Mental Practice

[VGB]

I still see it as a means of practice reinforcement or analysis Paul, rather than learning. I do create scenarios with students but they are based on experience. If I tell them to imagine taking a shot at a bonefish if they have never fished in tropical saltwater, they could have a mermaid in mind brushing her hair.

Maybe that’s what Phil had in mind?

Regards

Vince

[John Waters]

Hi Paul

This is an interesting subject and very pertinent to fly casting instruction at all stages. In their paper "Using Mental Imagery to Enhance Children's Motor Performance", Short, Afremow & Overby list 9 uses of mental imagery. They describe the first as "Imagery for Learning" and state "mental imagery can be applied very easily by teachers and coaches when teaching students new motor skills and strategies". I believe it can be applied to learning a new movement sequence if internal then external cues are used to target the desired, new movement. Videos are great, I use them all the time.

Good paper Vince referenced in post 9.

I use imagery a lot in bridging any gap between current movement and targeted movement. Stretch and release in distance casting is a typical example of such a bridge. A student who has never used such a movement can experiencing and internalise it without using a rod and line, but has difficulty when the rod and line are used. They usually revert to an arm centric technique, which is the opposite of what is the desired movement patterning and sequencing. When a disconnect exists between what they do without a rod and what they do with a rod (desired patterning vs. actual patterning), imagery can be a very powerful tool in order to bridge that gap.

John

[VGB]

Hi John

I can’t find a copy of your paper that is not behind a paywall? I would like to see the results that were obtained.

Mental imagery is easy to use, we use analogies wherever possible to create cues but that is not visualisation where mental imagery is based on the real action. Videos are not mental imagery either but an example of visual learning which as we have discussed before is the dominant learning mode.

Regards

Vince

[Paul Arden]

Thanks John,

Video analysis is interesting. The book Vince suggested reading didn’t recommend it as highly as I thought they would. I’ve found it useful, I think, in both my own casting as well as swim training. The reason however that it’s thought to not always be effective is because it can give “too much information” (P266 for anyone with this book).

Recently I had a very good student with whom I spent a sit down Zoom session going through a video of their distance cast and contrasting it to mine and another of my students. It didn’t get the subsequent results that I expected. It took another session of one to one casting to get where I thought we would have reached with the video stroke analysis session. It seemed very good at the time but not one week later when they sent me another video of their stroke! It had changed, but not very much and certainly not in the way I had suggested.

I’ve always thought that seeing oneself cast is one reason why video recording lessons is so effective but I’m also now more curious about video analysis (not for short term gains but for long term retention).

I’m going to try this sit down session more of course because one student is one student. But it was a top level fly caster and surprised me.

Cheers, Paul

[VGB]

Hi Paul

From what I have read, I would suggest that visualisation is not an either/or option to replace the multimodal teaching that we have discussed but rather to enhance the learning process. A citation from Johns paper emphasises this point:

It is also important for imagery practice to become automatic and complement the physical practice (Short, Afremow, & Overby, 2001) in order to transfer over into less structured activities later on in the lessons.

On the river, I will run a tricky shot through my mind before attempting it but I will never make that shot if I do not have robust skills in the first instance.

Regards

Vince

[John Waters]

Hi Vince and Paul,

I view visualisation as a component of imagery and it comprises two components - performance and outcome. Both enhance sport movement and sequencing. Outcome visualisation is generally associated with cueing, but it can deliver much more than cues. Use both for best results. Videos are a great source of information for both the instructor and the student and yes, they may include "to much information" and if so, the instructor needs to redress that outcome with targeted communication. That does not mean they should not be used. It depends upon what information the instructor wishes to convey. An alternative is to make them specific to the targeted outcome. The use of slow motion, body segments overlayed with lines and angles, insertion of still frames within the video are alternatives to the wide angle views of the complete body movement and generated loops shapes. You may consider use of tiered video segments. Start with a specific movement e.g external to internal shoulder rotation, then show different range options of the movement with vision of only the upper arm and forearm, then show same movement ranges with vision of both the shoulder and torso, then repeat with vision of the shoulder, torso and hip, then show vision of shoulder, torso, hip and knees, then add feet. Compartmentalise the message, by compartmentalising the vision. Conclude with the so called "too much information" vision. That sequencing means the full body, loop vision is no longer "too much information", but rather the final link in the communication chain.

My thoughts only, could be bollocks.

John

[Paul Arden]

Hi John,

In my particular case it was 170 backcast. I was trying to have the student accelerate the rod by straightening the forearm as opposed to powering from next to the body and trying to get into the 170 position afterwards. It clearly didn’t work. We have since got it to work. It might be interesting to now compare the student’s new cast to their old cast instead of someone else’s.

I think video might be a better tool for review than for development. As a tool for seeing what you are doing it’s second to none.

Cheers, Paul

[John Waters]

Agree Paul, it is a great tool for review, but I think it is undervalued for development. Discussing the before and after videos with your student would be powerful endorsement of how and why the arm movement changed, and the impact.

John

[VGB]

Hi John

I think that you are blending visualisation and video analysis, the former is purely a mental exercise. Passive practice for want of a better explanation.

Regards

Vince

[Paul Arden]

I don’t know John. It seems to work well at the time. But it’s now questionable to me a few weeks later. It does seem that the process of figuring things out is far more important than being just shown it. Quick fives are often quickly forgotten. Of course we use many tools normally in parallel.

Cheers, Paul