Boost Athlete Intent Instantly with These Competitive Training Strategies

In our last article, we explored the concept of the "slow lane" and strategies for improving athlete buy-in. While influencing behavior is crucial, those changes often take time. So, what can we do right now to drive greater intent and effort from our athletes?

To explore this further, we spoke with Ben Rosenblatt, Former Lead Men's Physical Performance Coach at England FA and Founder of 292 Performance, who shared valuable insights from his experience with GB Hockey and England Football.

Takeaway: Design your games and sessions around the physical state and emotional status of your athletes. Where are they currently, and where do you want them to be?

Professional athletes thrive on competition. Whether it’s small-sided games, cards on the team bus, or seeing who can jump the highest, they love to win! With limited time available, it’s not just about what’s included in the programme, but how it’s completed. Ben proposed a competition structure to increase intensity, outlined above and explained in greater detail below.

Me vs Me

The concept behind this format is simple: players compete against themselves. Ben and his team set minimum velocity thresholds for players to reach, with audio feedback from Output providing immediate results on whether or not they hit the target.

“Just by having some feedback, the players start competing with each other,” Ben observed.

Me vs Everyone Else

The leaderboard also created a Me vs Everyone Else dynamic, but this was mostly player-led. Allowing players to compare their performance with the rest of the team, motivating them to perform better by seeing how they measure up against their peers. Ben noted that this approach works particularly well in smaller groups. In larger groups, it can sometimes have the opposite effect—if a player isn’t in the top 5 or 10, they might become despondent.

Ben also explained how these types of competitions can be useful in pre-training preparation, driving intent among players. Immediate feedback stimulates the central nervous system, getting their bodies prepped and ready to go.

You vs Me

This setup is one-on-one competition, with players pitted against a single opponent rather than the whole group. The intensity is heightened by focusing on beating just one person, with the added incentive of bragging rights. Ben also mentioned that adding playful elements, such as asking players to choose their competition based on who they could beat in a fight or who they’d defeat in a dance-off, helps foster a competitive atmosphere.

Team vs Team

Building on the You vs Me setup, this structure involves competition between larger groups. An example would be using a cumulative or average reactive strength index (RSI) between two teams, such as reds vs. blues.

You vs Me in Team vs Team

Ben explained that this setup creates the most potent stimulus for driving intent. As part of a larger squad, each individual is motivated not only by their desire to win for their team but also by the need to outperform their direct opponent. Ben layers this competition throughout his training. For example, it might start with an exercise during prep, continue with a race during the activation and warm-up, and then feature in a possession drill during the technical on-field session.

Limitations

There are limitations to using competitive environments like these. For one, there can be a trade-off between intent, enjoyment, and actual work completed.

“This is why the Output system is so effective,” Ben said. “You can track who’s done what. It’s visual for everyone to see, and it brings a level of accountability.”

Another consideration is understanding when and where these competitions fit within the overall training cycle. Ben emphasized the importance of factoring in player readiness and emotional state. To manage this, Ben shared his approach to game design.

Ben Rosenblatt’s Process of Game Design:

1. Physical Outcome – What are the physical objectives of the session?
2. Physical State – What is the current physical state of the players? Are they fatigued? What are their self-perceived and objective readiness scores?
3. Emotional Status – What is the emotional status of the players? Are they fed up or bored of games and competition?
4. Emotional Outcome – What are the psychological objectives of the day? If it’s a recovery or down day, avoid pushing too hard emotionally.
5. Behavior Objective – What behaviors are we trying to incentivize in training?
6. Environmental Design – How can we set up the environment to elicit our desired response?

All these factors will influence how Ben scales the intensity of the games for his athletes. Underlying all his designs, though, is fun. He knows that competitive players will often try to cheat to win—so it’s crucial to design constraints that prevent this and ensure the maximum training benefit.

For more insights into how to drive greater intent in football training, download our eBook: Driving Intent in Football Training.