This presentation looks at how heuristics help to frame coaching points. Fast and frugal strategies for action and decision making

1. A Decision/Action Model for Soccer – Pt 4
Using heuristics as coaching points
What’s inside the adaptive toolbox
“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]
1

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]
2

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]
3

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]
4

5. How heuristics combine as
coalitions 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.
5

6. Heuristics in the main moments
It’s all about the use of the ball
In possession: Opponents in possession:
 Free up the ball. The ball should  Corral the ball. Limit the options
have as large a field for selection as available to it. Restrict it’s freedom.
possible.
 Blind the ball. Force the balls vision
 Give the ball eye’s. What can it see? down, back, into the stands,
Is it a good view forward?
someplace safe.
 Give the ball a plan. If you don’t
have a plan give the ball to a  Dictate the plan to the ball. Only
allow it what you want it to have.
teammate, they might, or test the
Taking the initiative away from the
opponents to see what happens.
Don’t waste time, don’t kill the opponents, or at least limiting it by
game, don’t over think and never being proactive is an on-going goal
surrender the initiative. defenders.
6

7. Heuristics in Schwerpunkt
Why 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.
7

8. Heuristics in concentration
When 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.
8

9. Heuristics in influence
What 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.
9

10. Strategies for selecting heuristics
Imitation 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]
10

11. Strategies for selecting heuristics
Recognition 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.
11

12. How can strategies and heuristics be learned
Actions 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
12

13. How can strategies and heuristics be learned
Consequences 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 some
awareness 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 or
to 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 [6]
throw-in only muddies the water for
future efforts.
13

14. How can strategies and heuristics be taught
Thinking 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.
14

15. How can strategies and heuristics be taught
Thinking 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]
15

16. How can strategies and heuristics be taught
Thinking 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.
16

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 verbal
communication, 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.
17

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).
18

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.
19

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.
20