How To Train The "Specialist" Roles And Creating The Perfect Player

[moj]

With FM2010 now using football terminology for player roles, such as Deep-Lying Forward or a Poacher, if you read TT&F 2010 you will realise the importance of player's roles inside a team - a fullback cannot play FC, but a DC could play central defender, ball-playing defender, etc..

Questions could arise; how can I train my full-back so he becomes the perfect full-back? How do I make my highly talented 17 year old become an excellent wing-back? etc..

Just as a basis, I will paste what each training category trains:
Strength
Natural Fitness, Stamina, Strength, Work Rate
Aerobic
Acceleration, Agility, Balance, Jumping, Pace, Reflexes
Tactics
Anticipation, Decisions, Off The Ball, Positioning, Teamwork
Ball Control
Dribbling, First Touch, Flair, Heading, Technique
Defending
Concentration, Marking, Tackling
Attacking
Creativity, Passing
Shooting
Composure, Finishing, Long Shots
Set Pieces
Corners, Crossing, Free Kick Taking, Long Throws, Penalty Taking

Now, let's see you want to train a wing-back to expertise, you're not going to assign him high shooting training because that isn't his role, but how do we know what to exactly assign him to train?



This image shows what I am building, a theoretical-based tutorial on how create a player that is perfect in his role. Upon completion of most roles (deep-lying forward, trequiartista, box-to-box midfielder, etc) I will upload images, word-processed documents and of course, my specially crafted training files. This will of course, all be free - and I encourage sharing files so others understand FM10 at a better level.

[Millie]

This is how I usually set my schedules too - work out which sections a player needs most and prioritise those ahead of the others.

Looking forward to hearing your findings.

[cagiva]

I liked the wat that moj sets his training.
My approach is simmilar,but I'm making more grouping schedules rather individual,with main aim to goes hand-to-hand with my current tactical setup  - ie central defenders,attacking fullbacks,defensive midfielders,attacking midfielders and etc.
Then I specific every training setup specifically of what every training group is needing.

[Squaddie]

Hey, this is how I have started devising my own training schedules with the release of FM10.

But just want to ask a quick question.

When you say that you don't want to train your wing backs in shooting, do you mean not even give him a light work load? Looking at this thread, by not doing that will mean a decrease in his passing stats. And although passing isn't considered a key attribute for a wing back, surely it is still quite important? (Not actually sure if that thread I linked still applies to FM10, I'm guessing it does)

[moj]

Hey, this is how I have started devising my own training schedules with the release of FM10.

But just want to ask a quick question.

When you say that you don't want to train your wing backs in shooting, do you mean not even give him a light work load? Looking at this thread, by not doing that will mean a decrease in his passing stats. And although passing isn't considered a key attribute for a wing back, surely it is still quite important? (Not actually sure if that thread I linked still applies to FM10, I'm guessing it does)

Depends on age and other factors, but rarely would I do that; I would apply a light schedule on Shooting, etc.

Some players however, particularly when young, I would give none to Defence, if they are a FCa, this helps greatly with young talents like Vela, Walcott, Granero, etc.

[DirtyACE]

Well what you can also do is just leave the shooting training on the default setting which will just maintain it while neither improving nor decreasing the stats that are associated with it.

[dadosprem]

I was using group training schedules (for DC's, DR/L's, ... for example MC's had a good attacking and defensive training schedules, DC's had higher training schedule for strength/aerobic/defence), but then I started thinking....why would, for example, Kranjcar had a good defensive schedule if he's playing in the AMC position, or AML....or why would Palacios have a good attacking schedule if he's acting as a ball winning midfielder....

so, I started creating schedules for each individual player.... if someone is good at pace, but bad in strength or defence (like wingers (Lennon for example)), why would he have sliders for defence and strength the same as Palacios (who is good in strength and tackling, but bad in attacking attributes)....or why would players who are playing as limited defenders/central defenders - cover/stopper duty be in the same training schedules if they need different attributes for their roles/duties....

this is just all just a theory because I started playing yesterday, but I think it makes sense

[miguel_garcia]

I have group training as follows

GK
FB
DC
DM / MCd
MCa
AMC
AML/R
Strikers (all my strikers are aerially challenged so one size fits all)

Each of these is tweaked for what I consider the important attributes.

