Lessons on communication and thinking from Neil deGrasse Tyson - 2/4

8 lessons field hockey coaches in 4 weeks from Neil deGrasse Tyson's insights on Scientific Thinking and Communication. This is week 2/4.

So last week we talked about understanding that being right isn’t enough without effective communication and about recognizing cognitive biases in player evaluation. Get ready for the third and fourth lesson by astrophysicist Neil deGrasse Tyson, applied to field hockey coaching 😉

TLDR;

Neil deGrasse Tyson, one of the world's great thinkers, shares his insights in how to think, teach, and communicate more effectively. This series of articles explores eight essential lessons from one of the world’s greatest science communicators that directly apply to coaching field hockey: understanding that being right isn’t enough without effective communication; recognizing cognitive biases in player evaluation; embracing the scientific method in tactical innovation; tailoring communication to different athletes; using progressive teaching strategies; measuring what matters; leveraging body language; and fostering genuine curiosity in your players. These aren’t abstract concepts. They’re practical tools that can transform how you develop players, implement tactics, and build winning programs.
For four consecutive weeks we'll share two lessons each week with you...

When Science Meets Sports

When Neil deGrasse Tyson delivered a masterclass on Scientific Thinking and Communication it wasn’t only about astrophysics, his field of expertise. It’s about how we discover truth, overcome our biases, and communicate complex ideas effectively. These are precisely the skills that separate good coaches from great ones.

We’ll explore eight lessons from Tyson that directly apply to coaching field hockey at competitive levels. Learning from Tyson’s insight that “the scientific method is, do whatever it takes to not fool yourself into thinking something is true that is not.”

We explore how to tailor your coaching to different types of athletes, implementing his principle that “the same ideas, the same concepts, can be framed, shaped, in different ways depending on the audience.”

Today its about lessons three and four we wanted to share based upon the masterclass given by Neil deGrasse Tyson. But make sure you also take a look at these earlier masterclasses:
→  Simon Blanford: How data analysis can change your team’s circle behavior 
→  Simon Blanford: A gentle introduction to data analysis in hockey 

These lessons aren’t theoretical—they’re immediately applicable to your training session tomorrow, your team talk on gameday, and your season planning for next year. Let’s continue….

Lesson 3: The Scientific Method: Do Whatever It Takes Not to Fool Yourself

You’ve developed a new press system over the summer. You’ve studied the top international teams, you’ve adapted principles from other sports, you’ve put in the hours of planning. You introduce it in preseason, run it in a few training matches, and it looks promising. By mid-season, you’re convinced it’s the foundation of your tactical identity.

But how do you know it’s working? And not just working compared to your old system, but working at all?

Tyson defines the scientific method elegantly: “Do whatever it takes to not fool yourself into thinking something is true that is not. Or into thinking that something is not true, that is. That’s the scientific method. Whatever it takes.”

Field hockey coaches are constantly experimenting—with tactics, with training methodologies, with team selection, with motivational approaches. But we rarely apply actual scientific thinking to these experiments. We don’t establish baselines, we don’t control for variables, we don’t seek evidence that might disprove our hypotheses. We implement something new, look for signs it’s working, and confirm our genius. This isn’t science; it’s superstition with statistics.

Consider Tyson’s planetary discovery examples. When Uranus wasn’t following Newton’s laws, scientists had two options: Newton’s laws were wrong, or there was another factor (Neptune) they hadn’t accounted for. When Mercury didn’t follow Newton’s laws, the same logic led to the hypothesis of Vulcan—but this time, the answer was that Newton’s laws actually were insufficient, and Einstein’s general relativity was needed.

The lesson? The same symptoms can have completely different causes, and you need to test your hypotheses rigorously to know which one is true.

Your team is struggling to convert scoring opportunities. Is it:

• A technical issue with finishing?

• A tactical issue with the types of opportunities created?

• A psychological issue with pressure in key moments?

• A selection issue with the wrong players in scoring positions?

• A training issue with insufficient practice of match-realistic scenarios?

Each diagnosis leads to a different solution. If you assume it’s a technical issue and spend three weeks drilling shooting technique, but the real problem is tactical (you’re creating low-percentage chances from difficult angles), you’ve wasted three weeks and frustrated your players in the process. You’ve fooled yourself.

Tyson emphasizes that “nature is the ultimate judge, jury, and executioner. You can argue all you want. But if nature doesn’t agree with you, you’re wrong.”
In coaching, match results are nature’s verdict—but we must be careful not to oversimplify. A win doesn’t mean every decision was correct; a loss doesn’t mean every decision was wrong.

Here’s how to apply scientific thinking to your coaching:

1. State Your Hypothesis Clearly: Instead of “We need to press higher,” state: “If we initiate our press 5 meters higher up the pitch, we will win possession in the attacking third 30% more often, leading to more scoring opportunities from turnovers.”

2. Define How You’ll Measure Success: What data will you collect? Possessions won in attacking third? Shots from turnovers? Goals from high turnovers? Be specific before you implement the change.

3. Establish a Baseline: You can’t know if something works better unless you know how things worked before. Track your current metrics for multiple matches before your start drawing any conclusions.

4. Isolate Variables: If you simultaneously change your press height, your defensive line positioning, and your striker rotation, and performance improves, which change caused the improvement? You don’t know. Try to test one significant change at a time when possible.

5. Look for Disconfirming Evidence: This is the hardest part. After implementing your higher press, actively look for evidence it’s not working. Are you conceding more from turnovers? Are your defenders getting exposed? Are your midfielders too fatigued in second halves?

6. Be Willing to Abandon Your Hypothesis: Tyson describes how scientists “were perfectly happy to give up Vulcan” when Einstein’s relativity provided a better explanation. You must be willing to abandon a tactical approach you’ve invested time in if the evidence shows it’s not working. This is incredibly difficult because of the sunk cost fallacy, but it’s essential.

7. Recognize Multiple Possible Outcomes: Tyson’s three planetary examples showed three different outcomes from similar problems: one confirmed existing theory (Neptune), one required new theory (Mercury and relativity), and one was faulty measurement (Neptune’s orbit after correcting observational errors). Your tactical experiment might succeed, might need modification, or might reveal that your initial diagnosis was wrong.

The key insight is that you’re always running experiments as a coach—the only question is whether you’re running them scientifically or superstitiously.

As Tyson notes: “The day you stop making mistakes, it’s the day you can be pretty sure you are no longer on the frontier.” Be willing to experiment, be willing to fail, but bring scientific rigor to the process. Your players deserve better than tactical guesswork dressed up as expertise.

And yes, we all recognize and understand as coaches we often have the pressure of immediate results. So testing and analyzing the right way is not always an option. Just make sure you recognize when you’re making decisions based upon gut and when you have the facts. And act accordingly…

Never hesitate to Assistant.Hockey more tips about this from the many other coaches we hosted in our masterclasses and workshops. If you’re already a paying subscriber… thank you  🙏  and please read on for the next lesson on cognitive bias. If you’re not yet a paid subscriber, join us to get the most out of what we share here 😉 and  make sure you don’t miss our next posts with the remaining lessons…

Lesson 4: Tailor Your Message to Your Audience. Every Time!