FSHP Academy
Sports Technology — all lessons

Module 1 – Introduction

Evolution and role of technology in sportImpact on training, recovery and competitionCase studies: technology in Olympic and elite sport

Module 2 – Biomechanics & Motion Capture

Biomechanics basics for technology usersMotion analysis tools: cameras, sensors and appsForce plates (e.g. VALD ForceDecks)Reaction-light systems (e.g. BlazePod)DynamometryRunning gait analysis (e.g. GaitON)Timing and jump systems (e.g. Hyperlab)

Module 3 – Wearables & Monitoring

Types of wearables: GPS and heart-rate monitorsInterpreting speed, load, fatigue and HRV dataIntegrating wearable data into training

Module 4 – Performance Testing & Analytics

Performance testing and analytics workflows

Impact on training, recovery and competition

How technology affects training prescription, recovery monitoring and competition — benefits, risks of over-monitoring and athlete buy-in.

Beginner Evidence: Emerging evidence 3 min read Reviewed 2026-10-31 Status: draft

Learning objectives

  • Describe how technology informs training
  • Explain monitoring of recovery and readiness
  • Identify technology in competition
  • Recognise risks of over-reliance

Before this lesson

Why this matters

Technology can refine training — or overwhelm athletes and coaches.

Training

External load (GPS distance, bar velocity) and internal load (HR, RPE) inform adjustment [bourdon2017].

Recovery

HRV, sleep, wellness questionnaires. Subjective measures are sensitive and cheap [saw2016].

Competition

Live tracking, video analysis, opponent scouting, officiating.

Risks

Data overload, privacy, athlete anxiety, poor validity of consumer devices [cardinale2017].

Common mistakes and misconceptions

Case study

A football academy uses GPS, HR, force plates and three questionnaires daily. Compliance falls. They reduce to GPS, session-RPE and a 5-item wellness check, and compliance returns above 90%.

Further learning: video lessons

Video links are only marked “verified” after a human has watched them. Unverified entries open a YouTube search for that channel and topic rather than a guessed link.

Technical needs verification — opens a YouTube search

Impact on training, recovery and competition

sport science practitioners and manufacturers’ education channels (search)

You will understand: impact on training, recovery and competition

Why: Practitioner content; verify the specific video and be aware of commercial bias.
Technical needs verification — opens a YouTube search

Validity and reliability explained

sport science practitioners and manufacturers’ education channels (search)

You will understand: judging measurement quality

Why: Practitioner content; verify the specific video and be aware of commercial bias.

Knowledge check

Knowledge check · 0/5

1. Saw et al. (2016) found that subjective self-reported measures…

Answer B. Systematic review.

2. A consensus statement on monitoring load is…

Answer A. IJSPP.

3. A risk of over-monitoring is…

Answer B. Buy-in.

4. Technology in recovery often measures…

Answer A. Readiness.

5. Collect data only if…

Answer B. Purpose.

Short-answer & application questions

  1. List technologies used in your setting and their decisions.
  2. Design a minimal monitoring system.
  3. Explain the value of wellness questionnaires.

Key takeaways

  • Technology helps quantify training load and individualise programmes.
  • Subjective wellbeing measures often respond better than many objective markers.
  • Competition technology supports tactics and officiating.
  • Too much monitoring burdens athletes; collect only what you use.

Connected topics

sports technology

Interpreting speed, load, fatigue and HRV data

strength conditioning

Overtraining: recognition and load monitoring

References

  1. Bourdon PC, Cardinale M, Murray A, et al. (2017). Monitoring athlete training loads: consensus statement. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 12(Suppl 2):S2161–S2170. Guideline check pending
  2. Saw AE, Main LC, Gastin PB (2016). Monitoring the athlete training response: subjective self-reported measures trump commonly used objective measures: a systematic review. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 50(5):281–291. Systematic review check pending
  3. Cardinale M, Varley MC (2017). Wearable training-monitoring technology: applications, challenges, and opportunities. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 12(Suppl 2):S255–S262. Narrative review check pending

Educational content only — not medical advice. Consult a qualified clinician for diagnosis or treatment.