1

A Decision/Action Model for Soccer – Pt 4Using heuristics as coaching points

“What is a heuristic? In essence it’s a rule of thumb. The important part is to understand that it is a strategy, a tool, that helps you to survive in an uncertain world.”Gerd Gigerenzer - YouTube

Strategies in the adaptive toolbox are fast and frugal. Fast refers to the relative ease of computation the strategies entail… Frugal refers to the very limited amount of information these startegies need.Daniel Goldstein et al. [6]

What’s inside the adaptive toolbox

2

The origin and function of the adaptive toolbox

“The notion of an adaptive toolbox provides a framework for nonoptimizing visions of bounded rationality, emphasizing psychological plausibility, domain specificity, and ecological rationality. Heuristics in the adaptive toolbox are modeled on the actual cognitive abilities a species has rather than on the imaginary powers of omniscient demons. They are designed for specific goals – domain specific rather than domain general – which enable them to make fast, frugal, and computationally cheap decisions. Heuristics are composed from building blocks that guide search, stop search, and make decisions. Heuristics that are matched to particular environmental structures allow agents to be ecologically rational. The study of ecological rationality involves analyzing the structure of environments, the structure of heuristics, and the match between them.” [6]

“The function of the adaptive toolbox is, thus, to provide strategies – cognitive, emotional, and social – that help to handle a multitude of goals by making decisions quickly, frugally, accurately, or, if not possible, not at all. The function of the adaptive toolbox is not to guarantee consistency or solve differential equations to optimize some function.” [6]

3

Heuristics in soccer

Heuristics in soccer; Are short cuts related to a specific goal, task, objective or strategy within the

game. They enable rapid decisions and actions by reducing the number of options for

consideration and the time needed for computation. They result in short, simple and general actions. They can be combined into a series and loosely coupled coalitions to create more

complex, i.e. specific and longer lasting actions. They are limited by the player/s experience with the situation and environmental

affordances.

Heuristics are recognized as either simple implicit patterns, i.e. a wall pass, an attacker checking in then out, short-short-long, eye contact at a free kick or as explicit phrases of up to six words, i.e. turn, time, man-on, get your head up, play the way you face, their corner-our counter, straight run-diagonal ball and so on. [3,5,6,13,21]

Historically, heuristics were learned informally on the field as feedback and guidance from older, more experienced players or as coaching points by experts in formalized models. The former represents the situated learning style and oral culture between an apprentice and a journeyman. [1,12,26] The later a standardized curriculum approach. [22,23,24] In both cases, the player learns by solving real problems in a large world. [4,5,6]

4

How heuristics combine as a serial process for planning and action

Individual heuristics are limited in what they can accomplish. They are simple, general and blind to any other heuristic. This is what allows them to be loosely coupled together creating complex and adaptable action plans. [6]

The degree of complexity is a combination of what the environment affords and which heuristics are available. For example, a defender watches a long ball played out to her immediate opponent. [1,2,6] The heuristics for action might be; [16]

Move while the balls in flight. Intercept if possible. If not, tackle as the ball arrives. Can’t tackle, get close. If poor control, tackle. If not, contain. Limit options, exert control.

Each heuristic is a straightforward ‘what to do’ action goal. It’s dependent on the previous one, sets the stage for the next, has a stopping and decision point which is determined by changes in the environments, i.e. if a tackle had been made the heuristics for a safe pass or counter would have been called up. This is an example of loose coupling.

Serial strings like these connect short term goals and actions. [13,28]

5

How heuristics combine ascoalitions for robust decision/actions

Each ‘what to do’ heuristic needs one or more ‘how to do it’ heuristics. These are the tools the player uses to achieve each of the ‘what’ mini-goals in the series. Examples of these ‘how’heuristics are; How do I work with others? [14]

How can I create/reduce friction? [25]

How do I outwit the opponent? [15]

How do I adjust the Tempo? [17]

How do I influence the flow? [17]

A coalition of heuristics is a combination of simple what and how’s. Together the boundaries are loose and vague. What becomes how, how morphs into what and back while different ones come in and go out. The difference between what one chooses to do, the aspirational level, and how they intend to do it is important. It marks the distinction between the ends and the means, the goal and the process. Both ends and means face the ecological constraints of limited time and energy. Those limitations flip the what/how relationship between heuristics within a series or coalition. [1,6] Example; breathing is what you do, how is an unconscious process. Now, how long can you hold your breath before how becomes the new what?

