BuzzerBeater Forums

BB Global (English) > Training Speed Analysis

Training Speed Analysis (thread closed)

Set priority
Show messages by
This Post:
00
381.457 in reply to 381.456
Date: 3/24/2008 2:49:12 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
Quick question: so the training times for secondary skills has been increased considerably, but not the training times for the primary skills. Why is that? Thanks for keeping this post up. The BBs should make it a sticky thread.

This Post:
00
381.459 in reply to 381.458
Date: 3/25/2008 12:08:17 AM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
I see now. Thanks for the explanation. Hopefully this most recent reduction in training isn't too drastic. I like seeing pops every week. Another question: how big of a difference in training speed is there between 18 year olds and 21 year olds? Any ideas?

This Post:
00
381.463 in reply to 381.461
Date: 3/28/2008 4:50:21 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
3535
1- How solid is the evidence that there really is any difference between different training types in the training speed for the primary skill?

Quite solid... defense (both inside and outside) is slower than (at least) most of the others.
To my experience (i train C and PF): ID > IS > Reb
(> means slower:) )

5- Will a player train equally fast for, say, IS at C and PF respectively, considering that IS is apparently relatively more important at the C position than at PF?

The rules claim that players playing at least 48 minutes in the trained positions get THE MAXIMUM BENEFIT from the training... if the training speed is different for the two positions... well, that statement would, at least, be very ambiguous :)

6- I'd appreciate a link to a good post that describes the exact relation between age and training speed.

Height also influences the training speed and the training speed itself is changing every season foe the moment... I am afraid it will take a while before we get to know that :)

Last edited by Newton07 at 3/28/2008 4:54:51 PM

From: Kermmy

To: RiP
This Post:
00
381.465 in reply to 381.464
Date: 3/29/2008 1:06:22 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
00
Just saying, I think it's good news to see a guy who only played 40 minutes pop. It shows that the training curve might not be as steep as some people think.


The reverse can also be said that your players were sooooo close to the next level that any amount of minutes above a certain amount (30 for example) would have been enough for them to pop.

This doesn't prove anything about training curve steepness at those minutes, IMO.

From: Newton07

This Post:
00
381.466 in reply to 381.465
Date: 3/29/2008 1:15:31 PM
Overall Posts Rated:
3535
I have a 18yo (211cm) trainee who had a pop in rebounding with more than 48 minutes. The next week he had a second pop still in rebounding with only 41 minutes...

I think this proves something :)

I forgot... both weeks I trained rebounding for C and PF.

Advertisement