MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2753935358 · doi:10.1123/iscj.2017-0058

Coaching Philosophy and Methods of Anatoly Tarasov: ‘Father’ of Russian Ice Hockey

2017· article· en· W2753935358 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Sport Coaching Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicCoaching Methods and Impact
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoachingIce hockeyPolitical scienceSociologyLawPsychologyManagementEngineeringMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Anatoly Tarasov was the architect of the Russian ice hockey system—one of the most storied program’s in the history of International ice hockey. As a head coach, he led his team to 3 Olympic gold medals, 9 World Championships, and 18 National Championships. He was also the first European inducted into the Hockey Hall of Fame in Canada. Given all that he accomplished, it is surprising that relatively little is known about Tarasov outside of Russia. The purpose of this paper is to introduce coach Tarasov and, through an analysis of his own writings and what others have written about him, shed some light on his coaching methods that we believe comprise his coaching philosophy. As we will demonstrate, Tarasov’s coaching methods, which would have been viewed as unusual at the time—particularly by ice hockey coaches in North America—are now widely supported in the coaching science literature and practiced by some of the world’s most regarded coaches. Rooted in Tarasov’s coaching methods, we also provide a number of “best practices” for ice hockey coaches, which we believe might also be applicable to coaches working in other contexts.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.339
Threshold uncertainty score0.814

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.443
Teacher spread0.393 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it