Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

desfirsit OP t1_iym82xu wrote

The relative age effect is documented in a wide range of sports and also in academics. A child born in January will be 11 months older than a child born in December the same calendar year, which is a big relative difference at young ages. If coaches don't think of this, they will misperceive the older kid as being more mature and talented, and will then encourage the older kid more.

I took data on all players in the FIFA World Cup and checked their birth month. Just as expected, the most common months to be born are January, February and March.

Some countries may have other cutoff dates for starting school or sports teams than January 1, but despite this, the effect shines through.

Made in R using the ggplot2 package. Data from fbref.com.

227

diamond280779 t1_iymf8t6 wrote

For academics September is the relative age effect start point. Most sports in Northern Europe work the same way Football 100% does so here in the UK

89

desfirsit OP t1_iymiz5r wrote

It depends on the country. In Sweden where I live January is the cutoff for both schools and most sports.

44

diamond280779 t1_iymm4uo wrote

England, Wales, Belgium, France, Germany, Croatia, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Serbia, Spain and Switzerland all start in September (academics)

8

hoffmistrz t1_iymr41b wrote

Well, academic year in Poland starts in september but you still go to classes according with year you were born in. Children from January wil be the oldest in class and the ones from December the youngest(There are also cases where a children from example December can be moved to another year)

21

locky_ t1_iymtfi7 wrote

That is not correct, at least in Spain. The classes start on September, but the students go to class following the calendar year. Someone born in April and someone born in November of the same year will go to the same class. And the same for sports.

20

Junkley t1_iyn6jh7 wrote

Much of the US goes by the Sept cutoff too. There are some places that use raw age for sports but most use school class and the cutoff varies but usually is around Sept 1st or Labor Day

5

FartingBob t1_iyo6jzr wrote

As a Brit, my first thought was "wow that's a weird way of doing it" then my second thought was "Hang on, no it isnt. Its the only logical way of doing it. Why the fuck do we still start a new school year in September???".

5

desfirsit OP t1_iyo7dtj wrote

Well we start the new school year in august, but the cut-off is still January! Everybody that is born a specific calendar year starts school the same time in August. If you are born December 31 the year before you start in August a year earlier.

11

FartingBob t1_iyo7j2u wrote

Oh, well then my first thought was correct. Your way is weird! At least out cutoff is start of september as well.

3

FITnLIT7 t1_iymced5 wrote

My fiancee really doesn’t understand why I want to plan to have our child earlier in the year. I seen the effects first hand playing competitive sports at a young age.

22

ranseaside t1_iyo4lnx wrote

My friends planned this, they planned to have a baby in January for the same reason. They ended up with a premature baby’s who was born in December.

17

FITnLIT7 t1_iyo511b wrote

I mean it can happen. I wouldn’t necessarily aim for a child to be born in January for this reason. My son now was born in April. And If I could “aim” for a date it would be Feb/March. People can deny it all they want but I’ve seen too many late year baby boys get bullied for being smaller - even if it’s just In the early years of school that shit leaves a lasting negative affect.

7

ranseaside t1_iyo5l0u wrote

No shade from me. I won’t fault any parents for wanting the best for their child. I had fertility issues so I am just happy I had a kid whenever it happened, I couldn’t plan it like that. Tho I have also seen many kids born later on the h the year who were big and strong (I am a teacher), so many factors go into how a child becomes (genetics, diet)

3

FITnLIT7 t1_iyo7lm3 wrote

Glad that worked out for you, being a parent is a wonderful thing. (My first is 7 months old). Genetics will always play a major part but that I can’t control (not some gene editing nut job) but if you have genetics as a December baby to outgrow and outperform everyone else your age, just imagine that same kid as a January baby. It’s really just a preference thing and it’s a small thing I can control to help tip the odds in my child’s favour in this difficult world.

2

Easter_1916 t1_iyow7x6 wrote

Or you could do what they do in the southern USA and have them early in year AND hold them back a year. I started college at 17 and my roommate turned 20 freshman year.

1

Anachronism-- t1_iynl85m wrote

Malcom gladwell did an update on his podcast and observed that many parents are using his data as a reason to hold their children back a year to give than an academic advantage.

6

abzlute t1_iyo6xu6 wrote

Idk which specific sport you're concerned with and if it would be done through school or separately, but if we're going with school grade cutoffs then why not just let the dice fall and if they are near the cutoff then keep them home for an extra year? They would be the oldest in their grade, but only by the same margin that the the otherwise oldest kids are/would be.

2

FITnLIT7 t1_iyo77h6 wrote

Sports here (Canada) don't go by school grade... they go by birth year. Sports aside, I would rather not have a December 2024 baby in classes with 2025 kids. I'd rather my kid be a Jan-March 2025 kid.

3

abzlute t1_iypq5k8 wrote

Is birth year more culturally significant in schools there? Here it's not really even a consideration. Ofc the school starting cutoff is usually based on age at the start of the school year in august iirc, not on calendar year, so I had a mix of classmates born in 94 and 95 for instance. Being born in summer made me one of the youngest, and being born in december would place someone in the older half. We only really associated with grade level, and with graduation year (both high school and college). And assuming your sports are through the school system (most are, but not all, and those that aren't are usually more chill) I don't think actual age affects eligibility at all until it's like state and national championship level U16, U18, U23, etc categories.

1

Analyst214 t1_iymhmz4 wrote

Well good news is if you are perusing Reddit and not busy doing something else then your child most likely won’t advance far into competitive sports so feel free to have it whenever

−35

FITnLIT7 t1_iymhsqi wrote

So you just woke up and chose violence? Perhaps one of the most useless comments I have ever read, thanks for the invaluable input.

6

Analyst214 t1_iymi9a8 wrote

It is what it is the truth hurts us all my friend

−29

FITnLIT7 t1_iymj7vu wrote

Having a semi-professional sport background and a cushy desk job that allows me to surf the web definitely indicates a child that will be unable to perform well in sports you are right.

10

Analyst214 t1_iymm0gz wrote

And that’s why your child won’t make it far, most athletes are dictated by genetics and discipline. If we go by chance and your Reddit history we can assume your offspring won’t make it far

−22

fongletto t1_iyn1yfv wrote

Or it could be because they're generally the biggest, smartest and most mature of their peer group they develop better confidence and leadership skills and are therefore more likely to pursue things to their highest level.

Or maybe a little from both.

4