What's the better training method for a NT?

[Federoy]

If you were setting the schedule for your NT preparations, what would be the better training method?

[Perseus]

number 2

[Federoy]

number 2

Sorry, I posted the blog before I could get the poll up. Please use the polling options.

[Mindozas]

In the first preparation games after physical work outs, players are usually clumsy, so it's better to start with weaker teams (I still remember how LT managed to lose at home against Sweden in their first prep.game in 2007 ), it's a good way to find the rythm bit by bit, in later stages of preparations there's no point to play against weak rivals, you get nothing out of it, players must be tested seriously, no matter the outcome, it's important to find out your weak spots, so my choice is combination of weaker and stronger rivals

[g.g]

In the first preparation games after physical work outs, players are usually clumsy, so it's better to start with weaker teams (I still remember how LT managed to lose at home against Sweden in their first prep.game in 2007 ), it's a good way to find the rythm bit by bit, in later stages of preparations there's no point to play against weak rivals, you get nothing out of it, players must be tested seriously, no matter the outcome, it's important to find out your weak spots, so my choice is combination of weaker and stronger rivals

100% agree

[fasoulaki]

The other question, is how many games should be played?

Many of them to get good team chemistry or only a small amount to avoid injuries and to save physical power for the tournament?

[g.g]

The other question, is how many games should be played?

Many of them to get good team chemistry or only a small amount to avoid injuries and to save physical power for the tournament?

This is THE question! it is obvious that lots of prep games and the chance for a serious injury is great. I say not more than 7-9 games is the best.

[mvblair]

In the first preparation games after physical work outs, players are usually clumsy, so it's better to start with weaker teams (I still remember how LT managed to lose at home against Sweden in their first prep.game in 2007 ), it's a good way to find the rythm bit by bit, in later stages of preparations there's no point to play against weak rivals, you get nothing out of it, players must be tested seriously, no matter the outcome, it's important to find out your weak spots, so my choice is combination of weaker and stronger rivals

Yeah, I agree too.

This same question can be asked about the US NCAA teams' preseasons. Should a mid-level NCAA D1 team play against a D2 team or a big D1 team?

Playing a combination is best.

As to fasoulaki's question...hmm, that's harder. I think that a team should probably play at least the same number of games that they're going to play in the real tournament. Of course, they should not play as hard.

[honeybadger]

I think it's a combination of all three. Start with weaker teams, progress to big, but at the same time do not treat those games with importance, as they are really just exhibition games. A good coach has to do some experimenting before the tournament, to see which roles to assign to each player, and to see how fit everyone is.
A perfect score in the preparation games can lead to overconfidence which might bring the team to an early defeat in the group stage. Look at Spain in basketball and soccer. Last year they were undefeated in the exhibitions, only to lose the first game to Serbia. In soccer they lost to Switzerland.
On the other hand, Serbia was demolished by Germany in a friendly before EB, but managed to reach the finals. Personally, I would like my team to lose a game, possibly tomorrow against Slovenia, so the players can cool their heads off. It's better that they lose now, than later.

[dxjayrock2008]

I'll pick number three option.