Understanding and Using Constraints

What is the Constraints-Led Approach?

The constraints-led approach (CLA) is a method of coaching based on the principles of non-linear pedagogy. It advocates a more hands-off approach to coaching. The CLA follows the idea that rather than explicitly telling players what to do and how to do it, coaches should instead focus on the desirable outcome or goal and create environments where players can explore different solutions (best suited to their ability) to achieve this outcome.

By carefully creating environments (small-sided games) and manipulating constraints, we can simulate game-like situations in which players must perceive the information around them to explore different solutions and self-problem solve to find the most effective way (for them) to achieve the desired outcome. The focus of the CLA is around the individual adapting to their environment.

For coaches, this means it is critical that learners are given opportunities to adapt to their environment and explore a variety of solutions. Essentially, the role of the coach is to identify and manipulate key constraints to facilitate the emergence of functional skills, behaviors and decisions in game-like situations.

Why Use the Constraints-Led Approach?

1. Promotes creativity and problem-solving skills - By using constraints, athletes are encouraged to find new and innovative solutions to movement challenges, promoting their creativity and problem-solving skills. Compared to simply be told what to do and how to do it in a traditional approach to coaching.

2. Increases adaptability - CLA helps athletes develop adaptability skills by challenging them to adjust their movements to changing constraints, leading to better performance in varied environments and situations.

3. Enhances learning and retention - Because athletes are required to actively problem-solve during training sessions, they are more likely to understand, retain and translate the skill, behavior or decision to a game.

What are constraints?

Constraints can be defined as anything that influences behavior by acting as information that shapes or guides the player to explore solutions and self-problem solve to achieve a desired goal or outcome. More simply put, constraints are the boundaries in which players search for solutions. The interaction of different constraints forces the player to explore for the most effective solution best suited for their skillset.

The Three types of constraints

1. Individual

   Individual constraints include factors such as body size (height, weight, and limb lengths), fitness (e.g., strength, speed, aerobic capacity, and flexibility), mental skills (e.g. concentration, confidence, emotional control or motivation), perceptual and decision-making skills (e.g. recognizing patterns of play, anticipating by reading the movements of opponents) and personality factors.

2. Environmental

   Environmental constraints consist of physical variables such as lighting, temperature and altitude of the playing location. Social factors also play a role. This includes cultural and societal norms, beliefs, family environment, friendship groups, and more. Individual and task constraints are the most important practical consideration for planning practices. However, understanding the impact of environmental constraints helps provide insight into how all of the constraints are continuously interacting and shaping performances

3. Task

Task constraints are more closely related to performance and include adjustments that determine how the game is played or the goal is achieved. Examples of task constraints include the amount of space players can play in, the scoring system, the number of dribbles they can take, starting the offense with an advantage, etc. In a basketball practice setting, task constraints are arguably the easiest category to manipulate in order to encourage certain types of outcomes to emerge in a practice setting.

How Can you actually use constraints in practice

By understanding the impact all categories of constraints can have on a player, we understand that player development goes so much deeper than solely being on-court and adopting the traditional approach of reproducing the performance of specific techniques over and over again.

Through the appropriate manipulation of task constraints, coaches can thoughtfully design small-sided games that expose players to the same situations and affordances (opportunities to act) they will encounter in an actual game. This allows players to perceive, respond and adapt to game-like situations and information. Using carefully-designed small-sided games is the best way for players to explore different solutions and self-problem solve in a manner that is most likely to translate from practice to a game.

For teams who use the traditional approach, players can only improve at these actual game-like scenarios through the game experience. Therefore, using small-sided games ensure players are exposed to far more situations that actually occur in games. By manipulating the right task constraints, player development becomes purposeful as teams are not solely relying on games as the only opportunity for players to be exposed to realistic basketball situations.

Common Constraints

• Amount of Space (can only player on the left side of the floor)

• Defense

  • Defender must keep both feet on the ground, be holding a basketball, etc. (great for finishing work).

  • Defense must hedge ball screens, trap the post, etc.

• Number of Dribbles

• Time (can force more aggressive play with shorter clock)

• Scoring System

  • Double points for a specific result (if you score off a pin down screen). Negative points for an undesired result or behavior (-1 for an offensive rebound, if you get beat middle, etc.).

