Home ground advantage
The importance of the travel factor in elite sport is perhaps best captured by Bale (1989) who notes a discernable pattern between the home or away status
of sports contests and the probability of winning. This is no doubt due in part to the advantages of home ground support and of playing and competing in familiar surroundings (e.g., training facilities, stadium facilities, familiar weather conditions). However, this is a partial picture. Again, Bale (1989) notes that not only is winning away less probable than at home, but ‘the probability of winning forms a clear gradient according to distance from home’ (Bale, 1989:31). The further a team travels from its home venue, the less likely it is to win. So home ground advantage and home support is important, but apparently so too are the stresses of long haul travel, which brings with it disturbances of physical and mental routines.
Manfredini et al. (2000:182) note that ‘rapid air travel across time zones exposes the traveller to a shift in the internal biological clock and to a transient desynchronization of their rhythms which lasts until rhythms adjust to the new environmental conditions’. The symptoms of jet lag, again according to Man- fredini et al. (2000), may include sleep disorders, difficulties with concentra- tion, depression, irritability, distorted estimation of time, space and distance, light-headedness, loss of appetite and gastrointestinal disturbance. Further- more, the further one travels, the more likely it is that the traveller encounters new climates and weather conditions as well as possibly new atmospheric conditions associated with the altitude and air quality of the destination, which may complicate or prolong the readjustment period. Clearly, travelling to new and unfamiliar places of competition brings with it a range of physiological, psychological, immunological, bacterial and environmental challenges, which also serve to explain why winning is much more straightforward when competition takes place close to, or preferably at, home (Table 5.2).
A number of studies addressing a range of sports have sought to quantify home advantage scientifically (Hugh Morten, 2006). These include studies of such varied sports as cricket (Clarke & Allsopp, 2001), ice hockey (Gayton, Matthews & Nickless, 1987), alpine skiing (Bray & Carron, 1993), football (Clark & Norman, 1995) and Australian Rules Football (Stefani & Clarke, 1992) as well as events such as the winter and summer Olympic Games (Balmer, Nevill & Williams, 2001). All of these studies, and others, have ‘almost invariably demonstrated the existence of a high positive home advantage, either on average or to most of the competitors (individuals or teams) taking part in sports events or sports league competitions’ (Hugh Morten, 2006:495).
Hugh Morten’s (2006) study of home advantage in the Super 12 (now Super 14) and Tri-nations rugby competitions (2000–2004) confirms that home ground advantage exists when analysed on the basis of both results (win/loss) and points scored. The Super 12 recorded 345 matches in the five seasons between 2000 and 2004, of which 217 (63.0%) were won by the home team (five-year range, 58–72%). During the same period the three teams involved in
Athletic Mobility and Competitive Performance 81
the Tri-nations (Australia, South Africa and New Zealand) recorded 22 home wins from 30 test matches played (73.3%) (Hugh Morten, 2006). However, it is also noted that home advantage tends to vary considerably from one year to the next in both competitions, and no teams established a consistent home advantage record from one season to the next during the period under analysis.
These results occurred consistently despite the fact that one is a balanced league and the other is an imbalanced league. In the former case, the Tri-nations was played between three national teams, each playing the others once at home and once away from home. In the case of the latter, the Super 12 involves 5/6 home and 6/5 away games for each team, and it is possible, and indeed not uncommon, that in a given year any team may face weak opposing teams at home and strong opposition teams away, or vice versa. One of the few constants in Hugh Morten’s (2006) study, and Pretorius, Pierce and Litvine’s (2000) study of South Africa’s domestic Currie Cup (rugby) competition, is that the highest home advantage in both cases lay with the Cats (Super 12) and Lions (Currie Cup), and indeed the Springboks (Tri-nations) when they play in Pretoria and Johannesburg, pointing clearly to the home advantage associated with playing at high altitude. As a result, Hugh Morten (2006:498) notes that sports scien- tists have recognized the potential to ‘improve performance in a competition if causal factors behind the size and variability of home advantage can be iden- tified and then, if possible, minimised or exploited as appropriate’. Indeed, as such travel demands have become increasingly routine, so responses to mitigate the consequences of travel for competitive performance have emerged.
