after a few more days it will say In Superb Condition, which is the very best type of fitness level.

However, if you are referring to actual match experience, then the fitness percentages have nothing to do with it. It's an entirely different attribute, which is hidden.

Link to post
Share on other sites
|Strength     (3) |Stamina, Strength, Work Rate
|Aerobic      (5) |Acceleration, Pace, Balance, Jumping, Agility
|Tactics      (5) |Anticipation, Decisions, Off The Ball, Positioning, Teamwork
|Ball Control (4) |Dribbling, First Touch, Heading, Technique
|Defending    (3) |Concentration, Tackling, Marking
|Attacking    (2) |Creativity, Passing
|Shooting     (3) |Composure, Long Shots, Finishing
|Set-Pieces   (5) |Corners, Crossing, Free-Kick Taking, Long Throws, Penalty Taking

Here's a useful code by Jenko_EFC of what areas are affected by training. The number in brackets represent the number of attributes and then the attributes they affect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

milkcheck - Use SFrasers schedules as a basis to make your own. I use the spreadsheet download from Doc and the team to help formulize the training. You see this training schedule could vary for how you play and the type of stats you feel important for the player and position. It is easy to make your own schedules and means much more control on how you develop your players.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am quite confused by all this.

How much training is enough for each area, to maintain and improve?

For example, I have a very good AMC, age 23, that he has acceptable levels of strength and stamina for me, 16 and 14 respectively. If I want to just maintain his physical attributes and improve his mental ones, what do I do? Should I just have 4 notches for stamina and 6 for aerobic and spend my remaining points at tactics, ball control and attacking?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hello all, I haven't been following this thread too closely of late, but I thought I'd share a small tidbit of info on attribute progression. One of my players has just suffered a broken shoulder, and I noticed that his Agility immediately dropped by two points. This happened immediately after the game, so it's not the usual decrease that happens gradually when a player is injured and not in training.

So it appears that in the same way as match events can sometimes trigger an increase or decrease in certain attributes, injuries can sometimes immediately affect a player's physical attributes. It's also worth noting that the player is only 18, and so is still at an age when his physical attributes might be expected to grow, rather than decline.

Apologies if this is common knowledge or has been discussed previously, but it's the first time I've noticed it and I thought it was interesting!

Link to post
Share on other sites
I am quite confused by all this.

How much training is enough for each area, to maintain and improve?

For example, I have a very good AMC, age 23, that he has acceptable levels of strength and stamina for me, 16 and 14 respectively. If I want to just maintain his physical attributes and improve his mental ones, what do I do? Should I just have 4 notches for stamina and 6 for aerobic and spend my remaining points at tactics, ball control and attacking?

Did you read the OP? In it SFraser explains how it all works.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Could you tell how many attributes is within each area? Or tell how many notch each of the areas is at in your test schedules? So I've got something to follow if I would to create a schedule for a special player. I don't want to drag & count it myself, since I might count wrong and put at wrong positions - So since you are the creator of this I though you know all the notches in your head or have them written down and could tell me.

I've tried this another time but only used your schedules for each position then, didn't understand how the test work. Also I had alot of Injuries on my players.. both from games and from their trainings - Now I want to try it again, for the next season, and see how it goes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Did you read the OP? In it SFraser explains how it all works.

I did. Unfortunately I got a bit confused. :(

That's why I asked for a more simple explanation, with a specific example with one of my players.

Link to post
Share on other sites

All I get from this training schedule is injuries lasting a month or longer. This has happened to me all season and I'm now without seven first team players because of it. I appreciate what you tried to do here, but your training schedule has just screwed my team up the entire season.

I'm going back to Tug's.

Link to post
Share on other sites
All I get from this training schedule is injuries lasting a month or longer. This has happened to me all season and I'm now without seven first team players because of it. I appreciate what you tried to do here, but your training schedule has just screwed my team up the entire season.

I'm going back to Tug's.

It's doubtful that these schedules alone are at fault. Your team may simply be going through one of those seasons when injuries are more abundant, it happens. Or you might have players that are more injury prone.

There are so many people who have used these schedules with little problems, including myself. I've also had seasons when I had to use a lot of rotation because my team simply couldn't stay healthy for whatever reason. However, I've also had even more seasons when my players were quite healthy for the most part. Injuries come and go.

People jump to conclusions too quickly around here. Training schedules do not decide or 100% control whether a player will be injured or not. There's a myriad of variables that determine when and how injuries occur.

