Successful Young Athletes Have Low Probability of Being Ranked Among the Best Senior Athletes, but This Is Higher When Compared to Their Less Successful Peers

Is There a Relative Age Effect among the Most Successful Track and Field Athletes?

The prevalence of the Relative Age Effect (RAE) was studied among medalists from the World Athletics Championships at U18, U20 and Senior age groups and from the Olympic Games from 2000 to 2022. The specific events examined were the 100, 200, 400, 800, 1500, and 3000/5000 m, the long jump, the triple jump, the high jump and the pole vault. Dates of birth from 1,858 outdoor track and field athletes were analysed and further divided into four groups according to the quartile of birth. The RAE was found to be widespread among athletes of both sexes in U18 and U20 age groups in all examined disciplines. There was no difference between the most successful U18 and U20 athletes (p = 0.52). Among senior athletes of both sexes, this effect was not detected and the number of "late-born" athletes in this age group was higher than athletes born in the first three quarters. The prevalence of the RAE across the four groups of events was found in U18 and U20 age groups. Additionally, within each age group, the difference among events was statistically significant. In most successful track and field athletes, the RAE is only significant in U18 and U20 age groups. In senior athletes, the number of "late-born" athletes is significant while RAE disappears. These data may be considered when assessing the athletic potential of an individual athlete.

Prospective and Retrospective Analysis of the Sporting Success of Elite Spanish High and Long Jumpers

The aim of the present study was to analyze the sporting progression from U14 to senior categories of elite Spanish high and long jumpers. For prospective analysis, 300 athletes ranked top 20 at U14 were analyzed (153 female and 147 male). For retrospective analysis, 64 athletes ranked in the top 20 in the senior category were included (21 female and 43 male). Ranking positions were registered in each of the seasons where they presented records. Only 6.3% (19) of athletes who reached the top 20 at U14 became successful senior athletes [4.7% (14) of athletes maintained top 20 status throughout their sporting careers from U14 to senior]. The transition rate from U14 to U16 (35.7%) was the most severe drop down in consecutive categories (after this, it ranged from 47.8 to 66.7%). Of the senior top 20 athletes (64), most of them were already ranked top 20 at U16 (59.4%, 38), at U18 (62.5%, 40), at U20 (70.3%, 45) and at U23 (78.1%, 50). Nevertheless, only 34.4% (22) were top 20 when they were U14 athletes. Transition rates in the top 20 senior athletes ranged from 86.7 to 95.5%. Around one out of four (26.6%, 17) of the top 20 senior athletes maintained top 20 status throughout their sporting careers from U14 to the senior category. Although early success is not a good predictor of senior success, successful senior athletes excelled early on and were able to remain in top rankings throughout their sporting careers of national elite jumpers.

International selection and competition in youth sport: pin the tail on the donkey or targeted intervention?

Across sporting contexts, there is growing debate surrounding the utility of junior international age group selection in sport. In this regard, there has been considerable focus on the age of selection, with the low conversion of athletes from junior to senior international level often used to critique the efficiency of such programmes. In this perspective article, we argue that there is a need for a more nuanced consideration of the effectiveness of international age groups in talent systems. We begin this perspective article with a synthesis of the literature pertaining to junior to senior transitions in sport, followed by the implications and opportunity cost presented by international age groups. We argue for a more contextual evaluation of international age groups relative to the performance aims of a talent system, the need for manipulation of challenge dynamics, and the resource costs of doing so (e.g., providing developmental challenges for those who have early advantage, or spreading resource amongst greater numbers for broader impact). We suggest that talent systems evaluate the opportunity cost presented by international age groups, with decisions based upon individual strategic context.

Early Success is not a Prerequisite for Success at the Adult Age in Spanish Sprinters

The aim of the study was to describe the relationship between success in junior and senior categories in sprint events. An observational and longitudinal analysis was carried out using rankings of the Royal Spanish Athletics Federation database. We analysed 547 sprinters (238 women and 309 men) from their U14 to senior stage who ranked in top-20 on at least one occasion during the period 2004 to 2021. The first entry in top-20 occurred mostly in U14 (44.4%, 243), and the frequency was progressively lower: 26.7% (146) in U16; 20.8% (114) in U18; 5.1% (28) in U20; 2% (11) in U23; and 0.9% (5) in the senior category. A similar tendency was observed in male and female athletes. Only 3.8% (9) of top-20 U14 athletes reached the senior elite stage, increasing this percentage in subsequent categories: 7.4% (15) in U16; 10.6% (24) in U18; 20.9% (32) in U20, and 31.4% (32) from U23 to the senior category. Data from female athletes showed higher maintenance of top-20 status from early categories to senior age. We conclude that even though the first entry into the national top-20 in sprint events occurs early in most cases, success in these initial stages is not a prerequisite for reaching top-20 positions in the senior category.

Strategy in talent systems: Top-down and bottom-up approaches

Building on a large volume of recent research in talent identification and development, this paper future directions for research and practice. We suggest that strategic coherence become a greater point of emphasis in both, with the Performance, Outcome and Process framework holding the potential to signal various markers of effectiveness. Secondly, greater recognition of the need to deploy limited resources where they promote movement toward these markers of effectiveness. Finally, we make recommendations for the operationalising of strategy in talent and performance systems by considering the integration of top down and bottom-up strategic processes.