Moving on is more important then optimizing the process. [6] A coalition should only include the tools necessary to achieve the mini-goal but still be robust enough to adapt to change and surprise. That’s the fine line which ensures the fast and frugal benefits of the adaptive toolbox.

6

Heuristics in the main momentsIt’s all about the use of the ball

In possession:

Free up the ball. The ball should have as large a field for selection as possible.

Give the ball eye’s. What can it see? Is it a good view forward?

Give the ball a plan. If you don’t have a plan give the ball to a teammate, they might, or test the opponents to see what happens. Don’t waste time, don’t kill the game, don’t over think and never surrender the initiative.

Opponents in possession:

Corral the ball. Limit the options available to it. Restrict it’s freedom.

Blind the ball. Force the balls vision down, back, into the stands, someplace safe.

Dictate the plan to the ball. Only allow it what you want it to have. Taking the initiative away from the opponents, or at least limiting it by being proactive is an on-going goal defenders.

7

Heuristics in SchwerpunktWhy goals are scored [8]

Most goals are scored when two or more of these reasons happen together or one right after another.

Lack of pressure on the ball. The first attacker is free to set the agenda.

Lack of support. Defenders should play with numbers up. A spare player should support the first defender.

Failure to track players down. Lack of concentration, miscommunication, a mismatch between players or opportunistic attackers.

Giving the ball away. A crime of commission or omission.

Set plays. Defenders cannot pressurize the player taking the restart and the attackers can rehearse a plan.

Not all goals result from these ‘errors’. The opponents deserve credit when it’s due.Clausewitz shows us how danger, fear, uncertain information, internal strife, chance, outside constraints, an active opponent and a mismatch between ends and means contribute to the problem. [25] Why goals are scored, i.e. what happened, maybe the result of the opponents just being better, faster, quicker or a lucky break.

8

Heuristics in concentrationWhen is it likely to fail [8]

Concentration falters at predictable times or when a player has an internal focus of attention.

When the ball changes hands. Tackles and interceptions result in an immediate switch in the main moments. In a

heartbeat responsibilities are reversed and the current plan no longer works.When there’s a stoppage in play. The referees whistle brings everything to a halt. However, unlike the ball changing

hands, in most cases there’s a delay in restarting the game and possession might not change. The delay gap relieves tension, breaks action and forces players to emotionally reboot.

When players become fatigued. One of the elements of friction. [25]

When a player is preoccupied. The six year old that needs a potty break; a player who is intimidated by an opponent

or the level of play; a player who can’t let go of a bad call; a puppet player and their parent master. Preoccupation interferes with concentration on an external task. It fosters a noisy cognitive environment that contributes to the Fog of War. [25] He or she is in, at the least, a partially isolated state. Until they can fully reenter the world and resume interactions they are are of limited use to themselves or the team.

9

Heuristics in influenceWhat effect do you want to have on the opponent

Capabilities are the tools and resources that are available for use. If the capabilities don’t have the desired effect on the opponent effort is wasted and time is lost. Effect equals influence and is dependent on the level of fingerspitzengefühl. [18] The main mental effects are to confuse, mislead or surprise the opponent. [15]

Deceive them. “convince them we are going to do something other than what we are really going to do in

order to induce him to act in a manner prejudicial to his own interests. The intent is to give the enemy a clear picture of the situation, but the wrong picture”.

Confuse them. “act in such a way that they don’t not know what to expect. Because they don’t know what

to expect, they must prepare for numerous possibilities and cannot prepare adequately for any one”. This is an example of Cheng ch’i.

Blindside them. “deny them any knowledge of impending action. They are not deceived or confused as to

our intentions but are completely ignorant of them”. Blind side runs, unseen second defenders and players who wear the cloak of invisibility are the ones who can surprise.

The player’s ‘on the ball,’ those in the spotlight of attention, can confuse and deceive opponents. Player’s ‘off of the ball,’ those out of the spotlight can to, as well surprise them. These players have the option of choosing when to move from the darkness into the spotlight.

