Bio-banding in Sport: Applications to Competition, Talent Identification, and Strength and

Conditioning of Youth Athletes

Abstract

Bio-banding is the process of grouping athletes on the basis of attributes associated with

growth and maturation, rather than chronological age. Children of the same age may vary

considerably in biological maturation with some individuals maturing well in advance or

delay of their peers. The timing of maturation has important implications for competition,

talent identification and training. Increased awareness and interest in the subject of

maturation has sparked a renewed interest in the study and application of bio-banding. This

overview describes the purpose and process of bio-banding, potential benefits and limitations,

and also presents some recent advances in its application in youth sports.

Key words: Maturation, Puberty, Sport, Adolescence, Youth

 Introduction

Young athletes are traditionally grouped by chronological age (i.e., age based on the calendar

date on which an individual was born) for the purpose of competition and training. Children

of the same chronological age may, however, vary in biological maturity with some

individuals maturing in advance or delayed relative to their peers. Maturation refers to

progress toward the adult or mature state and can be defined in terms to status, timing, and

tempo (56, 58, 64). Whereas status refer the state of maturation at the time of observation

(e.g., pre-pubertal, pubertal, post-pubertal), timing refers to the age at which specific

maturational events occur, such as age at menarche and age at peak height velocity (PHV).

Tempo refers to the rate at which maturation progresses. Children of the same age can vary in

rate, with some individuals reaching adulthood in advance of others.

Individual differences in the timing of maturation impact both physical and

psychosocial development (7, 59, 81). Boys who mature in advance of their peers are, on

average, taller and heavier from late childhood. Early maturing boys also experience, on

average, a more intense adolescent growth spurt (i.e., greater peak height velocity), resulting

in greater pubertal gains in height, weight, and lean mass (59). This affords the early

maturing male potential athletic advantages, i.e., greater size, strength, speed and power,

especially between the ages of 11 and 14 when maturity associated differences in size and

function are perhaps the greatest (64). Height differences among early, average (on time) and

late maturing youth are, however, negligible in late adolescence/early adulthood. From a

psychological perspective, early maturing boys present a more adaptive motivational profile

with higher perceptions of the physical self, i.e., strength, attractiveness, physical fitness, and

sport competence, and greater self-esteem (26, 50). Consequently, early maturing boys are

more likely to be attracted towards, and selected into, sports where greater size, strength and
power are desirable attributes, e.g., ice hockey, American football, soccer, rugby, basketball,

swimming (64).

The physical and psychological consequences of maturity timing in females are not

directly equivalent to those observed in males. Like boys, girls who mature in advance of

their peers are taller, heavier, and experience a more intense pubertal growth spurt (59).

Pubertal gains in mass in females are, however, largely attributable to body fat, with

comparatively smaller gains in lean mass relative to males. As a consequence, early maturing

girls tend to outperform their later maturing peers on tests of absolute strength, whereas

differences in performances of girls of contrasting maturity status in tests of speed, agility

and power are negligible (10, 59). Early maturing females are often over-represented in

sports that emphasise size or strength, such as tennis and swimming, and under-represented in

sports that emphasise aesthetic qualities, and /or relative strength and endurance such as

gymnastics, diving, distance running, figure skating and cycling. Girls advanced in

maturation also present a less adaptive psychological profile with lower levels of self-esteem

(71), and more negative perceptions of physical attractiveness, fitness, and sport competence

(27, 40). The associations may, however, vary with cultural and societal expectations and

ideals pertaining to female attractiveness (26).

Individual differences in growth and maturation may contribute to competitive

inequity and increased risk of injury, especially for athletes who are constitutionally small

and/or delayed in maturation (46, 54). In this context, proposals to match athletes on the basis

of physical attributes rather than chronological age have a long tradition (6, 33, 57). This

strategy is currently labelled ‘bio-banding’ and involves the grouping and/or evaluating

athletes on the basis of size and/or maturity status, rather than chronological age. Although

bio-banding places athletes into groups on the basis of physical characteristics, it does not

preclude the consideration of psychological and/or technical skills. An early maturing boy,
for example, might be discouraged from competing against or training with older youth if

they lacked the technical competence and/or psychological maturity to ensure a safe and

positive experience (52, 53). Similarly, a late maturing boy who is already thriving within his

age group is unlikely to benefit from competing against peers who are younger but of similar

maturity.

Bio-banding does not preclude the consideration of technical and

psychological development. These attributes should be taken into
consideration when grouping athletes by size and/or maturation for
the purpose of training and competition

Bio-banding: A history of the concept

The concept of grouping children on the basis of physical rather than chronological age was

first advocated early in the 20th century. With reference to child labour, Crampton (23)

proposed the use of “physiological age” based on the development of pubic hair (i.e., a

secondary sex characteristic), as a more suitable determinant of readiness to work. A year

later, Rotch (78) proposed the use of “anatomic age”, based on the radiographic assessment

of the carpal bones, for grouping children in both school and sports. Commenting on the

overrepresentation of early maturing boys competing in the 1957 Baseball Little League

World Series, Krogman (47) suggested that assessments of maturation should be considered

when determining player eligibility and evaluating athletic potential.

The process of grouping young athletes on the basis of age and weight-based criteria

is common in combat sports (e.g., boxing, judo, taekwondo, and wrestling), in which extreme

size mismatches are considered to have implications for competitive equity and athlete safety

(2). Similar strategies have been implemented in collision sports such as rugby and American
football at younger ages, though they tend to be the exception rather than the rule. Concerns

regarding the larger size of some children, particularly those of Polynesian and Maori

descent, have prompted a number of youth rugby programs in New Zealand to employ weight

based criteria to group children within age groups and/or move players between age groups

(90). Weight restricted divisions in rugby are limited to children of a specific age at or below

a specific weight criterion (e.g., under 11s ≤ 43 Kg.). For similar reasons, some junior

American Football programs have used weight criteria to permit children to play down an age

band, and designate which individuals are allowed to play specific positions and/or advance

the ball (90). Adopting a more holistic approach, the New York State Public High School

Association introduced an athlete dispensation rule whereby seventh and eighth graders

wishing to participate in interscholastic high schools sports were assessed on a combination

of physical, psychological and technical attributes including medical and sexual maturity

status, physical size, fitness and skill proficiency (85).

While bio-banding strategies have been designed and implemented in good faith,

there is limited evidence that they are effective in terms of reducing injury risk, increasing

competitive equity and/or optimising athletic development. This criticism is, however, more

reflective of an absence of scientific inquiry into the potential benefits of bio-banding, rather

than the presence of contrary evidence. Nevertheless, growing concerns regarding the impact

of mismatches in size and maturity upon athlete development, welfare and safety have led to

a renewed interest in this subject. Across a range of sports, researchers and practitioners are

beginning to explore the broader application of bio-banding strategies with particular interest

in how assessments of biological maturation may be used to inform talent identification and

development, including the provision of strength and conditioning. In this context, the

purpose of this review is to describe some of the novel ways in which bio-banding is being

reconsidered and introduced in youth sports, and how it might be used to optimise athletic
development and reduce the relative risk of injury in youth sports (Figure 1).

