The first step to success as a hockey player is being born at the right time! I went though the USA 15U Select Camp rosters and found it interesting how many of the players were born in the first part of the year. So being someone with too much time on his hands, I did some data analysis. This is what I came up with:
215 Players at the camp
80% born in the months of Jan-June
I don't want to discourage those players born in the last half of the year, but numbers don't lie.
I read something that this was the also case in Canadien Juniors. Canada hockey figured it was because coaches picked the bigger (older) players for their teams during the development years. This also looks to be the case in the USA.
Not ripping on Bernie, but it would be interesting to see the numbers for his program and the also Blades.
Several articles and studies have discussed this distribution of elite level athletes and their birth date. One interesting point that was made in the book Outliers was that you are essentially picking your national teams from half the available talent since a big chunk of athletes are impacted by birth date. They have less opportunities to develop when they are younger since relatively older and more mature players are usually picked for the top teams. In Minnesota, the player born Jan-June usually has an extra year of hockey in at a higher level then their counterparts. Though, in the second year of a given level, the July-Dec kids have the big advantage. Alway exceptions like Crosby being an August B-day and Ovechkin being in September.
Looking at the U-17 USA roster just selected for the tournament in germany, the split was even among the 18 skaters (sorry goalies!): 9 in the first six months of 93, 9 in the second half.
My advice to the second-half kids and parents: "Skate up" whenever possible, whether it be on teams or in camps or any kind of training. Jordan Schroeder (a Sept. baby) could be such an example.
I wonder whether Mrs. Obama looked at the previous 43 presidents and came to some conclusion about her son's chances to be in the White House.
Point: I wouldn't discount any athlete's progress based on birthdate alone. Talent, genetics and heart (a k a hard work) probably have much more to do with achievement.
Point: I wouldn't discount any athlete's progress based on birthdate alone. Talent, genetics and heart (a k a hard work) probably have much more to do with achievement.
That is the point I did not make. The theory is that a lot of 2nd half kids give up too early before they reach their potential. They may try different sports or just pursue different activities given the frustration of not making top teams. In addition, when costs are high, parents will pull the plug if jr is not progressing as fast as their older peers.
Bottom line is stay involved and don't get discouraged.
rudy wrote:Point: I wouldn't discount any athlete's progress based on birthdate alone. Talent, genetics and heart (a k a hard work) probably have much more to do with achievement.
The numbers don't lie. In Minnesota, the kids born in the 1st half of the year have an even LARGER advantage than do kids born later in the year for one very simple reason....every other year, they are playing at a higher level of competition than those who were born after July 1st. The kids born before July 1st will generally have 2 full years of Bantam experience by the time they try out for Advanced 15. The kids born after July 1st generally only have the one year. That makes a big difference.
Sure, talent and genetics play probably an even larger role, but you can't deny that date of birth isn't also a large factor.
Last edited by muckandgrind on Tue Jul 21, 2009 2:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Agreed. My son is an August birth date. During association hockey he is
top dog age wise. Summer hockey he is younger and the game is faster.
That extra year of hockey holds a huge advantage for the Advanced 15's.
The Jan-June birth month advantage in Advanced 15 can also be somewhat explained by a higher probability that those kids played high school hockey the previous winter rather than bantams. I saw a post somewhere that showed a lot of high school players among the ~240 Advanced 15 early phase participants. In the girls Advanced 15 the high school veterans very clearly were stronger than the 14U girls.
Has anyone ever looked at the birth months of the Advanced 17's where they all have 2-3 years of high school experience? Is there still a large advantage for Jan-Jun kids?
Mac15 wrote:The Jan-June birth month advantage in Advanced 15 can also be somewhat explained by a higher probability that those kids played high school hockey the previous winter rather than bantams. I saw a post somewhere that showed a lot of high school players among the ~240 Advanced 15 early phase participants. In the girls Advanced 15 the high school veterans very clearly were stronger than the 14U girls.
Has anyone ever looked at the birth months of the Advanced 17's where they all have 2-3 years of high school experience? Is there still a large advantage for Jan-Jun kids?