Randall Smith et al.’s (2000) study of the Major League Baseball (MLB) competition in North America is particularly relevant to this discussion simply because it seeks to isolate travel as a variable influencing success in ‘away’
competition games. They note that ‘travel is one of a constellation of factors that have been used to account for teams winning a greater percentage of home contests’ (Randall Smith et al., 2000:365). Of course the influence of travel is difficult to isolate from other factors such as crowd support, the peculiarities of the home field and, according to Nevill and Hodder (1999), the tendency for officials to demonstrate a decision making bias in favour of home teams. The lack of travel effects found by Randall Smith et al. (2000:365) is explained as aperceptionof travel effects on the part of players, coaches and journalists, which ‘arises from the mundane routine of the everyday life of the professional athlete’. This, too, might suggest that in the case of very frequent intercity and short haul travel maintaining levels of stimulation and novelty, in an appro- priate balance with the security and familiarity of the team environment, is an important aspect of team management.
These studies of course relate to financially well-supported professional sports franchises. It is interesting to note that, with the expansion of second
and third tier as well as qualification competition schedules, many athletes travelling to engage in international competition are unable to meet their playing and travelling expenses from tournament winnings alone. Woodman and Hardy (2001) highlight that financial concerns are a major cause of organizational stress in elite sport. In some sports, such as European football, American professional leagues in basketball and baseball and the Indian Premier League (IPL cricket), the earnings of many players have skyrocketed due to the combined influence of television media, sponsorship and endorsement (Halberstam, 1999). The reality for most athletes in the majority of sports (e.g., athletics, rowing, squash, netball) is that all but the absolute elite are semi-professional, poorly remunerated or amateur, to the point that travel to competition is compromised due to lack of funding and, in some cases, competitive careers are compromised or curtailed due to financial pressures. Thus while some travel to compete in private jets and limousines, the majority undertake travel to international competition under varying degrees of financial hardship.
Long haul travel, elite athletes and travel medicine
It is a common misconception that travel and positive health outcomes go hand in hand. Many destination marketers and researchers espouse the positive physical and mental health consequences of travelling abroad (Schmidhauser 1996; Urry 1990; May 1989; Vellas & Becherel 1995).
However, the reality is that upward of 50% of tourists are affected by some form of physiological or psychological health problems while travelling (Dawood, 1989; May, 1989; Musa, Higham & Hall, 2004). World Health Organisation (WHO) statistics reveal that for every 100,000 people who travel interna- tionally 50,000 have health problems; 30,000 suffer from diarrhoea;
3,000–4,000 contract malaria and eight will die abroad (Musa et al., 2004).
Air travel is commonly associated with the stresses of flight delays, and environmental factors such as climatic contrasts and changes in time zones, diet and altitude may also compromise the immune system of the traveller, rendering travellers more susceptible to local public health concerns and communicable diseases (Ryan 1996). Travel may also expose individuals to endemic diseases (Cartwright 1996; Rudkin & Hall 1996; Cossar 1996; Petty 1989; Musa et al. 2004), reduced levels of sun safety (Carter 1997; Weston 1996), sexually transmitted diseases and infections (Ford & Eiser 1996;
Gillies & Slack 1996) as well as crime and terrorism (Pizam & Mansfield 1996). Those who travel to remote and/or developing regions and countries may be isolated from modern medical facilities and place additional pres- sures on local health care facilities. Thus, travel medicine is an emerging and
Athletic Mobility and Competitive Performance 83
important area in tourism research, and it has become a priority focus, serving the interests of mobile elite athletes who travel to diverse and distant destinations in search of international competition.
Young, Fricker, Maughan and MacAuley (1998) address the medical issues associated with travellers and elite competition. Such is the mobility of international athletes as global travellers that medical support and comfort at places of competition have become significant issues. These, according to Young et al. (1998), include immunization, vaccinations, jet lag and accli- matization. Like studies addressing the tourist experience (see Clawson and Knetch, 1966), research and practice serving the study of travel medicine typically arrange concerns into distinct travel phases.
Pre-travel phase
The pre-travel phase includes general health screening, immunization, vacci- nations and preparations to ease acclimatization concerns. Two concerns arise in the pre-travel phase as it relates to elite athletes. These include, first, the need to remain healthy given the susceptibility of those travelling by aircraft to respiratory tract infections, tiredness and dietary irregularity. Remaining healthy is obviously a precondition if athletes are to be able to compete at the optimum level (Young et al., 1998). The second relates to being able to continue training efficiently and effectively in new and (possibly) unfamiliar environ- ments. Team selection timeframes should accommodate the specifics of places of competition if, for example, immunizations (e.g., malaria prophylaxis) are required. Many athletes are prone to viral infections due to travelling condi- tions, close living conditions in training accommodation and competition facilities and rigorous training regimes (Young et al., 1998) and should therefore have the influenza vaccine before departure. Athletes who use medications that require the notification of drug testing authorities must undertake notification in the pre-travel phase.