Bio-banding

Strength & Talent

Competition
Conditioning Identification
- Weight criteria
- Fitness standards
- Maturity bands - Training group allocation
- Developmental
- Age group dispensation - Program design &
trajectories
rules implementation
- Recruitment trials
- Injury prevention

Figure 1. A contemporary model of bio-banding for youth sports

Bio-banding for maturity

Bio-banding strategies have traditionally grouped athletes on the basis of physical size. In

recent years, however, researchers and practitioners have begun to explore the potential

benefits of grouping players by maturity status, which raises the question of how to best

assess biological maturity status. Assessments of secondary sex characteristics and skeletal

age, and estimates of age at PHV are impractical for use in youth sports. On the other hand,

two non-invasive and feasible anthropometric methods for estimating maturation have been

advanced for use with youth athletes – the percentage of predicted adult stature and the

maturity offset. The former is an estimate of maturity status while the latter is an estimate of
maturing timing, specifically time before PHV, which can be used as an estimate of status,

i.e., pre- or post-PHV.

Using percentage of predicted adult stature at the time of observation (43, 61, 67, 77),

it is possible to group athletes into maturity categories. The distribution of stages of pubic

hair (PH) relative to four bands for percentages of predicted mature height attained at the

time of observation illustrates the potential utility of this approach (Table 1 & Figure 1). The

data are for soccer players 11.0 to 15.25 years of age at observation. Although numbers are

limited, the majority of players with percentages of predicted adult height <85.00% and

≥85.00% <90.00% are, respectively, pre-pubertal (PH 1) and early pubertal (PH 2). The

majority of players with percentages of predicted adult height ≥90.00% <95.00% and

≥95.00% are, respectively, mid- (PH 3) and late- (PH 4) pubertal. Similarly, peak height

velocity tends to occur between 88-96% of adult height, peaking at approximately 92% (8).

Table 1. Correspondence between pubertal status (stage of pubic hair) and somatic

maturation as assessed by percentage of adult stature in Portuguese youth footballers aged

11-15 years. (Malina, unpublished, calculated with permission from data reported in

Figueiredo et al., (32)).

Percentage of Predicted Adult Height (PAH) Bands

Pubic hair <85% 85-90% 90-95% 95-100% Total

stage PAH PAH PAH PAH Number of

players

1 40 7 0 0 47
 2 15 23 4 1 43

3 1 6 20 8 35

4 0 0 7 25 32

5 0 0 0 2 2

Total 56 36 31 36 159

Figure 2. Bio-bands of maturity for an individual male based on cumulative growth and

percentage of adult height.

180
Pre-Pubertal Growth Post-Pubertal
spurt
170

160
Stature (cm)

150

140

130 %Adult Height

75 80 85 89 95 100
120
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Age (years)

Percentage of predicted mature height is not an indicator of growth velocity, though it can be

used to indicate whether a youngster may be progressing through the adolescent growth spurt.

As noted, evidence collected from longitudinal data indicate that peak height velocity (PHV)

occurs at approximately 91-92% of adult stature (8, 84), with the linear growth spurt lasting

approximately 24-26 months (i.e., + - 1 year from PHV) (82). Applying a band of one year

prior to and post PHV to longitudinal reference data (84), the onset of the adolescent growth

spurt (i.e., point of inflection from minimal growth velocity in childhood) would be expected
to occur at approximately 88-89% of adult stature before returning to pre-growth spurt

velocity (i.e., rate at take-off) at 95-96%. Applying these criteria, it is possible to group

athlete as being pre-, circa-, and post growth spurt. Estimates of percentage of predicted adult

height and group assignment should, nevertheless, be cross-referenced with concurrent

measures of growth velocity. Growth velocities during the adolescent growth spurt range

between 5 to 11 cm. in males and 5 to 9 cm. in girls. If, for example, a male athlete is at 91%

of their predicted adult height and presents a growth velocity of 8 cm per year, it is likely that

they are currently experiencing their adolescent growth spurt. In contrast, an athlete at 98% of

predicted adult height and presenting a growth velocity of 1 cm per year would be considered

post-growth spurt.

The accurate measurement of chronological age, height and weight of the youth

players and of biological mid-parent height is central to the protocol for estimating predicted

adult stature. As such, it is important that those responsible for taking such assessments are

appropriately trained and qualified. Reported parental heights, adjusted for the tendency for

overestimation, have been used in several research studies, though the suitability of this

method needs further evaluation. There is also a need for further refinement of height

prediction equations.

Predicted age at maturity offset (time before or after PHV) and in turn age at PHV

(age at prediction minus offset) provides an indicator of maturity timing (68). This method is

based on the premise that youth who are advanced or delayed in maturation will experience

PHV at an earlier or later than expected age, respectively. Mean age of PHV is, on average,

about 13.8 years in boys and 11.9 years in girls (9). Although predicted maturity offset was

suggested as a categorical variable, i.e., an indicator of maturity status: pre- (>1 year before

PHV), circa- (+/- 1 year from PHV), or post-PHV (>1 year after PHV), it is often used as an

indicator of maturity timing. The accuracy and reliability of the method has been questioned
(60, 62, 63). Predictions are dependent upon age and body size at prediction and have

reduced variation compared to actual ages at PHV. They are also influenced by individual

differences in actual ages of PHV, especially among early and late maturing youth. Among

early maturing boys and girls, predicted ages at PHV are later than actual age at PHV, while

among late maturing boys and girls, predicted ages are earlier than actual ages at PHV (60,

62, 63). Intra-individual variation in predicted ages at PHV is also considerable. Similar

limitations have been noted for the modified prediction equations (70) in an independent

longitudinal sample of boys (44).

Accordingly, practitioners using the maturity offset method should interpret their

findings with caution, and recognise the limitations of the protocol. Validation studies to date

suggest that predicted age at PHV or classifications of pre-, circa- or post-PHV status may be

useful near the time of actual PHV in average maturing boys within a relatively narrow age

range, circa 14.0±1.0 years (60, 62). Of note, many early- and mid-adolescent male athletes

are advanced in skeletal and pubertal maturation (64). Corresponding data for girls are less

clear. Predicted age at PHV appears to be useful among some average and some late maturing

girls (56, 63). A more complete and critical discussion of both invasive and non-invasive

methods of maturity assessment is beyond the scope of this discussion (56).

Bio-banding and competition

Competition is an integral component of youth sports programs and is inherently

neither good nor bad (38). Competitive inequity arising from mismatches in size and/or

maturity can, however, serve to impede the development of both early and late maturing boys

(64). Athletes who mature in advance of their peers experience a competitive advantage in

some sports due to their superior size and athleticism (59). While early developers initially

experience more success it can also be argued that they simultaneously experience less

challenge. As a consequence, the early developing athlete is often ill prepared for future
competition against physically matched and/or more mature opponents. The competitive and

selective nature of many youth sports programs may also encourage the early developer to

play to their physical strengths at the neglect of his or her technical and tactical skills (64). A

failure to employ or develop these skills during a developmental stage (i.e., childhood and

adolescence) in which neural pathways are strengthened or removed may have important

implications for learning and future performance (15, 16). The consequences of such actions

may be most evident in late adolescence and early adulthood, when maturity associated

differences in size and function are attenuated, and is some cases reversed (49). Collectively,

these factors may help explain why those athletes identified as the most able in childhood

often fail to meet expectations for success as adults.