Then for each group I have variants for Young / Medium / Oldie. New to this training lark but read a good post (here I think) that basically said:

- Upto 24/25 aerobic and strength can both increase

- Aerobic being less important from 24/25 upto 29/30 so this gets set at maintain and focus is on other areas

- After that (29 to 30) aerobic and strength tend not too increase so best  left at maintain level.

Further I set up individual training for promising players under 24 to try and tailor them as I want. This isn't easy though - best explained by example.

Neymar - 18 or 19 years old. Already 18 dribbling, 16 for pace and acceleration but 11 for finishing and passing.

He can play AMC or striker so I have to ask do I get him upto serious speed and dribbling first or improve those shooting and passing stats. I've opted to give shooting priority and set this high, acceleration and pace I'd still like to see increase some along with dribbling so ball control and aerobic are set to increase. I've sacrificed attacking, tactics and set pieces as a result which are both at maintain.

Who knows where he will increase and if he'd be better more rounded or a lethal speed machine who can simply dribble and score. Guess the way I've gone will suit striking best be that from deep as AMCL or AMCR and playing as inside forward.

I'm hoping I can get the speed/acceleration/dribbling trio upto 19s even 20s, the finishing upto 15+ and will then reset these to maintain and try and build his tactics and maybe even attacking from there. As I'm playing him at AMCl or AMCr or striker I'm not concerned with set pieces...he won't be crossing much or taking set pieces.

[IRLManagement]

Maybe I'm being thick here, but has the training files being uploaded somewhere?

[ProZone]

Hi moj,

Could I request a collaboration on this project.

I have recently produced the FM10 Squad Analysis Tool, which detemines the best Role for a given player based on their attributes, and introduced it to the FM-Britain forums. The next step for me is to create Role specific training schedules, which I see you have already embarked on here.

I have some of my own info. which I'd like to make use of. This is a big task, and you have made a headstart, so would you agree to combine our skills?

Regards.

[moj]

Hi moj,

Could I request a collaboration on this project.

I have recently produced the FM10 Squad Analysis Tool, which detemines the best Role for a given player based on their attributes, and introduced it to the FM-Britain forums. The next step for me is to create Role specific training schedules, which I see you have already embarked on here.

I have some of my own info. which I'd like to make use of. This is a big task, and you have made a headstart, so would you agree to combine our skills?

Regards.

i'd collaborate if you want to (by PM or something), the project started off brightly but i've had no time recently, i have finished a few other roles, won't paste the download links until everything is finished (training files for each player, training file for young talented players, etc)

[qadsawee]

Hi moj and ProZone.

I would really want to thank you guys and i don't want to sound demanding or persistent, but will you please give us an update on your project how is it coming along ?? Thanks again and sorry for the awkward question

[etcetera]

I've done basically the exact same thing with my training schedules. I note down what attributes are highlighted for each position/role and popped it into a spreadsheet so i know which training section to focus more on.

example : advanced forward

aerobic - 1 stat
ball control - 3 stats
set piece - 1 stat
shooting - 2 stats
strength - 1 stat
tactics - 2 stat.

Then I move the sliders accordingly: 1 stat = half a bar. Once all that's done, I add in the unnecessary training sections like defending, then move the workload bar up 1 notch below heavy

In theory it should work, but in reality it's been epic fail. After 1 season of training none of the players have had much increase in their stats. My training page is completely blank, no up arrows and no down arrows. I thought this is because I've only implemented this for my senior players but when i switched back to Tug's training, some stats will slowly start to increase again.

Has anyone else had this problem?

[Millie]

I tried a similar thing based on the findings that many have that:

8 notches (7 clicks) = maintain stats
14 notches (13 clicks) = start to increase stats
20 notches (19 clicks) = highest increase possible (all further clicks increase rate of increase, not overall gain).

So, I picked the most important ones and moved those up to 20. The useful ones to 14. And the unnecessary ones to 7. All except the fitness-based training (strength + aerobic), which I didn't put beyond 14 (due to work load, fear of injuries, etc.).

All of my bars are on either 8, 14 or 20, based on some of the advice in this thread and this thread.

