ok timing of team selection how long should it be???

[archerybob]

just been looking around the net and have seen the yanks are picking there junior worlds team at there nationals (which is happening over the next couple of weeks) makes me wonder about what is the ideal timing to pick a team, for any event, not just juniors. Our junior team were picked in jan giving them round 10 months to the event, our olympic team were picked, i think, at the end of march in and competed in august.....y? (i cant remember) round 5 months. the american juniors will have about only 3 months to get ready.

what would be the ideal length of time between selection event, to the event itself??? does it make no difference?? in my mind i like the closer to the event (obviously not always possible as majority of comps are in northern hemisphere and in there summer, therefore winter down here would be left to late) i think your more likely to continue training rather than take a break

[Cartz]

In most sports, i see picking the team closer to the event the best possible choice. Look at the swimmers, their teams are chosen very close to the time of the actual event. Especially in a sport such as archery that isn't a team sport and people endure slumps every now and then. Who knows what will happen to the archer 10 months before the event?

If Australia is going to send the best possible team, the decision to send the team should be made at a closer date to the actual comp, therefore we would be choosing those who are at the top of their game. Who wants to send a hopeless team to a world event? An event in which they would be the face of archery in Australia...

[archerybob]

there is no doubt archery australia take it into consideration, so many factors come into play mainly $$$$$$$ another comp, albeit smaller, is still more $$$$$$ just wondering if there is some sort of magical formula? ill keep stumbling on the net

[Cartz]

That's it...money comes into it, a big deal. It is going to take some strong initiative to send a decent team and hold another qualifying comp OR just organise those qualifying comps (Nats etc..) around a suitable time. If more money must be spent to fine tune a team together, wouldn't that be evenly weighted out by having a greater chance at a medal? Medals is where funding comes from...

[andrewf87]

If Australia is going to send the best possible team, the decision to send the team should be made at a closer date to the actual comp, therefore we would be choosing those who are at the top of their game. Who wants to send a hopeless team to a world event? An event in which they would be the face of archery in Australia...

I suppose another advantage of picking the team earlier to the date is that the competitors are able to stay motivated as they would have there eyes set on a place in the team which would mean lot of practice. Then as you said when the actual comp comes around they are on top of there game because of all the practice they put in just prior.

[Ja]

i know its not exactly a team sport, but you do have team competition and if you've had chances to work and shoot as a team i think the archers would feel better knowing they are in good company, with friends who will support them. Of course you would always support team mates but being able to pick when someone is starting to lose their head (sometimes too obvious) and being able to say something that would bring them back on track would only come about if you had shot with them more than a few times.

[The One]

The closer to the event you get, the more expensive the travel, more difficult to find accomodation, and the less time the archers have to prepare, but I agree, their scores can change with time. I reckon 6 months beforehand is pretty good!

[Archangel]

Ultimately there's going to be a delay between picking the team and them leaving, so there is always a chance archers may drop off their game in between - or they may just not perform at the event. There aren't any guarantees in sport.
Approximately 6 months generally works well as a compromise. For something like the Olympics you can take it a lot closer because accommodation and flights aren't an issue, and there are often events that have to be run first - for example if your CQT happened to be in April, selection isn't going to happen until after that.
Other sports (someone suggested swimming?) earlier can go closer too, if they're willing to pick up the tab for travel. As long as we have self funded archers that's not really an option.

[Cartz]

What's wrong with choosing accomodation before the team is chosen? If it's definate that a team WILL be travelling and WILL only consist of so many members...well?

[Brett k]

What's wrong with choosing accomodation before the team is chosen? If it's definate that a team WILL be travelling and WILL only consist of so many members...well?

Good point. I suppose its not like a rugby team that need to train together all the time. One or two months seems ok five or six seems a bit excessive, but hey what does my opinion matter.