• Musts (must get a post touch before scoring, etc.)

• Starts

  • Does the offense start with an advantage? Maybe every possession must start with a pin down, the ball will start in the corner, etc.

Guide to manipulating constraints

The key thing to consider when using the CLA is determining task constraints can be manipulated in a purposeful way. Constraints certainly can eliminate potential outcomes from occurring. Therefore, coaches have to be very careful to refrain from over-constraining players. Over-constraining happens by too heavily restricting the behaviors or solutions players can use. For example, players play live 1v1 to improve finishing but are instructed to only use a specific finish. Using these scenarios may lead to pigeonholing players and narrowing their focus. Instead, using the CLA ecologically means that coaches should purposefully manipulate task constraints to invite potential movement solutions to emerge.

1. Intention - Be clear about what you are trying to achieve and ensure that the rider understands the goal and is doing the problem solving.

2. Constrain to Afford - Make sure that the constraint is not prescribing a solution, rather it should just remove some options while allowing self-organisation and solution finding by the rider, or horse-rider partnership. The idea is to either design practice activities that dampen affordances (opportunities for movement) that are less functional and amplify affordances that are more functional, without prescribing movement solutions.

3. Information (Perception) Is Key - Traditional approaches tend to break player development into two parts; developing the skill in an isolated setting (1v0) then practicing that skill in a game-like environment. With recent research, we now know that this is not effective because the particular skill or movement being used depends on the information the player is perceiving. We must perceive, then act.

4. Repetition without Repetition - What this means is that we want to have repetition of an outcome without repetition of the exact movement. Skill is the ability to achieve an outcome, not the ability to repeat one solution. Riding is complex and great riders are adaptive in achieving stable outcomes.

The video below from Basketball Immersion is a great example of manipulating constraints in a 1v1 setting.

The Importance Self-problem solving

Using the Constraints-Led Approach, basketball coaches can support their players by creating situations in practices that promote self-problem solving. In basketball, self-problem solving is the process of a player coordinating their body to perform basketball-specific sequences. For example, passing the ball or finishing at the rim. Self-organization is shaped by the confluence of these aforementioned constraints. Because these constraints are ever-changing, no basketball possession is ever the same.

Furthermore, using the CLA in practice provides athletes with the opportunity to search for movement solutions similar to those that will emerge in competition. This differs from traditional approaches where coaches believe there is one “correct” movement pattern players should supposedly perform skills. This is characterized by a belief in “fundamentals” and specific techniques, which are drilled into players about how they should pass, shoot, and play defense. These movements are explicitly taught by coaches to their players in practice activities such as 1-on-0, 2-on-0, and pattern rehearsal 5-on-0.

The Role of Perception-Action Coupling

During competition, a continuous process of perception-action coupling occurs. Players must perceive information in their environment, such as the location and positioning of teammates and defenders, the time and score, etc. which shapes the self-problem solving process (perceive, then act, then perceive, then act, etc.)

The traditional approach focuses overtly on the action component, training ‘techniques’ and then assuming that players can then somehow perform these skills or behaviors at the right time in games. This type of training does not allow players to become perceptive, responsive and adaptive to the information around them. In the traditional approach, coaches make all the decisions for their players by promoting or drilling pre-determined movement sequences.

How Does The CLA COmpare to the Traditional Approach to Practice

In traditional drills, it’s very common to find little to no external information for players to interact with and decipher to self-problem solve and find the best available solution. This is essentially the information in a game that will determine a players’ actions, such as how you are being guarded, spacing templates, location of the ball etc. By training in a 1v0 or on-air environment, a player has no external information to read and decipher, removing many of the opportunities for action that naturally present themselves within an actual game.

Under an ecological dynamics framework, these opportunities for action are referred to as affordances. The information perceived by an athlete during the game specifies affordances. It is important to note that affordances are continuously changing during the course of a possession. Affordances may invite different behaviors for different athletes. It depends on their ability to attend to specifying information and act upon it.

In traditional environments, players are held back with their development as they are required to master very specific techniques before progressing to more complex situations with defenders. This holds players back from experiencing a number of different situations and acting upon various affordances, which is required in games in order to be successful.