Athletes who mature in delay of their peers are at a distinct disadvantage in sports that

demands size, speed, strength, and power (59). As a consequence, late maturing players are

less likely experience success and/or be identified as talented. Even if the later developers are

selected, they are less likely to play key roles or positions and impact the game (64). It can be

argued that the greater challenge associated with being the youngest and/or least mature

serves as a stimulus towards superior long term development. This argument was first

advanced by Krogman (47) and is embedded in the ‘underdog hypothesis’ of Gibbs and

colleagues (36), which states that those youth who experience the greatest physical

challenges are more likely to develop the technical and psychological attributes necessary for

success at the adult professional level. The argument only holds, however, if the challenge is

manageable and if the athlete is recruited into and/or retained by the system. At the elite

level, the level of challenge associated with being the youngest and/or least mature within an

age group is significant. In a sample of academy football players at a professional club,

players who were late maturing and born in the fourth quarter of the competitive age group

(i.e., youngest) were twenty times more likely to be deselected (41). This observation is
particularly of concern considering that neither date of birth or maturity timing are attributes

over which the athlete has control.

Research pertaining to the potential benefits of bio-banding is limited and largely

restricted to sports in which grouping athletes by age and weight based criteria is an

established practice. Evidence from combat sports suggests that weight-based criteria can

eliminate potential selection and performance biases towards older and/or more mature

athletes. The absence of a relative age effect in junior boxing has been attributed to the

grouping of athletes for competition by a combination of both age and weight based criteria

(28). The relative age effect is also absent in a number of similar combat sports that employ

age and weight based criteria, e.g., Olympic taekwondo and judo (1) with the exception of the

‘heavy’ category in judo where a slight over-representation of athletes born in the first half of

the competitive year is noted. While the results of these studies are suggestive, it should be

noted that relative age is not an indicator of maturation. It reflects, on average, age

differences among youth in the same chronological age year (e.g., 13.50 to 14.49, or 14.00

to14.99 years of age). Nevertheless, selection biases towards early maturing athletes may still

exist within these sports, especially at the more elite levels. The impact of weight categories

on player selection/development and safety in contact sports such as American football and

rugby is largely unknown, although observations for Australian rugby suggest that

discrepancies in player size do not serve as a risk factor for injury (45).

A case study example of bio-banding from the Premier League academy system

The English Premier League has been a front-runner with regards to the recent

interest in the application of growth and maturation to long-term athlete development. As part

of the Elite Player Performance Plan (EPPP) in UK soccer, the league recently trialled a bio-

banded soccer tournament in which players were grouped on the basis of biological maturity
status rather than age (11, 24). Using percentage of predicted adult stature as the index of

maturity status, teams participating in a tournament for boys between 11 and 14 years were

restricted to fielding players with predicted adult statures of ≥85.0% and <90.0%. This band

is assumed to represent the transition into adolescence, i.e., early puberty (see Table 1 &

Figure 2). It is important to note that clubs were advised to consider both the psychological

and technical development of players when selecting their teams.

Players’ experiences and perceptions of competing in the bio-banded tournament were

captured in a series of focus groups (11, 24). Early and late maturing players described their

experiences as positive and agreed that the bio-banded games presented them with unique

challenges and a more diverse learning experience. They also recommended that that the

Premier League should integrate bio-banded games within the existing games program and

continue to support this initiative. Their reason for supporting the initiative varied, however,

relative to their maturational status. Early maturing players described the games as

physically more challenging, and found that that they had to adjust their game emphasising

technique, teamwork, and tactics over physicality. They also described the games as ideal

preparation for competing at the adult level, and as an opportunity to learn from, and be

mentored, by older players. As expected, late maturing players described their experience as

less physically challenging. They did, however, see benefits from having more opportunity

for them to utilise and demonstrate their complete skills set (i.e., physical technical and

tactical), impact and take control of the game, and adopt positions of leadership. It should be

noted that while the players unanimously supported the introduction of bio-banded games,

they believed that they should serve as an adjunct to, and not as replacement for, age-group

competition. Coaches also described their experiences as positive and encouraged the

Premier League to include opportunities for bio-banding within the existing games program

(11, 24). More specifically, bio-banding was viewed as providing players with a more varied
training program and diverse set of challenges and learning experiences, contributing to the

holistic development of the athlete. Coaches also noted that the tournaments challenged them

to “think differently about our players” and gave them an opportunity to evaluate the players’

skills and attributes in a more evenly matched environment (24).

While the results of this initial bio-banding venture show promise, further research is

required to fully understand the potential benefits and limitations of such initiatives. The

impact of bio-banded competitions on player performance and evaluation are of particular

interest. Application of new technologies such as GPS and performance analysis software

will permit the examination of the impact of bio-banding upon in-game indicators of

performance, e.g., peak speed, distance covered at speed, involvement in singular and

repeated high intensity activities, among others. It should also be noted that while the

Premier League have the financial and logistical resources to introduce and potentially

benefit from bio-banding, these strategies, may be more challenging to implement at the grass

roots or local levels. Nevertheless, there is no reason that strategies aligned with the

principles of bio-banding could not be considered. In many youth sports programs, for

example, it is common for early and late maturing athletes to be encouraged to play up or, to

a lesser extent, play down an age group, if it is felt that this will aid in the athlete’s

development and if the athlete is psychological and socially prepared for such a transition. It

should be noted, however, that athletes playing up or down an age group will still have to

contend with the significant variances in athlete size and maturity that exist with

chronological age groups.

Bio-banding and talent identification

The identification and confirmation (i.e., validation) of talented young athletes is a primary

objective of most professional sports clubs, national governing bodies, and many
intercollegiate sport programs in the United States. Talent is commonly defined on the basis

of success and/or athletic aptitude within competitive age groups (87). However, the entire

process of identification and development is superimposed on the demands of physical

growth, biological maturation and behavioral development, and their interactions.

Individual differences in biological maturation directly and indirectly impact the

process of talent identification (26). Direct effects reflect the immediate impact of variance in

physical and functional attributes upon athletic success, while indirect effects reflect the

social management of growth and maturation by the individual athlete and the adults (e.g.,

coaches, managers, etc.) who direct specific sports programs. The body and functional

characteristics hold significant social stimulus value for those involved in the identification

and development of youth athletes (25, 69). More to the point, youth with the physical and

functional attributes deemed most appropriate for success in a given sport are more likely to

be encouraged and rewarded for their participation, obtain more playing time and opportunity

to play important positions (i.e., captain), and receive greater access to specialised coaching

and training resources (19). Conversely, youth who are talented yet physically less gifted are

less likely to experience success, and more likely to be overlooked or excluded (22).