So it was just a case of keeping the balance between them to keep the workload at a reasonable level (just below heavy, for me). Some players cannot train all of their key sections (complete forwards, for instance - they would be knackered!), some players have to be given extra stuff to do (like limited defenders).

After three or four months, some players have improved - no major red arrows all over the place, anyway. But then my coaches and facilities are abysmal. And this is my first season at a professional club.

With some more testing to make sure I don't get injuries or reds all over the place, I will post them up. Probably need another season, though.

[etcetera]

thanks millie! I will try that.

I remember reading the second thread you linked a few months back but totally escaped me =/

[Crouchaldinho]

I tried a similar thing based on the findings that many have that:

8 notches (7 clicks) = maintain stats
14 notches (13 clicks) = start to increase stats
20 notches (19 clicks) = highest increase possible (all further clicks increase rate of increase, not overall gain).

So, I picked the most important ones and moved those up to 20. The useful ones to 14. And the unnecessary ones to 7. All except the fitness-based training (strength + aerobic), which I didn't put beyond 14 (due to work load, fear of injuries, etc.).

All of my bars are on either 8, 14 or 20, based on some of the advice in this thread and this thread.

So it was just a case of keeping the balance between them to keep the workload at a reasonable level (just below heavy, for me). Some players cannot train all of their key sections (complete forwards, for instance - they would be knackered!), some players have to be given extra stuff to do (like limited defenders).

After three or four months, some players have improved - no major red arrows all over the place, anyway. But then my coaches and facilities are abysmal. And this is my first season at a professional club.

With some more testing to make sure I don't get injuries or reds all over the place, I will post them up. Probably need another season, though.

I've always designed my own schedules but I've never used a system like this. I'm very curious about it.

Where do these numbers (8, 14 & 20) come from? 

Sorry if I am missing the obvious but it wasn't clear to me in the two threads that you linked.

Looks like I'm due to redesign some of my schedules!

[Millie]

In both threads, 8 is taken as the point at which players maintain their stats; 14 where they begin to improve; and 20 is the most that a player will improve (although higher levels will make the player improve quicker).

It is explained in both threads, as far as I recall. Most explicitly in the first one at Los Wonderkids.

[Crouchaldinho]

What I meant is that I would like to understand where the numbers come from in the first place. In other words, I'd like to see how it was originally worked out.

Clicking on the original thread linked to by TND in the first thread doesn't work unfortunately.

[Millie]

http://forums.fm-britain.co.uk/index.php?topic=4546.msg94398

This is the original thread, but beyond this I don't know. To be honest, I care so little about training I'm happy to just go with it rather than spending forever trying to work out what works and what doesn't in minute detail.

For me, it's a logical thing. Low, medium, high. It's how I always used to set my tactics pre-TC, so it's what I carry through into my schedules.

[Crouchaldinho]

Yes, makes sense.   

Thanks for the link.

[SFraser]

The "Training Line Theory" has been around for a while but it doesn't make a lot of sense when you get into the nuts and bolts of how players function, and my own research into Training has produced schedules that produce results that are completely contrary to the "Training Line Theory". I don't know where this way of looking at Training came from but I have seen nothing to back it up either in arguement or practice.

All the evidence suggests that Training is a lot like building Tactics in as much as you have to take into account a multitude of factors prior to designing schedules for players, and also that there is no "one shoe fits all" system for getting results from players. For each individual player you have different attribute weights requiring more or less CA per attribute, different rates of increase and decline for attribute categories according to Age so that physical attributes in youngsters for example have a natural tendency to increase whereas physical attributes in older players have a natural tendency to decrease. And then you have the fact that CA itself changes throughout the course of a season and career. Ontop of this comes Coaches with their attributes that modify the rates of CA change per training Category independant of the Intensity of the Category itself.

In other words the "Training Line Theory" cannot function in practice even if it works on some absolute test case player. Different rates of CA gain, different Ages and different Positions will inevitably produce different results for the same Category slider position and the same schedule. If two players have identical positions and identical schedules but one is gaining 10 CA per season while the other is losing 10 CA per season, there can be no equal "maintain" slider position for both.