I don't know if that study has been done but as they grow older the percentages still favor first half of the year but the gap does seem to close a bit. A study was done of NHL players and their birth month. The study took all players in the NHL born between 1980 and 1990 and found that 302 were born between January 1 and June 30th and 210 were born between July 1 and December 31 (or basically it was 60% first half, 40% second half). So while the NHL is long shot at best to begin with, in the big scheme being born in the second half of the year is not a major disqualifier (in otherwords don't give up just because you have an August birthday ). It seems it is much bigger deal in the youth stages than at the upper levels of hockey and the difference at the upper levels is probably fueled by the large descrepancy at the youth levels, my guess is, and it's only a GUESS, is that if AAA and other "elite" training type programs started at older ages (say age 12 instead of 7 or 8 years old) this descrepancy would be alot smaller. Interesting at any rate
This would seem to indicate that playing and practicing at a more competetive level is what makes a better hockey player. This tends to prove that bigger, stronger is not more important than quality repetitions; hockey players are made.
rudy wrote:There are 21 1992s from U.S. going to Slovakia in August on the U-18 USA Hockey team, which was announced today.
12 are born in first half.
9 are born in the second half.
slight edge to the first half, but nothing striking.
just facts to chew on.
It's a much smaller sample size and sucha small sample size is hard to draw any real conclusions from. However it is interestign that it is almost the same 60% / 40% split that you see in the NHL number I posted above. Coincidence....
the real difference is Q1 births vs. all the other quarters. 10 Q1 vs 2 Q2, 5 Q3, and 4 Q4.
This bias is demonstrated in other sports that have cut-off dates. Some sports in Europe that have a Aug 1 cut off have a predominant number of elite athletes born in August and September.
It is a very real bias, but it can be overcome somewhat as long as you stay in the game, and do not get discouraged.
sorno82 wrote:the real difference is Q1 births vs. all the other quarters. 10 Q1 vs 2 Q2, 5 Q3, and 4 Q4.
This bias is demonstrated in other sports that have cut-off dates. Some sports in Europe that have a Aug 1 cut off have a predominant number of elite athletes born in August and September.
It is a very real bias, but it can be overcome somewhat as long as you stay in the game, and do not get discouraged.
Your right about Q1 being the difference, even in the NHL numbers I posted above the January through March birth months were the number quarter by a staticially significant margin. Interestingly March was the #1 birth month though, followed by January being second, while February was tied for third with May. Interestingly August was right there running neck in neck with top six though
In my opinion, the Minnesota hockey model is about as fair as it gets when it comes to birth months. If you have a late birthday (Sept through Dec) you get to be the older, bigger kid during your association season and if you have an earlier birthday you get the advantage during the AAA season (if you so choose).
That would be 36 born in the first half of the year and 34 in the second half.
Another nice thing about association hockey is that kids are continually cycled from being the younger players when they enter a new level of play to the older players before they move up.
doesn't most of the rest of the country go by birth year for pre high school hockey?
the kids in the first half of the year also have an extra year of eligibility if they play juniors
I read a book about this exact topic 6 months ago.
The name seems to have left me, but nonetheless, it completely supported the earlier birthdays being more successful and used Canadian Junior leagues as an example.
Someone please have read this book so I don't go insane trying to think of if it
The name seems to have left me, but nonetheless, it completely supported the earlier birthdays being more successful and used Canadian Junior leagues as an example.
Outliers discusses this. Also points out that in soccer where the cutoff is August 1, most of the top players are born in those first AUgust and September.
). It seems it is much bigger deal in the youth stages than at the upper levels of hockey and the difference at the upper levels is probably fueled by the large descrepancy at the youth levels, my guess is, and it's only a GUESS, is that if AAA and other "elite" training type programs started at older ages (say age 12 instead of 7 or 8 years old) this descrepancy would be alot smaller. Interesting at any rate
](./images/smilies/eusa_wall.gif "Brick wall"){kind=small}