[archerybob]

there is quite alot of info out there in cyber space about this especially for golf..............i know its not the same but it is pretty close and very interesting none the less

[Clare Barnes]

A couple of non-archery advantages of earlyish team selection is that it allows those selected to:

1. have time to work out their finances such as save/fundraise/get loans
2. arrange for leave from work or schedule school and uni assignments

[Archangel]

What's wrong with choosing accomodation before the team is chosen? If it's definate that a team WILL be travelling and WILL only consist of so many members...well?
It's frequently not definate that it will consist of exactly X members. If you've got stacks of good archers in all divisions looking to go to Worlds or something then it's pretty straightforward, but if there aren't and a couple are on the edge of selection then you don't really want to start booking for them if you don't know they'll be going. Plus, people do turn down selection sometimes, especially if money's a factor.
It's normally more of a problem with airfares though, since they tend to be a pain in the ass about refunding them.

[James Park]

It is frequently assumed by the sports that the competitors have no life other than the sport. However that is rarely in reality the case.
Hence, it does indeed help quite a bit to have at least a little time between selection and the event.
For example, if you take me as an example (probaly not a good example, but the one I know best): I would need to arrange leave, which would usually be best arranged about a month or more in advance. It is even more important if a series of events is involved as in the current FITA grand prix events.
I would usually try to use frequent flyer points because I have many hundreds of thousands of them, (unless someone else graciously decides to pay) and here I want as long as possible to have a chance of getting a flight - 6 months would be ok, 1 month is hopeless, greater than 6 months would be better. This does of course depend on the destination (we arranged our flights to Las Vegas this year many months in advance and even then had trouble getting frequent flyer seats).
Arranging things like uniforms is easy, and can all be done in a week or so, so not an issue.
We virtually always compete as individuals, so we do not need time for group sessions or meeting team members, etc. Even for something like team matchplay, those who are likely to be involved will generally have a reasonable idea of what to do, so you do not need weeks of practice.
I would generally not put time into fund raising, but I know that can be important and can take many months.
I don't think it is important to pick the competitors close to the event to optimise performance levels. The good competitors know how to peak at the right times anyway.
Hence, my conclusions are:
- The longer the better.
- If it has to be short, we may still get archers happy to go, but it is more complex.
- It is very important to remember that there are more things in life than archery, and we need to leave our competitors a chance to manage both.

[archerybob]

hmmmmm yes i definately agree with jim, it is the best to plan these trips as early as possible. i am wondering more on the performance side

[Cartz]

I understand what you are saying Mr Park, which proves that there is definately two sides to this argument... One that involves personal benefit and one that involves the overall benefit to the sport. Hence, one must weigh up which takes priority.

[James Park]

On the performance side: My experience is that top archers generally perform pretty well whenever it matters, but not necessarily in between those times. For example, I have many times seen Leigh Cornish shoot low scores in the weeks prior to a big tournament and then shoot magnificently when it matters (a few years back he shot in the high 280's indoor in the weeks prior to the AV State Indoor and then when score mattered in the event blitzed us all very easily with scores near 300.
That is, top archers know how to get the best at the right times, and in between don't waste too many good scores.
This does make life difficult, however: back in 1999 the selection for the World target was held in a separate event about a week after the Nationals (absolutely crazy thing to do). Most of the top compounders tried to get their peak form for the Nationals and then ignored the selection event. Trying to be at your top for two events so close was not ideal, as well as expensive.
Hence, I see no real problem in selecting archers for teams well in advance - thge good ones will still be good when it matters.
Either way you will still get the archer that shoots well above themselves for a particular event and then cannot reproduce it later, but we take that risk either way. One advantage of using the Nationals for these selections is that being a very big and important event, most of those who would have a fluke good performance are not likely to cope with the pressure - almost always the reliably top archers will win.

[Cartz]

What about the recurve side of things? Archerybob hinted regarding the Juniors being selected. Many of these aren't top archers and are prone to slumps. Even the top archers are prone to slumps. And this isn't just restricted to archery but also to other sports, team sports, look at Ricky Ponting and Matthew Hayden...both playing at the top of their class and both who suffered serious slumps when it really mattered.

It all comes down to risk, is it logical to risk sending a team that could possibly do worse than a team that could potentially perform better?

[Archangel]

What about the recurve side of things? Archerybob hinted regarding the Juniors being selected. Many of these aren't top archers and are prone to slumps. Even the top archers are prone to slumps. And this isn't just restricted to archery but also to other sports, team sports, look at Ricky Ponting and Matthew Hayden...both playing at the top of their class and both who suffered serious slumps when it really mattered.