Taking all of this into account and looking at constructing schedules according to attributes rather than categories, I have produced a series of Training schedules for download and explained the principles underlying player attribute behaviour in the following thread that you may find useful.

http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=185812

[moj]

You're suggesting that you cannot make a specialist player? What you haven't considered is, what if this theory takes into account different rates of CA gain (which is complete bullshit, not true in real life, only in FM), takes account of different personalities, takes account of different ages and produces different training schedules for each of these? With tests on 20-50 players, I'm pretty sure we'd find out if it worked or not.

[SFraser]

You're suggesting that you cannot make a specialist player? What you haven't considered is, what if this theory takes into account different rates of CA gain (which is complete bullshit, not true in real life, only in FM), takes account of different personalities, takes account of different ages and produces different training schedules for each of these? With tests on 20-50 players, I'm pretty sure we'd find out if it worked or not.

I am not saying any of that. There is no reason why you cannot make a specialist player and frankly that should be the aim of every schedule, to either improve specific deficiencies or boost specific strengths.

What I am saying is that Slider Notch 8 or 9 is not "maintain attribute at current level" while Slider Notch 24 is "maximum rate of increase". That is akin to saying that Mentality Slider Notch 8 means a player only picks a backwards pass while Mentality Slider Notch 15 means diagonal balls to the flank and Notch 20 means shoot from every position on the pitch. The game does not function like this.

"Maintain", "Improve", "Vastly Improve" are not slider positions in a training schedule, they are results of the interaction between CA gain/loss, Coach ability, Attribute Weights, Age, and relative slider positions in Training Schedules. You cannot "Maintain" a player at slider notch 8 if he is losing CA through Age, Lack of Match Experience etc. and the rest of his Training Categories are at notch 16 or above. What you end up doing here is slowly removing CA from the Category at Notch 8 because you have a schedule that is not putting in as much CA to that Category as the other Categories for a player that is not gaining CA. If the Category at notch 8 happens to be a Physical Category and the player is over 30 then not only will you not be "maintaining" his physical attributes, you will be facilitating their rapid and accelerating decline.

[Millie]

Very good points Fraser.

However, what I would say is that it would be useful to have a "model" training system which you then modify as players move through their career. If players are losing stats in areas you need to improve, then you can rejig the schedule to attend to that player's personal needs.

To be honest, those who really care about training should be doing that anyway.

The problem is that because of all these different factors (CA changes, coaching skills, fitness, facilities, etc.) there's no practical way (when there are, frankly, more important things to worry about, imo) to know every single combination.

For want of a more intuitive training system, I think that for a lot of people the "position" approach followed by tailoring to individual needs is a good way to go about things. But if you really care about training, then I have to agree with you and your approach - I look forward to hearing more about it.

[betterthanburley]

I think the missing piece is the degree to which game experience might also shape a player.

For example, I have a young player who apparently has a ton of potential.  He is a natural AMC, but accomplished at FC.  I would prefer for him to be an AMC.  The problem is, his skillset right now is very much in a striker mode.

So, the thing is-- can I play him at striker and train him at AMC?  The conceivable advantage to this would be that he is good enough to play striker right now on my team.  Therefore, I can get him much more playing time and he will also play better, which presumably gives him more ability points to play with.  And by training him as AMC, I can then direct those points towards things like passing and decisions.

But that doesn't make sense.  It would seem to me that if I play him as striker, the CA points he gains via game experience should naturally be assigned to more striker-like skills such as finishing.  Therefore training him as AMC is a losing battle.  I could be better off simply trying to convert him to a striker via position training and a striker training schedule.

Also, I wonder if beyond game experience, certain players just have their attributes capped in some way.  Like if a guy is 5 at jumping, he'll just never be good at jumping.  I can focus on aerobics training even to the expense of everything else, but the player will simply gain pace or agility and not jumping.

I believe that a specialized training schedule in conjunction with games at the position will definitely mold a player to a certain degree.  I do notice that my AMC's or DC's tend to have the points where I prefer them more than players from computer teams.  Not by a whole lot, but enough where it does give them a bit of an edge. 

But anything beyond that is a mystery.  Which is why I pretty much just set up a few training schedules based on position and leave it at that.