10

Strategies for selecting heuristicsImitation and Take the Best

Imitation works in a stable environment. Go along with successful group/average behavior, an even more successful outlier or disruptive behavior (the wrong crowd model). Unstable or unpredictable environments make imitation very difficult as the norm and outliers are unclear. Note; imitation is not value free. It can create group think, mediocrity, solve problems or create even bigger ones. [6]

Take the Best chooses between two alternatives based on the first cue that discriminates between them. For example; you are going to pass the ball to either A or B. You can reach both players1, both are open2, a pass to A puts four defenders out of the game while one to B puts two out3. With this strategy you pass to A. The third cue, number of opponents played out, determined the choice. Note; Take the Best assumes some level of experience because players will need to search and select two targets/ideas for comparison and be able to process through a short checklist for the higher valued option. If both alternatives are equal two new targets have to be compared or a new strategy employed. [6]

11

Strategies for selecting heuristicsRecognition and Take the First

When selecting between two targets or ideas the Recognition heuristic depends on missing knowledge. “If one of two objects is recognized and the other is not, then infer that the recognized object has the higher value with respect to the criterion” and choose it. Example; a player who recognizes what one teammate is about to do and is unsure about another should cooperate with the first. [6]

Take the First. “Experts, such as pilots, firefighters, and chess players, have a simple strategy at their disposal: when face with a problem to solve, often the best course of action to take is the first (or only) one that comes to mind. (This strategy has been described as the recognition-primed decision model)… [11] Take the first is argued to be effective because… options are not random but may come to mind in order of quality. Take the first is less successful in domains where the decision maker is not an expert or in completely novel situations within a domain of expertise.” [6]

Expertise is relative to the decision maker and the environment. An eight year old can be an expert compared to other eight year olds.

12

How can strategies and heuristics be learnedActions have consequences and provide feedback

For any of these heuristics and strategies to be learned “requires a regular environment, an adequate opportunity to practice, and rapid and unequivocal feedback about the correctness of thoughts and actions. When these conditions are fulfilled, skill eventually develops, and the intuitive judgments and choices that quickly come to mind will mostly be accurate. All this is the work of System 1, which means it occurs automatically and fast. A marker of skilled performance is the ability to deal with vast amounts of information swiftly and efficiently.” [9]

“Experience does not translate directly into expertise if the domain is dynamic, feedback is inadequate, and the number and variety of experiences is too small.” [11]

Consequence; the effect, result, or outcome of something occurring earlier. Merriam Webster On Line Dictionary

Feedback; a) the return to the input of a part of the output of a system, or process: b) the transmission of evaluative or corrective information about an action, event, or process to the original or controlling source. Merriam Webster On Line Dictionary

13

How can strategies and heuristics be learnedConsequences of their actions have to be meaningful, the feedback fast and clear

The relationship between consequences and feedback to learning can be seen in this matrix. The best learning space is in the upper left, the worst is the lower right.

Consequences are outcome based and emotionally driven. If players don’t care, no matter what, consequences will be small. Here, it’s the level of attachment to the end product of an action that matters and serves as the measure. Internal motivation is the driver for quality. [6]

Quality feedback has two parts. First, it’s the ‘return’ to the source someawareness of their action. It’s a reflective, inner looking process. Input from an outside source, i.e. a coach can contribute to noise. Second, the return must be “rapid and unequivocal.” [9] To delay reflection orto have ambiguous standards adds to noise. Few players will remember or care about a missed tackle last week and praise for a shot that goes out for a throw-in only muddies the water forfuture efforts.

[6]

14

How can strategies and heuristics be taughtThinking fast and frugally requires living in a fast and frugal world

Teaching heuristics starts with experience, the training environment. Concrete, realistic examples that have been lived provide the material for reflection.

Ability appropriate small sided games provide a large number of consequential situations and minimal noise. The games should be outcome based, there are winners and losers. Winning and losing can be measured by internal actions and not just the end result. Each players level of motivation can be subjectively observed in real time.

The games should be long enough to develop tension and create enough examples while short enough not to run out of gas and become inconsequential. These can be organized around a ‘cup format’ where teams rotate, a ‘festival format’ where players switch teams or as ‘winners stay’ where the out team can be questioned as the following slides show.

Fast and frugal answers can solve simple and deterministic problems while jury rigging random problems. They maybe a part of the solution to wicked problems but won’t get near the actual solution. [19]

This has to do with the solution space of the problem. The first three have room for only one answer, the last is uncertain. Heuristic strategies like Imitation, Recognition, Take the Best or Take the First can solve single solution problems with minimal information and computation. This is not an optimal answer strategy but a close enough one to keep moving in a dynamic environment.