Travel phase
Assumptions, often false, about the ease and efficiency of international travel have significant implications for the travel demands of elite athletes. Few enjoy the luxuries of advance travel and acclimatization due to training and competition schedules or because of insufficient funding support. The problematic aspects of the travel phase relate to the disruption of normal bodily processes due to rapid travel. ‘Jet leg refers to the effects of rapid trans- meridian travel and included bowel disturbance, fatigue and poor sleep’
(Young et al., 1998:78). Jet lag is not readily distinguished from jet stress, which relates to the dehydrating effect of pressurized cabins as well as
unfamiliar diet and crowded seating conditions. Young et al. (1998) note that circadian rhythms take seven days to normalize if more than five time zones have been crossed but that this varies with direction of travel (eastbound air travel results in shortened days, which is more onerous physiologically) as well as age, travel stress (including anxieties associated with air travel that are felt by some) and the consumption of alcohol.
Some athletics authorities will plan travel phase sleep strategies for indi- vidual athletes based on preferences for ‘cat napping’ or re-establishing sleep–
wake cycles (Young et al., 1998). Such strategies may include the use of hypnotics or sleep Medication (e.g., Melatonin) during and in the nights immediately following long haul travel. While many trans-meridian travellers including elite athletes use Melatonin to counter the effects of jetlag, Man- fredini, Manfredini and Conconi (2000) warn of the importance of individually tailored rather than standard doses, particularly as they differ based on gender.
Some athletes may be provided with guidance on in-flight relaxation tech- niques, preferential seat booking and priority terminal services to ease transit arrangements and reduce total travel time. Arranging appropriate meals and carrying supplementary foods and drinks in hand baggage may be necessary for some. These initiatives, as well as a range of specific transit, seating and medication requirements, also apply to disabled athletes (Darcy, 2003).
At the place of competition
All athletes, but particularly those who travel to compete in developing coun- tries, are inevitably brought into contact with unfamiliar organisms and therefore face the possibility of intestinal infection. Most cases of traveller diarrhoea are the result of non-viral causes, including pathogens such as Salmonella,GiardiaandCampylobacter, and as such can be guarded against with simple food hygiene initiatives (Young et al., 1998). Meeting familiar, calculated and safe dietary regimes has become a necessary part of elite performance away from home, at least in advance of and perhaps during competition. Young et al. (1998) note that ‘.exercise performance is impaired in the heat, but repeated exposures bring about adaptive changes that serve to minimize negative effects on performance’ (Young et al., 1998:79).
While acclimatization programmes remain the subject of ongoing research, it is generally agreed that training (and preferably living) in the heat (32–35 C, with humidity greater than 70% being the optimum range) for 7–14 days before competition is important and that training intensity should be reduced and performed in the coolest part of the day initially (Young et al., 1998). Acclimatization should take place alongside a planned strategy to prevent dehydration because as acclimatization to a hot climate takes place,
Athletic Mobility and Competitive Performance 85
sweating increases. Sweating results in the loss of body fluid and electrolytes, which without compensation will impair both physical and mental perfor- mance (Young et al., 1998). The rehydration regime and carbohydrate and sodium content of replacement fluids will vary with the nature of training programmes, the nature of a given sport (e.g., timing and duration, amount of standing and waiting between periods of competition) and whether or not the sport takes place at indoor or outdoor venues.Lifestyle issues, at least prior to competition, are also critical to elite athletes who compete in unfamiliar geographical, climatic and weather conditions. Sunburn can cause heat stress and compromise sweating responses long after the obvious symptoms of skin damage have faded (Young et al., 1998).
While this dialogue relates to long haul air travel from temperate to equa- torial climates, the same principles may be applied to all forms of travel for elite competition. Thus, in the case of US college competitions bus journeys can be planned to minimize disruption of daily routines as well as travel times on days of competition (Newell, 2003). Access to training facilities in close proximity to accommodation at the destination may be given priority, and actions to mini- mize distractions (e.g., incoming telephone calls) may also be taken in advance (Newell, 2003). Pace and Carron’s (1992) quantitative study of the National Hockey League (NHL) provides two interesting insights into regular and recurring road trips. First, the longer the team road trip, the more likely that the visiting team will win away games. Secondly, where teams travel across multiple time zones, the greater the number of rest days before competition, the lower the chances of winning the game. The first of these two results is explained by suggesting that teams become accustomed to the rigors of long road journeys if time on the road can be effectively used to create a special team bond and generate team cohesion. This clearly needs to be balanced against a tour schedule that limits time off between games to get used to unfamiliar environments and new time zones, because this may contribute to a loss of focus and concentration (Pace & Carron, 1992).