“All or Nothing”: The Road to the National Hockey League for Five Successful Danish Players Born in 1989
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this case study was to explore the conditions that contributed to the development of five Danish National Hockey League players born in 1989. Informed by the personal assets framework, we conducted nine semistructured interviews with six players, two parents, and a former head coach. The purpose of these interviews was to explore the conditions that surrounded the athlete’s development and facilitated their ascent to the National Hockey League. Generally, we found that the club coaches identified and targeted the National Hockey League players from an early age, were result oriented in their leadership approach, and provided exclusive training opportunities to identified players. During their specializing years, the players were encouraged to undertake an “all or nothing” approach, whereby they were largely expected to sacrifice opportunities to pursue dual careers. In addition, a relocation to the Swedish hockey gymnasium and club, Frölunda, provided an important developmental stepping-stone for nearly all of them. Furthermore, uncontrollable and fortuitous conditions (e.g., prosperous national sport environment, role models) inspired the players’ ambitions and perceptions of capability. The results of this study are discussed in relation to the literature and practical implications, and we highlight limitations and propose future directions.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".