15

How can strategies and heuristics be taughtThinking fast and frugally requires living in a fast and frugal world

During the breaks between or in games ask specific closed ended questions in the area that you want to address about actual events. Avoid hypothetical questions.

Ask what, how, who, when, where, did questions about very specific events in the SSG. Who scored their second goal? How did they line up? What was your basic agreement? Did you see her run past you? Who picked up the runner? These heuristics about heuristics ask for fast and frugal answers. Everyone is learning a language. Since there is only one right answer the players will ‘feel the consequences’ of their errors and that supplies ‘immediate and unequivocal feedback.’ It also sets the tone for an action driven oral culture on the field. When it’s a regular part of training players come to expect it and learn implicitly that they have to pay attention and remember what’s going on.

In the beginning avoid asking why, projecting into the future or what do you think? These questions ask that some weighting, comparison and values be applied to the decision process. That’s System 2 at work. Slow and deliberative, it can create new heuristics, solve adaptable problems and ponder wicked ones. Projecting into the future is planning and plans tend to suffer from mission creep. You get bogged down. Like any skill, to get fast and frugal you have to practice fast and frugal. Nobel Prize winner Daniel Kahneman, [9,21] an advocate for System 2, acknowledges this on slide 12. Initially to build trust, vocabulary and speed stay in the concrete past tense of their just lived experience. Connect their “remembering and experiencing selves.” [9]

16

How can strategies and heuristics be taughtThinking fast and frugally requires living in a fast and frugal world

How do you present the questions and what do you look for?

Push simple single answer questions on what just happened down to the players. Create a demand for information from them. The players have the responsibility to provide the details for the coach. They need to develop game memory and be held accountable. [14]

Use both a broadcast and point-to-point approach to questioning. The former allows anyone to answer which gives you some insight into who volunteers and who hides. The later targets an individual and puts them in the demand-pull hot seat. Choose wisely. [14]

Ask follow up questions. “Who scored their second goal? Where were they? What foot did they use? Where were you when it happened?” By stringing questions together players can begin putting the games narrative into focus. Longer and deeper threads of shared memory can be built which help to enhance trust and meaning. [14]

Don’t allow too much time for a response. Keep things moving. That’s what happens on a corner; sharp, fast and simple. [15]

The goal? Look for the players to take responsibility for the questioning itself. Start discussions, disagreements even arguments and then back out. The goal is for the group to start questioning itself, building an internal consensus which transfers onto the field. When the coach no longer has to prime the dialectical pump, when they talk and argue soccer points amongst each other, they are on the way to taking control. Shared heuristics are a valuable tool in this process.

17

Summary“The only special thing I have is insight; I see things a fraction earlier,

and can play the ball a fraction earlier to where it should be.” [27]

Soccer is a dynamic game that requires a high level of rapid communication between players. Communication takes place primarily through visual signals and cues, i.e. recognized patterns and explicit verbal exchange.

Visual signals can be implicit or explicit. The former are “expressions that we give off,” the presumably unintentional acts, habits, behaviors, idiosyncrasies everyone has. These expressions cannot be turned-off. The later are “expressions that we give” which are always intentional and convey a specific meaning like pointing or a break into space. These expressions are under voluntary control. [7]

Verbal communication falls into the “expressions that we give” category. Verbal communication requires thought and speech which is subject to control. [7]

Fast and frugal heuristics depend on the speed of search, stop search i.e. recognition, and a decision. Matching a memory, the stripped down bits of of experience, with new uncertain and unfolding reality is a challenge. It’s a ‘close enough’ emotional approach that the team adopts which values adaptability, trust and improvisation over optimization. [6]

As Cruyff’s quote above illustrates players who can pick up implicit or explicit communication fast and frugally have an on-going advantage. Heuristics, both pattern recognition and verbalcommunication, play a key role in helping players to gain a temporal edge over their opponents. When that edge is multiplied over and over again the opponents are usually left chasing after the game.

18

References

1. CRAWFORD, M. 2010, Shop Class as Soul Craft, An Inquiry Into the Value of Work (New York: Penguin Books).

2. GIBSON, E. 1988, Exploratory Behavior in the Development of Perceiving, Acting, and Acquiring of Knowledge (Annual Reviews, 39: 1-41).