Talent identification strategies that favour youth on the basis of attributes not fully

realized until adulthood (i.e., mature size and build, technical and tactical skills) may be

counterproductive in the long term. There is a risk in overinvesting in youth who are

physically most capable at the expense of those who may have the most potential as adults.

As previously noted, maturity associated differences in size and function observed in

adolescence are often attenuated or reversed in adulthood (49). Selection gradients towards

the selection of youth of specific maturity status have been documented in a number of sports

and tend to increase with age and competitive level (54, 55). There is, however, limited

evidence to suggest that ability or success in late childhood and adolescence is predictive of
success at the adult level. A seven year follow-up of German athletes across seven Olympic

sports found that that only 15 of 4972 (0.3%) of those selected at the youngest level in each

sport eventually ranked amongst the 10 best international senior athletes (37). Furthermore, a

three-year follow-up analysis noted that only 192 of 11,287 athletes in elite sport schools

(1.7%) attained a medal in an international championship as adults. These findings highlight

the importance of encouraging multiple sports participation in youth, and providing a

varied/sampling training stimulus that teaches a broad range of movement skills and prepares

athletes for success across a range of activities.

“The biggest risk was that we had erred in our assessment of a

particular boy and could have used his slot to work with a more
talented youngster. We had to wait a little longer to see the real
potential in some boys, because not everyone’s physique develops at
the same rate”.

Sir Alex Ferguson, former manager of Manchester United Football

Club (31, p.260)

Observations from studies of the relative age effect provide some additional insights.

Youth soccer players enrolled in the talent development program of the German Football

Association who were born in the first quarter of the competitive year (January-March)

presented the highest absolute mean values on a composite index of athletic aptitude (89).

However, the scores fell below the median value for age when compared against the

developmental curve for age, i.e., the oldest players performed the best within their age

group, but were the weakest when evaluated relative to the developmental curve. Conversely,

players born late in the competitive year (Oct-Dec) presented the lowest mean scores within

their competitive age groups, yet scored well above the median when considered relative to
the developmental curve. The largest differences in absolute athletic aptitude scores were

observed between those players born at the start of the competitive year, and the players born

a month earlier (i.e. December) in their next oldest age group. The observation is seemingly

consistent with the ‘underdog hypothesis’ which suggests that younger and/or later maturing

athletes need to be physically, technically, and psychologically ‘ahead of the curve’ in order

to remain competitive within such programs (36). The results also suggest that older and/or

early maturing males get by on their physical prowess rather than their technical or tactical

abilities.

Case study examples of bio-banding for talent evaluation

As part of the EPPP for UK soccer, all Premier League and category one academies

conduct a standardized series of fitness tests on a tri-annual basis (24). The data from each

club is entered into the Premier League’s Player Management Application and used to

generate league wide age and maturity specific reference. On a similar basis, the British

Lawn Tennis Association (LTA) (80) and Bath Rugby Football Club (3) combine maturation

and fitness data to generate age and maturity specific references. Use of the references will

permit bio-banding athletes by both chronological age and maturity status when assessing

fitness. The strategy should also enable coaches and practitioners to better account for

individual differences in maturation when evaluating athletic ability and potential, and help to

identify previously unseen strengths and weaknesses in their athletes. The benefits of

considering athletic performance and/or fitness relative to both age and maturity specific

standards are illustrated in Figures 3 and 4. In Figure 3, the performances of an early

maturing 12 year-old male football player (Player A) on series of physical fitness tests are

plotted relative to reference standards derived from players of the same chronological age.

Considering the athletic advantages associated with advanced in maturation in males, it is not

surprising that Player A scores consistently above the mean on tests of speed, power, agility,
and aerobic capacity when compared with his same-age peers. When Player A’s performance

are compared against standards derived from youth of the same biological maturation,

however, we see a much different pattern of results (Figure 4). In this instance, Player A's

fitness scores only approximate and, in some instances, fall below the mean (i.e., agility &

aerobic capacity), revealing previously unidentified weaknesses. Conversely, a late maturing

athlete, who may not appear exceptionally fast or strong compared with same age peers, may

present a much more favourable performance compared against their maturational peers.

To better monitor long-term changes in the functional capacity of junior tennis

players, the LTA is currently working with the Institute for Mathematical Innovation at the

University of Bath to generate CA and maturity-status specific developmental trajectories for

fitness (80). Developmental trajectories for fitness should enable practitioners to better

monitor athlete development while taking individual differences in maturation into account.

The trajectories may also help identify periods of acceleration and stagnation, and in the

partitioning of training-related gains from those that occur as a result of normal growth and

maturation. While the development of age and maturity specific references against which a

young athlete can be compared represent a step in the right direction, it is important to

recognize that functional capacities (peak VO2, static strength, power and speed) also have

adolescent growth spurts that vary, on average, relative to the timing of PHV in boys and

girls (12, 13, 59, 72).

Figure 3: Player A’s fitness attributes represented as Z-scores relative to players of the same

chronological age (please place the figures side by side for comparison)
 Fitness Z-Scores for U12s

05m Sprint
2

Yo-Yo 1 10m sprint

-1

CMJ -2 20m sprint

505 Agility Right Foot 30m sprint

505 Agility Left foot

Figure 4: Player A’s fitness attributes represented as Z-scores relative to players of the same

maturity status
 Fitness Z-Scores for 95% PAH

05m Sprint
2

Yo-Yo 1 10m sprint

-1

CMJ -2 20m sprint

505 Agility Right Foot 30m sprint

505 Agility Left foot

Recognising that a selection bias towards older and/or more mature soccer players

exists as part of the scouting process, a number of English and Scottish professional soccer

clubs have hosted trials restricted to youth born in the last quarter of the competitive year

(17). Similarly, scouting biases towards relatively older players can be mitigated through the

use of age-ordered shirt numbers (65). These strategies and perhaps others attempt to address

the relative age bias in athlete recruitment. The effectiveness of such strategies may be

limited, however, as variation in actual maturity status is not accounted for, as noted in the

report (65).

Individual differences in maturity status are not dependent upon the calendar. Within

a single chronological year, e.g., 11.0 to 11.99 years or 13.0 to 13.99 years, late, average and

early maturing players are observed within each birth quarter. A player born late in the year

yet who is advanced in maturation may not be expected to struggle in a competition within
their own age group, whereas a player born early in the year who is late in maturation may

not be expected to possess an athletic or size advantage over his same age peers. It should be

also noted that the relative age effect is a population based phenomenon-reflecting

appropriation of athletes of various ages across an organization and, as noted earlier, should

not be considered a proxy for maturity status in individual athletes. Nevertheless,

organizations and practitioners need to consider how some of these aforementioned strategies

could be used to counter selection biases towards older and/or more mature players in the

scouting process.

