Dan's Training Schedule Calculator

[Pompey_Dan]

Ok i'm going through making the schedules now, thanks for the tool! The screenshot shows one of my CB's, with his stats, and the schedule recommended shows a fair amount of attacking and shooting training, though neither are needed for a CB at all. Is the objective with these schedules to create well rounded players or make them excel at the required attributes?

Also a few of the players i've done, have a workload at the very high end of medium, would this not cause alot of injuries?

EDIT: My team being Lyon would mean my players fall under level 1, though would the youth players be set down to say, level 2, or just have a heavy workload? (By youth, I mean younger backup players that are over the age of 18, and therefore on senior schedules) I'm guessing keep them on level 1 to help them develop to the right standard.

I'll post the results on some random players once i've done a season.

Hi there, the reason that shooting training has been identified is because "composure" is a key attribute for central defenders and this is found under shooting! Watch out for those attributes with double meaning - is it composure in taking a shot or composure in making a tackle? Actually it's both.

You can also see that attacking training includes passing. The objective here isn't to create well rounded players but to try and improve key attributes given their position. As you cannot train on specific attributes we have to train within groups of attributes which appear as training disciplines... i.e. ball control. You can identify these groups by the colour coding on the TSC.

As for the workload, I believe you can go up to high end of medium without too much worry, but I avoid heavy or v.heavy workloads.

Hope that helps answer your questions.

 

[Mike.]

also what do the base stat figures mean?

 

[Pompey_Dan]

dan can i ask what your theory is behind your training? because i use sfrasers ( i actually used yours a lot, before i defected ) yours achived some very good results, but think some of you training is heavier than needed, for example i dont think your centre forward one needs to be that high in places

I believe that this is the problem with generic training schedules, it assumes that al defenders, strikers, etc need improvement when the higher the stats the harder it is to improve them. Some players just need to maintain most stats and concentrate on improving their weaknesses. This is different for each player.

Each position has key attributes that are vital in carrying out the job efficiently, and some "secondary" attributes that are beneficial. My theory
is to identify these key and primary attributes and then improve or maintain them. To do this I give each attribute a target score, 16 for key attributes, 12 for secondary and so on. The TSC then "measures" the players stats against these scores... where high maintain, where low improve.

Now FM 2010 doesn't allow us to train on attributes singularly, instead it groups attributes into nine disciplines (see how the TSC is colour coded to illustrate this). The TSC also groups the scores by discipline and then decides which groups need the most training and suggests a suitable schedule.

It also measures the impact of that suggested schedule, if the anticipated workload is heavy or very heavy then this indicates that the player has a fair amount of improving to do to achieve the necessary attributes to fulfil that role efficiently. The higher the workload the greater the risk of injury so consider a different role perhaps. This shows an interesting side benefit to the TSC in illustrating a players suitability to a particular role.

Another common flaw in many generic schedules is that they overlook the importance of certain training disciplines. Surely a defender doesn't need attacking or shooting training right? Buy you want them to be composed on the tackle and sure in their passing, well composure is improved by shooting training and passing by attacking training.

I don't want to suggest that the TSC is in anyway the finished article, it is a work in progress. I may need to reconsider the weighting or the importance of the secondary attributes and this is where feedback is of great help to me.

Hopefully my theory is sound, time will tell!

 

[LP94]

Will take a good look later on

 

[Mike.]

I believe that this is the problem with generic training schedules, it assumes that al defenders, strikers, etc need improvement when the higher the stats the harder it is to improve them. Some players just need to maintain most stats and concentrate on improving their weaknesses. This is different for each player.

Each position has key attributes that are vital in carrying out the job efficiently, and some "secondary" attributes that are beneficial. My theory
is to identify these key and primary attributes and then improve or maintain them. To do this I give each attribute a target score, 16 for key attributes, 12 for secondary and so on. The TSC then "measures" the players stats against these scores... where high maintain, where low improve.

Now FM 2010 doesn't allow us to train on attributes singularly, instead it groups attributes into nine disciplines (see how the TSC is colour coded to illustrate this). The TSC also groups the scores by discipline and then decides which groups need the most training and suggests a suitable schedule.

It also measures the impact of that suggested schedule, if the anticipated workload is heavy or very heavy then this indicates that the player has a fair amount of improving to do to achieve the necessary attributes to fulfil that role efficiently. The higher the workload the greater the risk of injury so consider a different role perhaps. This shows an interesting side benefit to the TSC in illustrating a players suitability to a particular role.

Another common flaw in many generic schedules is that they overlook the importance of certain training disciplines. Surely a defender doesn't need attacking or shooting training right? Buy you want them to be composed on the tackle and sure in their passing, well composure is improved by shooting training and passing by attacking training.

I don't want to suggest that the TSC is in anyway the finished article, it is a work in progress. I may need to reconsider the weighting or the importance of the secondary attributes and this is where feedback is of great help to me.

Hopefully my theory is sound, time will tell!

agree with virtually all of this. my training schedules are based on Sfrasers theory http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=185812 dont wanna go into loads of detail as i feel it would be spamming your thread, but suffice to say it works on this premise (showing outfield only):

|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

essentially for the base setting its one click per attribute, then multiplied by how much i want to focus on a given category. so if i want to training attacking at 5 times the focus, i use ten clicks, but for set pieces it would be 25. i think looking at your complete forward schedule you could cut it by about 15 or so clicks and still get near enough the same output, while lowering risk of injury and fatigue

 

[Redrup]

Did I read that you said you aim to have the Key attributes at 16 and secondary at 12? If so, I believe that is a bit too low.