Dealing with injuries is part of management, and how you deal with them is one of the determining factors of whether you're a good manager or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Michaelthestrange - the spreadsheet is somewhere on page 8, the link to download is in a quote

Injuries - After 5 seasons with rochdale and using SFrasers training theory I have to say I have not suffered anything major in terms of injuries. I notice the vast majority of my injuries come from matches and not training.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sfraser, a theory question;

Do you think there is some kind of diminishing returns when the ratio for one training category to another gets really high? For instance, if we follow your idea to the 't', maxing out attacking training would mean you are giving it ~13 times more focus than something with only 1 focus, however for something like tactics you can only max out at about 5 focus.

Or do you believe this is all controlled by the underlying coefficients that modify the placement of CA gain into attributes?

Link to post
Share on other sites
SFraser, have you had any input into the new training module announced for FM2011?

No.

I am very interested to see how SI have managed to add "Tactical Preparation" to training. I commented before that I thought the only way without radically adapting huge areas of the game would be to artificially boost specific attributes which might lead to exploitable gameplay behaviour. I have no input nor knowledge whatsoever of how this was done, and I am looking forward to finding out. It is certainly a very "realistic" thing to attempt, but how realistic it is in terms of gameplay and the currently existing game mechanics is something I wait to see.

Sfraser, a theory question;

Do you think there is some kind of diminishing returns when the ratio for one training category to another gets really high? For instance, if we follow your idea to the 't', maxing out attacking training would mean you are giving it ~13 times more focus than something with only 1 focus, however for something like tactics you can only max out at about 5 focus.

That is absolutely correct. It is something I mentioned previously. There is a greater achievable "difference in extremes" when boosting the Attacking category compared to boosting the Aerobic category.

If Attacking is set at notch 2 to train each attribute at "1 notch worth training" then you can boost each Aerobic attribute to "4 notch worth training" relative to attacking. So you can train Aerobic attributes at 4x attacking attributes.

If you do it the other way and set Aerobic to notch 5 for "1 notch worth training each attribute" then you can boost each attacking attribute to 12.5 notch worths of training.

That is three orders of magnitude greater and explains precisely why training is so damn difficult to get right. It's just not balanced.

Or do you believe this is all controlled by the underlying coefficients that modify the placement of CA gain into attributes?

This is applied after training. Once my attacking attributes have increased because they are accidently being trained 3x faster, my Aerobic attributes decline to make up the difference.

I must say that there is possibly a balance between CA weight and Attribute per Category, I hadn't actually considered it untill now.

Thanks for these questions. They have opened up an avenue for investigation I hadn't previously considered.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I must say that there is possibly a balance between CA weight and Attribute per Category, I hadn't actually considered it untill now.

Thanks for these questions. They have opened up an avenue for investigation I hadn't previously considered.

I would say this is unlikely based on the presumed low CA weighting for all set piece attributes (other than crossing), I'm basing this on assumption rather than knowledge so correct me if I'm wrong.

However, if workload is added into this correlation it might be worth considering.

I'd take it easy SFraser though, no doubt we'll need your help with FM11 more than putting the finishing touches on this!

Link to post
Share on other sites
This is applied after training. Once my attacking attributes have increased because they are accidently being trained 3x faster, my Aerobic attributes decline to make up the difference.

I must say that there is possibly a balance between CA weight and Attribute per Category, I hadn't actually considered it untill now.

Thanks for these questions. They have opened up an avenue for investigation I hadn't previously considered.

I have a way that I think we could test this, I just don't feel like doing it right now.

What I would do is test training schedules which only train one attribute group, and correlate the attribute gains with the overall CA gains. This might give some clues as to 'where the CA is going' behind each attribute category, and possibly give information that could tell us how the training categories are related.

However, I suspect this would hours or even days of computer time to run all of these tests and quite frankly with a new training system in FM11, I'm not sure it's worth my time. I'd kind of rather just play the game, as this system is working quite well without being 'perfectly' fine-tuned.

Link to post
Share on other sites

DirtyACE How long roughly did it take before you started to see increase in your players stats? As i made a schedule for my young striker (20 years old) and left it on him for 1 and half or 2 months i think and saw hardly any improvement. In fact i think his key stats started to decrease. I think the schedule i made had the right 'clicks'. Maybe i didnt leave him on the schedule long enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Does the use of 'heavy' and 'very heavy' training, especially at clubs where training facilities are not world class, not cause serious injuries in training? Just a thought, not that I have used these schedules yet.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...