Bio-banding and strength and conditioning

While bio-banding was initially proposed for matching athletes in competition, it also has

potential relevance in the context of strength and conditioning. Practitioners have long been

encouraged to accommodate individual differences in growth and maturation when

designing, implementing, and evaluating training and conditioning programs for young

athletes (79). In childhood, for example, gains in strength, speed, and power are best achieved

through activities that encourage adaptations of the neuromuscular systems; whereas post-

pubertal youth are more able to become stronger, faster, and powerful through muscle fiber

hypertrophy and increases in the cross sectional area of muscle (52). It has also been

suggested that the adolescent growth spurt is a period of increased risk for overuse injuries

and that training and recovery should be more carefully monitored and adjusted during this

phase of rapid growth (30, 66, 73). It remains unclear, however, whether the growth spurt

per se or the cumulative effect of a range factors related to age, size and maturity –

behavioral changes, training volume, changes in the nature of competition, and perhaps

others – that contributes to the increased risk for injury. Further research is clearly warranted.
 To optimise training effects and ensure athlete safety and well-being, practitioners

should consider individual differences in maturity status (53). The Long Term Athlete

Development Model was the first model of athlete development to gain worldwide

recognition and was adopted and implemented by numerous organizations working with

young athletes (5). The LTAD model proposed that the development of young athletes could

be accelerated and optimised by implementing the most appropriate training stimuli at

specific phases of maturational development known as ‘windows of opportunity’. The

authors proposed that through the assessment and monitoring of the pubertal growth spurt it

was possible to adapt training programs relative to their stage of development of individual

athletes, thereby maximizing potential benefits. While the concept of matching training

relative to maturity status is intuitively appealing, the LTAD model has been criticised on

several accounts (34). Key criticisms included the use of chronological age groups and not

maturational bands for defining key phases of development, limited evidence to suggest that a

failure to exploit windows of opportunity inhibits athletic development; and too late of an

emphasis upon muscular strength development (52). A further limitation of the LTAD model

was the lack of consideration of growth spurts in other dimensions and functions, in addition

to overemphasis on the importance of the adolescent growth spurt.

Addressing the limitations of the LTAD model, an alternative paradigm named the

Youth Physical Development (YPD) model has been advanced (52). The YPD model offers a

more comprehensive and detailed framework for understanding athlete development in youth,

and the impact of maturation on trainability in children and adolescents. A key tenet of the

YPD model is that all fitness attributes are responsive to training throughout childhood and

adolescence. The most efficacious training modes are, however, those that complement

physiological adaptations which occur as a result of growth and maturation. Referred to as

‘synergistic adaptation’, the principal holds that the athletes’ training program (assuming
technical competence has been achieved) should expose athletes to training stimuli that

complement their stage of maturation (51). Prior to puberty, optimal strength gains in

strength and power are achieved through enhanced neural coordination. Maximum gains in

strength and power during and post- puberty are achieved through a combination of both

neural and structural adaptations, with the latter resulting from a combination of factors

including hormonal and metabolic changes, training stimuli and nutrition (34). From a bio-

banding perspective based on PAH, youth <85% would be considered pre-pubertal (Table 1)

and training programs would be designed to primarily facilitate positive neural adaptations to

enhance force, speed, and power. Youth between 89-95% of PAH would be in the mid to late

stages of puberty and thus programs modified to facilitate both neural and structural changes.

Youth at 95% PAH and beyond would be post-pubertal and more capable of achieving

substantial performance gains through hypertrophy.

Through the consideration of individual differences in maturation and the provision of

developmentally appropriate training programmes, practitioners may be able to reduce the

risk of growth- and training load-related injuries. The adolescent spurt is often indicated an

interval during which youth are more susceptible to overuse and growth related injuries (20,

21, 30, 42, 66, 73). The prevalence of apophyseal injuries, such as Osgood Schlatter’s disease

and Sever’s disease among youth football players peaked during and just prior to the

adolescent growth spurt, respectively, following a curve that was very similar to that of

growth velocity in stature (73). The earlier increase in the incidence of Sever’s disease may

reflect the fact that the growth spurt in the foot typically occurs 6 months in advance of the

lower and upper segments of the legs. Similarly, an increased risk of overuse injuries in

Dutch Academy footballers noted in the year prior to and during predicted age at PHV (88).

Additional risk factors for such injuries include sex (i.e., being male), neuromuscular control,
over-training, and participation in sports that require running, jumping, and sudden changes

of direction (76).

Through regular assessment of growth and maturity status and also concomitant risk

factors, practitioners can better identify intervals of greater risk of injury and adjust training

programs accordingly. Such strategies may be particularly beneficial for the early maturing

athlete who may experience a more intense growth spurt, and the late maturing athlete who

experiences his/her growth spurt at an age when the demands of training and competition are

typically greater and in turn may enhance the risk of injury (88). Consistent with this

hypothesis, ballet instructors argue that early maturation is favourable for dancers in that it

‘got the growing out of the way’ at an age when training demands were lower and prior to

important phases of evaluation and selection (69). On a similar basis, delayed maturation in

female gymnasts has been identified as a potential risk factor for chronic spine injuries as a

result of prolonged exposure of the growth plates to unfavourable mechanical factors, such as

repetitive pressures, micro trauma and impacts (83, 91). Through the application of bio-

banding, it may be possible to accommodate individual differences in the maturity status of

young dancers and adjust training and evaluation practices accordingly. Dancers going

through the growth spurt might have their training load adjusted to place a greater emphasis

on quality and diversity in contrast to quantity, while corresponding adjustments and

assessments may be delayed until after the growth spurt in in later maturing dancers.

Bio-banding may also be used to better identify and accommodate athletes who

experience decreases in movement skills during the adolescent spurt. Commonly referred to

as “adolescent awkwardness”, some evidence suggests that the rapid changes in size and

proportions that accompany the pubertal growth spurt, coupled with changes in how the brain

processes information about body positioning (14, 74) may adversely impact neuromuscular

control and proprioceptive ability during the interval of rapid growth. While empirical
evidence remains somewhat limited, it has been argued that decrements in neuromuscular

control during the growth spurt result in a decline in motor and functional performances (10),

a need to relearn motor skills (21), and an increased potential risk of injury in (14, 20, 21, 39,

72, 75). Similarly, it has been argued that an asynchrony between rates of growth in standing

height and bone mass accumulation, occurring between stages 2 and 3 (Pubic Hair) of

puberty, may predispose youth to a high incidence of fractures during this period (4, 18, 35,

48).

To alleviate the potential impact of growth and maturation on skill performance,

practitioners should routinely screen athletes to identify any notable deficiencies in

fundamental movement skills, especially during the phase of rapid growth. The observation

of athletes in training and competition would also help determine the extent to which any

such changes impact the performance of sport specific skills and/or present an increased risk

for injury. Note, however, that not all individuals experience decrements in performance

during the adolescent growth spurt. Likewise, not all decrements in performance can be

attributed to the growth spurt and may arise from training overload, competing interests, lack

of motivation, or peer coaching.

Athletes entering phases of rapid development should also be educated on the

potential risks to skill performance and their training programmes should be adjusted

accordingly (21). Both education and implementation should be delivered by individuals

(e.g., coaches, sports scientists, or medical staff) who have been trained in the assessment and

interpretation of growth and maturity status, and who operate as part of a multi-disciplinary

and integrated athlete support program. A variety of strategies might be implemented to

mitigate the effects of growth on skill performance including; the integration of fundamental

movement skills in warm ups, and technical sessions, a greater emphasis on movement skills

training and a reduced emphasis on performance gains (i.e., quality over quantity), the use of
visual and kinaesthetic feedback, controlled movement, reaction and motor co-ordination

training, and the retraining of functional abilities (i.e., running, lifting and jump-landing

mechanics) (17).