 

[Jake]

Stuck. Great work.

 

[Average Joe]

To be fair I've never really thought about composure counting for a defernder, just shooting and passing.

Its a good point now ive though about it!

 

[Pompey_Dan]

agree with virtually all of this. my training schedules are based on Sfrasers theory http://community.sigames.com/showthread.php?t=185812 dont wanna go into loads of detail as i feel it would be spamming your thread, but suffice to say it works on this premise (showing outfield only):

|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

essentially for the base setting its one click per attribute, then multiplied by how much i want to focus on a given category. so if i want to training attacking at 5 times the focus, i use ten clicks, but for set pieces it would be 25. i think looking at your complete forward schedule you could cut it by about 15 or so clicks and still get near enough the same output, while lowering risk of injury and fatigue

I have just read some of sfraser's stuff and it's really interesting, especially considering players age and the effect that has on training.

But to be effective the user must know what are the key attributes for the players chosen position, this is easily done (from tactics screen in game) but is vital when approaching training. Otherwise assumptions arise such as "defenders don't need shooting training" when the key attribute composure is only improved by shooting training.

I think that I could improve my own calculator by redressing the secondary attributes and their weighting.

Cheers for the feedback

Did I read that you said you aim to have the Key attributes at 16 and secondary at 12? If so, I believe that is a bit too low.

It isn't that I aim to get key attributes to 16, and secondary to 12, it is the base figure by which the player's attribute is measured. The training is adjusted accordingly, if your winger's "crossing" is 17 but "off the ball" is 8 then why wouldn't you want to concentrate on improving the low key attribute whilst maintaining the high attribute? Remember, over train and you risk injury.

To be fair I've never really thought about composure counting for a defernder, just shooting and passing.

Its a good point now ive though about it!

This is often overlooked! But here you go, you can see that "composure" is a key attribute for central defenders by the way it is highlighted with a grey bar.

View attachment 79595

 

[Billy]

Any plans to put together a youth version of this calculator, Dan?

 

[Danyul]

Could we also get goalkeepers added to the calculator?

I'm still trying it out with lyon atm, and was thinking of toning the workload down from high end of medium to the low end for each player after december, as I tend to pick up alot of injuries after then, plus the match schedule can get really tight. Would this affect the results too much if I knocked each category down by a few clicks?

 

[Pompey_Dan]

Any plans to put together a youth version of this calculator, Dan?

If this proves useful I will look at doing that. I'm going to run some more tests and I'm keen for people to BETA test the calc with me. It is a work in progress and sure it needs some fine tuning still.

Could we also get goalkeepers added to the calculator?

I'm still trying it out with lyon atm, and was thinking of toning the workload down from high end of medium to the low end for each player after december, as I tend to pick up alot of injuries after then, plus the match schedule can get really tight. Would this affect the results too much if I knocked each category down by a few clicks?

The thing about goalkeepers is that the primary stats don't really change. I could look at the differences between sweeper keepers and standard though.

By all means adapt the suggested schedules to suit, the more intensive the training the greater the chance of injury but also the greater the chance of improvement so it is a balancing act. I think I need to reduce intensity on secondary attributes and will also look at injuries resulting from the training.

 

[swfc107]

just downloaded dan's training calculator but when i try to edit numbers it wont let me help please.

 

[Mike.]

If this proves useful I will look at doing that. I'm going to run some more tests and I'm keen for people to BETA test the calc with me. It is a work in progress and sure it needs some fine tuning still.



The thing about goalkeepers is that the primary stats don't really change. I could look at the differences between sweeper keepers and standard though.

By all means adapt the suggested schedules to suit, the more intensive the training the greater the chance of injury but also the greater the chance of improvement so it is a balancing act. I think I need to reduce intensity on secondary attributes and will also look at injuries resulting from the training.

it is possible to get changes in a a goalkeeper, but its very difficult. your traing needs to very spot on, i have good one if you are interested. but as with all training. its actually match experience that gets the most growth from a player, training just augments it. the best way to get a goalkepper to grow is to keep him playing. always have your back up keepers available for reserves or on loan

 

[swfc107]

anyone help?

 

[Billy]

Did you open it as read-only?

 

[swfc107]

dont know

 

[Billy]

Well, does it say 'Read-Only' as part of the file name at the top of your Microsoft Excel application?

 

[swfc107]

it's ok i fixed it

---------- Post added at 06:06 AM ---------- Previous post was at 06:06 AM ----------

thanks anyway

 

[Pompey_Dan]

it is possible to get changes in a a goalkeeper, but its very difficult. your traing needs to very spot on, i have good one if you are interested. but as with all training. its actually match experience that gets the most growth from a player, training just augments it. the best way to get a goalkepper to grow is to keep him playing. always have your back up keepers available for reserves or on loan

Thanks for the offer but I've been really pleased with GK improvements using Dan's Training.

What I was saying originally was that there's little point including goalkeepers in the TSC as they are only ever interested in improving very specific attributes and that this differs little from one keeper to the next.

But thanks anyways.