Norway's edge isn't that they find more talent. It's that they lose less of it. Early specialisation selects for whoever is best at age 10, which is mostly whoever is biggest at age 10. That filters out every kid who would have been elite at 18 but hadn't finished growing yet. The Norwegian system keeps the pool open long enough for talent to separate from physical maturity, and by the time the selection happens the late developers have arrived.
5.6 million people producing more elite athletes than 330 million isn't a miracle. It's maths. America narrows the funnel at age 8 and wonders why the adults who come out the other end aren't as good. Norway keeps the funnel wide until 13 and lets biology finish the conversation that coaches started too early everywhere else. The talent was always there. The system just stopped throwing it away before it could show up.
A classmate of my son's, 5th grade, declared to him that "you are not doing sports if you are not on a team". It's hard to defend physical activities for recreational purposes in this day and age. At recess baseball, some treat it like MLB, some just want to play. Big big conflicts among kids because of this difference.
I do think we're seeing an optimistic shift in our approach to sport. Alysa liu is the prime example that comes to mind but it seems like we're shifting gears a bit towards love and joy for sport rather than the over-the-top grind mentality.
Personally, I like the Norwegian way much more than the competitive way, but also maybe both countries are doing what works best for them. The small country has to keep a high percentage of their youth in the sport as long as possible because of a low population, whereas a larger country like the US can select earlier and drill their youth for competition. At the World Cup, both nations are only sending 26 players, so it makes sense for both sides to do it their way.
This refers only to find the most competitive athletes. If it is about how to make people, and especially young people, happy and live a fulfilled life, that is a completely different thing. Then I'd always on the Norway side of things.
Interesting cultural observations, although I'm not sure the causation lines hold up. I suppose it's safe to say that all of these factors have made some contribution to athletic excellence.
Norway's edge isn't that they find more talent. It's that they lose less of it. Early specialisation selects for whoever is best at age 10, which is mostly whoever is biggest at age 10. That filters out every kid who would have been elite at 18 but hadn't finished growing yet. The Norwegian system keeps the pool open long enough for talent to separate from physical maturity, and by the time the selection happens the late developers have arrived.
5.6 million people producing more elite athletes than 330 million isn't a miracle. It's maths. America narrows the funnel at age 8 and wonders why the adults who come out the other end aren't as good. Norway keeps the funnel wide until 13 and lets biology finish the conversation that coaches started too early everywhere else. The talent was always there. The system just stopped throwing it away before it could show up.
This made me smile: “I am often the first coach to tell the eight-year-olds they need to do a better job focusing.”
A classmate of my son's, 5th grade, declared to him that "you are not doing sports if you are not on a team". It's hard to defend physical activities for recreational purposes in this day and age. At recess baseball, some treat it like MLB, some just want to play. Big big conflicts among kids because of this difference.
I do think we're seeing an optimistic shift in our approach to sport. Alysa liu is the prime example that comes to mind but it seems like we're shifting gears a bit towards love and joy for sport rather than the over-the-top grind mentality.
Personally, I like the Norwegian way much more than the competitive way, but also maybe both countries are doing what works best for them. The small country has to keep a high percentage of their youth in the sport as long as possible because of a low population, whereas a larger country like the US can select earlier and drill their youth for competition. At the World Cup, both nations are only sending 26 players, so it makes sense for both sides to do it their way.
This refers only to find the most competitive athletes. If it is about how to make people, and especially young people, happy and live a fulfilled life, that is a completely different thing. Then I'd always on the Norway side of things.
Norway also has high levels of sporting participation amongst girls & women, including lifestyle sports:
https://chesterrep.openrepository.com/server/api/core/bitstreams/f7fbe6fd-a49d-488e-9f3b-0cc95f2c25ff/content
Typo in final paragraph: "The United Sates"
Interesting cultural observations, although I'm not sure the causation lines hold up. I suppose it's safe to say that all of these factors have made some contribution to athletic excellence.