1. Introduction
The athletic career, considered as the period in which an athlete is dedicated to obtaining their maximum performance in one or more sports [
1], is characterized by different stages: initiation, development, mastery (elite) and retirement [
2,
3]; although each sport has its own idiosyncrasies and the length of the stages and the ages differ very much from one sport to another [
4]. Thus, the type of sport may shape the features of the athlete’s career.
The holistic model of athletic career development considers the athlete as a unique entity [
5]. Hence, while the athlete develops the athletic career, he/she is developing as a person, developing in his/her relationships with others, and in some cases also developing a second career outside of sport. This model considers that each athlete has different spheres of life (sport, psychological, psychosocial, vocational, and financial) and postulates that these dimensions interact with one another. Thus, the dimensions should not be analyzed separately, and the athlete should be studied as a whole. In addition, throughout their athletic career, an athlete experiences transitions in each life sphere. Transitions are known as “a change in assumptions about oneself and the world and thus requires a corresponding change in one’s behavior and relationships” [
6] (p. 5). These transitions can be normative (expected) or non-normative (unexpected) [
1]. Normative transitions are the changes the athlete may expect to experience at the different stages of an athletic career; for example, entering a high-performance center after being selected for the national team. On the other hand, non-normative transitions are those that are unexpected. These could be injuries or a sudden change of coach. Facing non-normative transitions requires an effort to cope and deal with unwanted change. Stambulova’s model of sports transitions highlights that the balance between barriers and athletes’ resources mark successful or unsuccessful transition coping. When a transition is not overcome, a crisis could be experienced by the athlete followed by negative consequences such as being dropped, substance abuse or frustration [
7].
Life spheres can interact with each other positively or negatively. In this respect, in the last decade, the studies on combining sport with a second career (studies or work) have increased in quantity as well as quality, exploring the benefits for the athletic career [
8]. This combination is known in the European Union as developing a dual career (DC). In a recent study, Stambulova and Wylleman [
8] reviewed state of the art on this topic. Developing a DC implies a strong commitment to both careers. Athletes that follow a DC deal with tight schedules, and they often mention their personal sacrifices, such as having little time for themselves, for personal relationships, for developing a social life, and for resting, in comparison with their counterparts. This situation may lead to stress, fatigue, injuries, and burnout [
9,
10,
11]. On the other hand, once the athlete has adapted to the DC, the advantage is the perception of experiencing an optimal DC, balancing the different spheres of life: sport, a second career and personal life, where the athlete has the sense of having a “safety net” [
8,
12,
13,
14].
There are different ways of combining the athletic career with a second career. In a recent update, Torregrossa et al. [
15] describe four different career paths. The
linear path is when the athlete focuses exclusively on sport; the
convergent path is when the athlete maintains the second activity (studies or work), but he/she gives priority to sport; the
parallel path is when the two activities are combined, but the priority is shifted depending on external demands, and the athletic career is not always first; the
divergent path is when the two careers put pressure on the athlete in a way that forces him/her to quit one of them (sport or studies/work). Managing the demands of both careers is not an easy task. While each sphere in life (sport, psychological, psychosocial, vocational, and financial) has its own normative transitions such as entering secondary school, entering the high-performance center, deciding whether to study at university or not, or whether to start working after achieving a degree, athletes create their own paths based on the decisions they make [
8,
16]. In order to prepare for each normative transition, athletes gather information from their peers/teammates about competition, or a training camp, or even about their skills for managing their studies and planning for their next steps. Planning has also been highlighted as a key element for coping satisfactorily with the sports retirement transition [
17,
18]. In addition, the lack of planning could be compensated with other resources, external or internal. External resources are like having unconditional support from a close social network [
17,
19,
20,
21,
22,
23]. For example, Willard and Lavalle [
23] describe in a study with professional dancers how keeping the support circle intact during their whole career was a fundamental pillar in each transition. In relation to the internal resources, the education or academic level achieved is one of them [
24]. Previous studies on this topic reinforce the idea that former elite athletes have a higher academic level than the general population [
25,
26]. In addition, in another study on elite athletes, women from individual sports reached a higher educational level than their counterparts [
27]. However, in the comparison of individual and team sports athletes, the former are more likely to drop-out from secondary school [
28]. This could be related to the hours of training per week, as the training load is greater in individual sports compared to team sports [
29].
An active lifestyle is also desirable for the satisfaction of the retired athlete [
30]. To our knowledge, studies regarding the physical activity performed by former elite athletes are scarce. Bäckmand et al. [
31] reported in a sample of Finnish former elite athletes that 46% of them were physically active while 13% were sedentary. Torregrossa et al. [
30], analyzing another large sample of former elite athletes from Colombia and Spain, found 54.6% were physically active and 12.9% sedentary. Both studies are based on self-reports, which usually under or overestimate the amount of Physical Activity in comparison with objective measures [
32]. The recommendations of global organizations such as the World Health Organization (WHO, [
33]) are clear in terms of quantity and intensity. They recommend adults aged 18–64 should do at least 150 min of moderate-intensity aerobic physical activity throughout the week or at least 75 min of vigorous-intensity aerobic physical activity throughout the week, or an equivalent combination of moderate- and vigorous-intensity activity. However, there is also a perception among this population of former athletes that accomplishing the recommended daily activities by going for a walk or cycling to work is not physical activity [
34].
This research is in line with the recent review on DC by Stambulova and Wylleman [
8], in which they state that one of the major gaps on this topic is the absence of training for the DC support providers. The purpose of this study is to compare the athletic career and retirement of former elite athletes according to the sport practiced and to provide information for the athletes’ counselors. Furthermore, describing the retirement transition of former elite athletes may help practitioners to aid the next generation of athletes at some key points to deal successfully with their transitions. Therefore, it could be interesting to analyze in-depth the athletic careers of former elite athletes and shed some light on their retirement and current lifestyles.