Case examples of bio-banding for training

When assigning athletes to various bands based on maturity status it is important to

initially consider the resistance training competence and/or psychological maturity (i.e.,

cognitive & emotional) of the individual athlete. For example, an integrated three-step

process for bio-banding athletes for the purpose of training had been advocated; it includes

the assessment of technical, psychological and maturational development before being

assigned to a specific training group for ice hockey (17), while assessments of biological

maturation and technical competence are recommended for grouping players for the purpose

of conditioning in football (29). Such approaches can also be used to create individualised

developmentally appropriate training programs for youth athletes.

A progression model (e.g., bronze, silver, gold, platinum), whereby individuals are

graded on the basis of their technical, psychological and maturational attributes, may

facilitate the assessment and monitoring the ‘readiness’ of a youth athlete to move into and

through different stages of a training program (e.g., bronze level = poor technical

competency, pre-pubertal, psychologically immature; platinum = high technical competency,

post-pubertal, psychologically mature). A stage-based progression model can also help

practitioners to monitor and address potential regressions in technical competency in some

athletes which may be related to the adolescent spurt (i.e. awkwardness). A coach might, for

example, encourage an athlete to revisit a particular stage (e.g., silver to bronze) should they

experience a sudden decrement in technical competence. Such models should emphasize the

holistic development of the young athlete and should also emphasize that decisions to move
an athlete up or down a level be informed by a scientifically-sound based of information and

input from a specialist practitioner/integrated sports performance team.

Summary

The practice of bio-banding is receiving renewed interest in the context of youth

sports and is being applied in a variety of contexts (i.e., competition, training, assessment).

Emerging evidence suggests that the bio-banding, as an adjunct to age group competition, can

benefit both early and late maturing players in Academy football. Further research is required

to replicate the findings and evaluate the extent to which they may be generalized to different

sports or samples. Some evidence suggests that bio-banding also may have application to the

training of young athletes and the processes of talent identification and confirmation. More

research is, however, required to substantiate these positions.

While the process of bio-banding has the potential to contribute positively to the

experiences and development of youth athletes, it is important to recognise that it is not a

panacea and that it should operate as part of a multifaceted and holistic program of

development. Bio-banding is one of many tools that can be used to better understand and

promote the development and well-being of young athletes. It is not a substitute for age group

training or competitions; rather, bio-banding is an adjunct activity that has the potential to

challenge the athlete in a unique manner and to create a more diverse and developmentally

appropriate learning environment. In line with this reasoning, a more effective athlete

development program might include the provision of both age group and bio-banded

activities, which offer athletes a more diverse, multifaceted and developmentally sensitive

learning stimulus. A ‘hybrid approach’ (86) might involve monthly or bi-monthly bio-

banded competitions as part of the existing game programme. Such a system would retain the

benefits of age group competition whilst simultaneously addressing its limitations. It would
also expose athletes to a more diverse range of challenges and learning contexts, which may

optimise athlete development, skill acquisition and welfare. A hybrid approach would also

permit coaches and scouts to assess abilities and potential of athletes across a broader range

of learning environments.

Finally, bio-banding, much like age-groups competition has its limitations. Maturity

assessments applicable to field conditions need further study and validation. Biological

growth and maturation, and psychological and social development do not progress in

synchrony. Knowing how to best assess and evaluate biological, psychological and social

readiness is essential to improving the effectiveness of bio-banding strategies. Bio-banding,

as both a practice and topic of scientific inquiry, is still in its infancy. More research is

needed to determine its effectiveness and understand its limitations.

References

1. Albuquerque, MR, Franchini E, Lage GM, Da Costa VT, Costa IT, and Malloy-Diniz LF. The

Relative Age Effect in Combat Sports: An Analysis of Olympic Judo Athletes, 1964-2012.

Percept Motor Skill 121: 300-308, 2015.

2. Albuquerque, MR, Fukuda DH, Costa VT, Lopes MC, and Franchini E. Do weight categories

prevent athletes from the relative age effect? a meta-analysis of combat sports. Sport Sci

Health: 1-7, 2016.

3. Atkinson, M. Bio-banding in the academy. Available at:

[Link] Accessed

September 15, 2016.

4. Bailey, DA, Wedge JH, Mcculloch RG, Martin AD, and Bernhardson SC. Epidemiology of

Fractures of the Distal End of the Radius in Children as Associated with Growth. J Bone Joint

Surg Am 71A: 1225-1231, 1989.

5. Balyi I and Hamilton A. Long-term athlete development: trainability in childhood and

adolescence. Olympic Coach 16: 4-9, 2004.

6. Baxter-Jones ADG. Growth and development of young athletes: Should competition levels be

age related. Sports Med 20: 59-64, 1995.

7. Baxter-Jones ADG. Growth and maturation, in: Paediatric Exercise Science and Medicine. N

Armstrong, W Van Mechelen, eds.: Oxford University Press, 2009, pp 157-168.

8. Baxter-Jones ADG. Growth, maturation, and training. In: Handbook of Sports Medicine and

Science: Gymnastics. DJ Daine, KW Russell, L Lim, eds. UK: John Wiley & Sons, 2013, 17-27.

9. Baxter-Jones ADG, Eisenmann JC, and Sherar LB. Controlling for maturation in pediatric

exercise science. Pediatr Exerc Sci 17: 18-30, 2005.

10. Baxter-Jones ADG, Thompson AM, and Malina RM. Growth and maturation in elite young

female athletes. Sports Med Arth Rev 10: 42-49, 2002.

11. Bengsch V. A step forward? Kids in British Premier League academy train based on physical

maturity. Available at: [Link]

british-premier-league-academy-train-based-on-physical-maturity. Accessed September 15,

2016.

12. Beunen GP and Malina RM. Growth and physical; performance relative to the timing of the

adolescent spurt. Exercise and Sport Sciences Review 16: 503-540, 1988.

13. Beunen GP, Malina RM, Van't Hof MA, Simons J, Renson R, and Van Gerven D. Adolescent

growth and motor performance: A longitudinal study of Belgian boys. Champaign, Il.: Human

Kinetics, 1988.

14. Bisi MC and Stagni R. Development of gait motor control: what happens after a sudden

increase in height during adolescence? Biomed Eng Online 15, 2016.

15. Blakemore SJ. Brain Development in Adolescence. J Neurol Neurosur Ps 85, e3, 2014.

16. Blakemore SJ, Burnett S, and Dahl RE. The Role of Puberty in the Developing Adolescent

Brain. Hum Brain Mapp 31: 926-933, 2010.

17. Blanchard S. Bio-banding. Available at: [Link]

_20150225_132718_11.html. Accessed September 15, 2016.

18. Blimkie CJR, Lefevre J, Beunen GP, Renson R, Dequeker J, and Vandamme P. Fractures,

Physical-Activity, and Growth Velocity in Adolescent Belgian Boys. Med Sci Sport Exer 25:

801-808, 1993.