It all comes down to risk, is it logical to risk sending a team that could possibly do worse than a team that could potentially perform better?
There aren't any guarantees in sport. There's no way to guarantee an archer won't perform worse than expected at the event.
Holding the selection event closer to the tournament doesn't make it all that much less likely that they'll drop off before they get there.

[The One]

And it's still possible for archers to improve between the selection and the event :)

[Coghlan]

My thoughts are.....

As long as the archers are made aware early enough of the selection criteria, then it doesnt really matter, because you train to make the team based on that selection criteria.

However, the closer that the decision is made to the time of the competition effects the ability to gain affordable accommodation and flights. This to me is a large determining factor in going to events after making the team and I think should be taken into account.

Overall I am quite happy with the current process, well for Compounders anyway, I dont know about the recurve side of things too much, but as with everything, no matter what is done by the Selection Committee it is nearly impossible to make everybody happy.

Pat

[Cartz]

it is nearly impossible to make everybody happy.


Thats the nail on the head, and it probably won't ever happen

All im saying is that the further away from the event the team is chosen, there is more time allowed for the athlete to drop off. Equally, it's more time for an athlete to excel further. However, if the athlete were to shoot the qualifying score closer to the event, that gives an actual guarantee that the archer has the ability to do it again since it is obvious that they are capable of such scores. This is more personal if anything, but if i were to be investing money, large sums of money, into a team, i would want a strong sort of guarantee that they will do well in that event. Giving it longer may have certain benefits yes, and i would be all for it if the archers were moderated over the time between selection and the event. Therefore one must ask, what would happen to an archer if, while moderated, they dropped off dramatically?

[Chris Madeley]

I feel that there are some advantages to an earlier team selection. I feel that last year the earlier selection for world champs gave me the extra drive and encouragement to push myself further. It also allowed my coach (and me) to establish a training plan to peak at the right moment. Like Jim said, the coaches and archers with enough experience seem to be good at knowing how to peak at the right moments (that's often why they peaked at the selection shoot six months earlier).

However I can see the points that Cartz and others are making, and I guess it's something that you can justify either way, as each would have it's own pros and cons. Ideally, with money being to object, it'd be great to select a squad six months earlier to train and travel, and then choose a team to compete from this as close to the event as possible. Just like is done in high profile sports like cricket and union. Of course for a sport like ours this is very unlikely for any event (apart from possibly the olympics).

Jim also makes an important point that many archers do have many other commitments in life, so some sort of notice helps to sort these things out. Many events held in the European summer can land across uni exams, and last year I had to arrange for deferred exams for as soon as I returned (which was even more pressure). Also arranging time off work can be difficult (especially if you haven't been working there too long). If the events are close together you need to get lots of time off in close succession, and you've got to spend a lot of time sucking up to the boss!

At the end of the day I'll just plan my shooting for whatever the selection criteria is. So long as this is published well in advance it gives everyone plenty of time to prepare and is fair for everyone.

[archerybob]

yes definately key pont as long as AA give the criteria.......which they do very well........in advance we can only be happy chappys and ladies

[Vittorio]

There are several parameters to be considered, and majority of them have been already mentioned in previous posts. Putting them toghether, you will easily end up with the proper solution.
Apart from Olimpyc Games, 30 to 45 days prior the evnt is the minimum to arrange travel, change names on flight tickets (group booking has to be done before). 30 days is also the minimum to have probability that a top athlet can repeat a peak performance. Very few can go down to 20 or 15 days, while 1 week is very very difficult.
Then you also have o consider jet lag, and if you are going west or east, if this is the case. Zo we are back to 30 to 45 days...
Finally, as surely a team that is shooting as team since many months has logical advantages, is not said that the selection as to be made at the same time for all members of the team. With the new (stupid) rule of 3 only at the world champs, you may confirm 2 members months in advance based on history and average performances, and leave to the selection one month before the event between 3 or 4 other archers the choice for the third name (in the past, third and fourth names). This way you will usually get the best of the 2 systems.... and in a way or the other this is what we are doing in Italy. In our philosophy, you more have to go to the experience and average results rather than single peak result in single day whithout knowing if that peak can be repeated...