3. GIGERENZER, G. BRIGHTON, H. 2009, Homo Heuristics: Why Biased Minds Make Better Inferences (Topics in Cognitive Science I, 107-143).

4. GIGERENZER, G. GAISSMAIER, W. 2011 Heuristic Decision Making (Annual Review Psychology, 62:451-482).5. GIGERENZER, G. GOLDSTEIN, D. 1996, Reasoning the Fast and Frugal Way: Models of Bounded Rationality

(Psychological Review, Vol. 103, No. 4, 650-669).6. GIGERENZER, G. SELTEN, R. 2001, Bounded Rationality, The Adaptive Toolbox (Cambridge MA: MIT Press).7. GOFFMAN, E. 1959, The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life (New York: Anchor Books).8. HUGHES, C. 1973, Tactics and Teamwork (Yorkshire, England: EP Group).9. KAHNEMAN, D. 2011, Thinking Fast and Slow (New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux).10. KANDEL, E. 2006, In Search of Memory, The Emergence of a New Science of Mind (New York: W.W. Norton

& Co).11. KLEIN, G. 1998, Sources of Power, How People Make Decisions (Cambridge, Ma: MIT Press).12. LAVE, J. & WENGER, E. 1991, Situated Learning, Legitimate Peripheral Practice (New York: Cambridge

University Press).13. LUAN, S. 2011, A Signal-Detection Analysis of Fast and Frugal Trees (Psychological Review, Vol. 118, No. 2

316-338).14. MARINE CORPS, U.S. 1996, MCDP 6, Command and Control

(http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/service_pubs/mcdp6.pdf).15. MARINE CORPS, U.S. 1997, MCDP 1, Warfighting (http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/jel/service_pubs/mcdp1.pdf).16. PAUL, L. 2005, Playing Better Soccer is More Fun (Springfield, Va: Accotink Press).

19

References

17. RAO, V. 2011, Tempo, Timing, Tactics and Strategy in Narrative-Driven Decision-Making (Ribbonfarm Inc).18. RICHARDS, C. 2004, Certain to Win, The Strategy of John Boyd, Applied to Business (Xlibris Corporation).19. ROYAL MILITARY ACADEMY SANDHURST 2011, An Officer and a Problem Solver: Developing Problem Solving

and Thinking Skills in Officer Cadets at Sandhurst(http://www.army.mod.uk/documents/general/RMAS_An_Officer_and_a_Problem_Solver.pdf).

20. TALEB, N. 2007, The Black Swan, The Impact of the Highly Improbable (New York: Random House).21. TVERSKY, A. KAHNEMAN, D. 1974, Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases (Science, New Series,

Vol. 185, No. 4157, 1124-1131).22. UNITED STATES SOCCER FEDERATION, Best Practices for Coaching Soccer in the United States, Player

Development Guidelines (http://www.ussoccer.com/Coaches/Resources.aspx).23. United States Soccer Federation, Concepts and Coaching Guidelines

(http://resources.ussoccer.com/n7v8b8j3/cds/downloads/Part%202%20-%20Concepts%20and%20Coaching%20Guidelines%20U.S.%20Soccer%20Coaching%20Curriculum.pdf).

24. United States Youth Soccer 2012, Player Development Model (http://www.ussoccer.com/Coaches/Resources.aspx).

25. WATTS, B. 1996, Clausewitzian Friction and Future War (McNair Paper 52, Institute for National Strategic Studies).

26. WENGER, E. 1998, Communities of Practice, Learning, Meaning, and Identity (New York: Cambridge University Press).

27. WINNER, D. 2000, Brilliant Orange, The Neurotic Genius of Dutch Football (London: Bloomsbury).28. WOOD, J. PETRIGLIERI, G. 2005, Transcending Polarization: Beyond Binary Thinking (Transactional Analysis

Journal, Vol. 35, No. 1, 31-39).

Additional references about Gigerenzer and heuristics, including the opening quote can be found at:http://www.youtube.com/user/gocognitive?feature=CAgQwRs%3D.

20

Thank you“I’ll live or die by my own ideas.” Johan Cruyff

Presentation created September 2012 by Larry Paul, Prescott Arizona.All references are available as stated.All content is the responsibility of the author.For questions or to inquire how to arrange a consultation or workshop on this topic you can contact me at larry4v4@hotmail.com, subject line; decision/action model.For more information visit the bettersoccermorefun channel on YouTube.