19. Bloom BS and Sosniak LA. Developing talent in young people. New York: Ballantine Books,

1985.

20. Bowerman E, Whatman C, Harris N, Bradshaw E, and Karin J. Are maturation, growth and

lower extremity alignment associated with overuse injury in elite adolescent ballet dancers?

Phys Ther Sport 15: 234-241, 2014.

21. Bowerman EA, Whatman C, Harris N, and Bradshaw E. A review of the risk factors for lower

extremity oversue injuries in young elite female ballet dancers. J Dance Med Sci 19: 51-56,

2015.

22. Cobley S. Talent identification and development in youth sport. In: Routledge Handbook of

Youth Sport. K Green, A Smith, eds. Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 476-491, 2016.

23. Crampton CW. Physiological age: A fundamental principle. Amer Phys Educ Rev 8: 141-154,

1908.

24. Cumming SP and Bunce J. Maturation in playere development and practical strategies in

Premier League Academies. Rugby Football Union (RFU) Player Development Conference:

The Future Player. Twickenham Stadium, UK, 2015.

25. Cumming SP, Eisenmann JC, Smoll FL, Smith RE, and Malina RM. Body size and perceptions

of coaching behaviors by adolescent female athletes. Psychol Sport Exerc 6: 693-705, 2005.

26. Cumming SP, Sherar LB, Pindus DM, Coelho-e-Silva MJ, Malina RM, and Jardine PR. A

biocultural model of maturity-associated variance in adolescent physical activity. Int Rev

Sport Exer Psych 5: 23-43, 2012.

27. Cumming SP, Standage M, Loney T, Gammon C, Neville H, Sherar LB, and Malina RM. The

mediating role of physical self-concept on relations between biological maturity status and

physical activity in adolescent females. J Adolescence 34: 465-473, 2011.

28. Delorme N. Do weight categories prevent athletes from relative age effect? J Sport Sci 32:

16-21, 2014.

29. Depledge M. Application of growth and maturation at Southampton FC. Team Bath

Professional Development Seminar Series. University of Bath, 2015.

30. DiFiori JP, Benjamin HJ, Brenner JS, Gregory A, Jayanthi N, Landry GL, and Luke A. Overuse

injuries and burnout in youth sports: a position statement from the American Medical

Society for Sports Medicine. Brit J Sport Med 48, 2014.

31. Ferguson A. Leading. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 2015.

32. Figueiredo AJ, Goncalves CE, Silva MJCE, and Malina RM. Youth soccer players, 11-14 years:

Maturity, size, function, skill and goal orientation. Ann Hum Biol 36: 60-73, 2009.

33. Figuereido AJ, Coelho Silva MJ, Cumming SP, and Malina RM. Size and Maturity Mismatch in

Youth Soccer Players 11-to 14-Years-Old. Ped Exerc Sci 22: 596-612, 2010.

34. Ford P, De Ste Croix M, Lloyd R, Meyers R, Moosavi M, Oliver J, Till K, and Williams C. The

Long-Term Athlete Development model: Physiological evidence and application. J Sport Sci

29: 389-402, 2011.

35. Fournier PE, Rizzoli R, Slosman DO, Theintz G, and Bonjour JP. Asynchrony between the rates

of standing height gain and bone mass accumulation during puberty. Osteoporosis Int 7:

525-532, 1997.

36. Gibbs BG, Jarvis JA, and Dufur MJ. The rise of the underdog? The relative age effect reversal

among Canadian-born NHL hockey players: A reply to Nolan and Howell. Int Rev Sociol Sport

47: 644-649, 2012.

37. Gullich A, Emrich E, and Schwank B. Evaluation of the support of young athletes in the elite

sport system. Eur J Sport Society 3: 85-108, 2006.

38. Hedstrom R and Gould D. Research in youth sports: Critical issues status. Michigan State

University, Michigan. 1-42, 2004.

39. Hewett TE, Myer GD, and Ford KR. Decrease in neuromuscular control about the knee with

maturation in female athletes. J Bone Joint Surg Am 86A: 1601-1608, 2004.

40. Hunter Smart JE, Cumming SP, Sherar LB, Standage M, Neville H, and Malina RM. Maturity

associated variance in physical activity and health-related quality of life in adolescent

females. A mediated effects model. J Phys Act Health 9: 86-95, 2012.

41. Johnson A. Growth and maturation of youth football players: Medical considerations and

implications. Premier League Performance Leadership Conference. Silverstone, UK, 2015.

42. Kemper GLJ, van der Sluis A, Brink MS, Visscher C, Frencken WGP, and Elferink-Gemser MT.

Anthropometric injury risk factors in elite-standard youth soccer. Int J Sports Med 36: 1112-

1117, 2015.

43. Khamis HJ and Roche AF. Predicting adult stature without using skeletal age - the Khamis-

Roche Method (Vol 94, Pg 504, 1994). Pediatrics 95: 457-457, 1995.

44. Koziel SM and Malina RM. Validation of the modified maturity offset equations in a

longitudinal sample of boys. in preparation.

45. Krause LM, Naughton GA, Denny G, Patton D, Hartwig T, and Gabbett TJ. Understanding

mismatches in body size, speed and power among adolescent rugby union players. J Sci Med

Sport 18: 358-363, 2015.

46. Kreipe RE and Gewanter HL. Physical maturity screening for participation in sports. Pediatrics

75: 1076-1080, 1985.

47. Krogman WM. Maturation age of 55 boys in the LIttle League World Series, 1957. Res Q 30:

54-56, 1959.

48. Landin L and Nilsson BE. Bone-mineral content in children with fractures. Clin Orthop Relat

R: 292-296, 1983.

49. Lefevre J, Beunen G, Steens G, Claessens A, and Renson R. Motor-performance during

adolescence and age 30 as related to age at peak height velocity. Ann Hum Biol 17: 423-435,

1990.

50. Lintunen T, Rahkila P, Silvennoinen M, and Osterback L. Psychological and physical correlates

of early and late biological maturation in 9- to 11-year-old girls and boys In: Young athletes:

Biological, psychological, and educational perspectives. RM Malina, ed. Champaign, Ill:

Human Kinetics, 85-91, 1988.

51. Lloyd RS, Cronin JB, Faigenbaum AD, Haff GG, Howard R, Kraemer WJ, Micheli LJ, Myer GD,

and Oliver JL. The National Strength and Conditioning Association position statement on

long-term athletic development. J Strength Cond Res, 30: 1491-509, 2016.

52. Lloyd RS and Oliver JL. The Youth Physical Development Model: A new approach to long-

term athletic development. Strength Cond J 34: 61-72, 2012.

53. Lloyd RS, Oliver JL, Faigenbaum AD, Myer GD, and De Ste Croix MBA. Chronological age vs.

biological maturation: Implications for exercise programming in youth. J Strength Cond Res

28: 1454-1464, 2014.

54. Malina RM. Children and adolescents in the sport culture: The overwhelming majority to the

select few. J Exerc Sci Fit 7: S1-S10, 2009.

55. Malina RM. Skeletal age and age verification in youth sport. Sports Med 41: 925-947, 2011.

56. Malina RM. Assessment of biological maturation. In: Oxford Textbook of Children's Sport and

Exercise Medicine. N Armstrong, W van Mechelen, eds.: Oxford University Press, in press.

57. Malina RM and Beunen G. Matching of opponents in youth sports." The child and adolescent

athlete. In: The Child and Adolescent Athlete. O Bar-Or, ed. Oxford: Blackwell Science Ltd.,

202-213, 1996.

58. Malina RM, Bouchard C, and Bar-Or O. Growth maturation and physical activity. Champaign,

IL: Human Kinetics 2004.

59. Malina RM, Bouchard C, and Bar-Or O. Growth, maturation, and physical activity.

Champaign, Ill: Human Kinetics, 2004.

60. Malina RM, Choh AC, Czerwinski SA, and Chumlea WC. Validation of maturity offset in the

Fels Longitudinal Study. Pediatr Exerc Sci, in press.

61. Malina RM and Cumming SP. A non-invasive method for estimating maturity status.

Application to young athletes. Insight FA Coaches Association Journal 6: 34-37, 2004.

62. Malina RM and Koziel SM. Validation of maturity offset in a longitudinal sample of Polish

boys. J Sport Sci 32: 424-437, 2014.

63. Malina RM and Koziel SM. Validation of maturity offset in a longitudinal sample of Polish

girls. J Sport Sci 32: 1374-1382, 2014.

64. Malina RM, Rogol AD, Cumming SP, Silva MJCE, and Figueiredo AJ. Biological maturation of

youth athletes: assessment and implications. Brit J Sport Med 49: 852-859, 2015.

65. Mann DL and van Ginneken PJ. Age-ordered shirt numbering reduces the selection bias

associated with the relative age effect. J Sport Sci: 1-7, 2016.

66. Mansfield MJ and Emans SJ. Growth in female gymnasts - Should training decrease during

puberty. J Pediatr 122: 237-240, 1993.

67. Meylan CMP, Cronin JB, Oliver JL, Hopkins WG, and Contreras B. The effect of maturation on

adaptations to strength training and detraining in 11-15-year-ods. Scand J Med Sci Sports 24:

E156-E164, 2014.

68. Mirwald RL, Baxter-Jones ADG, Bailey DA, and Beunen GP. An assessment of maturity from

anthropometric measurements. Med Sci Sports Exerc 34: 689-694, 2002.

69. Mitchell SB, Haase AM, Malina RM, and Cumming SP. The role of puberty in the making and

breaking of young ballet dancers: Perspectives of dance teachers. J Adolescence 47: 81-89,

2016.

70. Moore SA, Mckay HA, Macdonald H, Nettlefold L, Baxter-Jones ADG, Cameron N, and

Brasher PMA. Enhancing a somatic maturity prediction model. Med Sci Sport Exer 47: 1755-

1764, 2015.

71. Petersen AC and Taylor B. The biological approach to adolescence: Biological change and

psychological adaptation In: Handbook of adolescent psychology. J Adelson, ed. New York:

Wiley-Interscience, 1980.

72. Philippaerts RM, Vaeyens R, Janssens M, Van Renterghem B, Matthys D, Craen R, Bourgois J,

Vrijens J, Beunen G, and Malina RM. The relationship between peak height velocity and

physical performance in youth soccer players. J Sport Sci 24: 221-230, 2006.

73. Price RJ, Hawkins RD, Hulse MA, and Hodson A. The Football Association medical research

programme: an audit of injuries in academy youth football. Brit J Sport Med 38: 466-471,

2004.
74. Quatman-Yates CC, Quatman CE, Meszaros AJ, Paterno MV, and Hewett TE. A systematic

review of sensorimotor function during adolescence: a developmental stage of increased

motor awkwardness? Brit J Sport Med 46: 649-655, 2012.

75. Read P, Oliver JL, De Ste Croix MBA, Myer GD, and Lloyd RS. Injury risk factors in male youth

soccer players. Strength Cond J 37: 1-7, 2015.

76. Read PJ, Oliver JL, De Ste Croix MBA, Myer GD, and Lloyd RS. Assessment of injury risk

factors in male youth soccer players. Strength Cond J 38: 12-21, 2016.

77. Roche AF, Tyleshevski F, and Rogers E. Non-invasive measurements of physical maturity in

children. Res Q Exercise Sport 54: 364-371, 1983.

78. Rotch TM. A study of the development of the bones in children by roentgen method, with

the view of establishing a developmental index for grading of and the protection of early life.

Trans Assoc Am Physicians 24: 603-630, 1909.

79. Sanderson L. The Importance of Considering Growth and Development When Designing and

Implementing Training Plans for Young Athletes. World Athletics Symposium: 88-95, 1989.

80. Science could help search for the next Andy Murray. Available at:

[Link] Accessed September 15,

2016.

81. Sherar LB, Cumming SP, Eisenmann JC, Baxter-Jones ADG, and Malina RM. Adolescent

biological maturity and physical activity: Biology meets behavior. Pediatr Exerc Sci 22: 332-

349, 2010.

82. Stang J and Story M. Adolescent growth and development. In: Guidelines for Adolescent

Nutrition Service. J Stang, M Story, eds.: School of Public Health, University of Minnesota, 1-

8, 2005.

83. Tanchev PI, Dzherov AD, Parushev AD, Dikov DM, and Todorov MB. Scoliosis in rhythmic

gymnasts. Spine 25: 1367-1371, 2000.

84. Tanner JM. Growth at Adolescence: With a General Consideration of the Effects of Hereditary

and Environmental Factors upon Growth and Maturation from Birth to Maturity. Oxford:

Blackwell Scientific Publications, 1962.

85. The New York State Education Department Office of Elementary, Middle, Secondary and

Continuing Education. The New York State Selection/Classification Program for

Interscholastic Athletic Programs. New York State Selection. Available at:

[Link] Accessed on

September 15, 2016.

86. Tucker R, Raftery M, and Verhagen E. Injuury risk and tackle ban in youth Rugby Union:

Evaluating the evidence and searching for targeted, effective interventions. Brit J Sports Med

Online 0: 1-6, 2016.

87. Vaeyens R, Lenoir M, Williams AM, and Philippaerts RM. Talent identification and

development programmes in sport - Current models and future directions. Sports Med 38:

703-714, 2008.

88. van der Sluis A, Elferink-Gemser MT, Brink MS, and Visscher C. Importance of Peak Height

Velocity Timing in Terms of Injuries in Talented Soccer Players. Int J Sports Med 36: 327-332,

2015.

89. Votteler A and Honer O. The relative age effect in the German Football TID Programme:

Biases in motor performance diagnostics and effects on single motor abilities and skills in

groups of selected players. Eur J Sport Sci 14: 433-442, 2014.

90. World Rugby. Weight consdieration guideline. Available at:

[Link] Accessed on September 15, 2016.

91. Wyatt H. Physical development contributions to biomechanical injury risk in female

gymnasts. Cardiff Metropolitan University, 2015.