Sports science platform · Athlete monitoring
The sports science platform for longitudinal youth-athlete monitoring — sport-specific assessment, maturity-adjusted interpretation, and evidence-based decision support coaches can act on.
Hover a quality to see what we measure · illustrative profile
20
tests in the battery
3
reference frames per metric
3
age bands, U10 to U18
100%
of metrics cited to source
Why testing alone isn't enough
Testing produces numbers. Development decisions need meaning — the same result read against the right peers, the right age group, and the right stage of maturation.
That interpretation layer is the platform: sport-specific, age-appropriate, maturity-adjusted, and honest about what the data does and doesn't support.
A 28 cm jump means nothing on its own. Against the right reference group — sex, age, maturity — the same number changes verdict entirely.
Two athletes with identical totals can need opposite programmes — one lacks speed, the other power. Averages hide exactly what training should target.
One test day is a photograph. Development is the film — the same tests, seasons apart, separating real change from day-to-day noise.
Maturity offset per Mirwald et al. (2002).
Why biological age matters
A late-maturing 12-year-old who jumps "average for his age" is often exceptional for his stage of physical development — and he's exactly the athlete traditional age-group comparison overlooks. Every result on the platform is read against biological maturation (PHV), not just a birthday year.
Explore the methodology →The platform
Every assessment becomes an interactive report — for the athlete, the coach and the squad. What follows isn't a mock-up: these are the product's own components, running on sample data.
One profile per athlete, read against three reference frames — team, chronological age, and biological maturation.
+8.4%
overall progress since first assessment
3
reference frames on every metric
99.9th
best percentile — Sprint 40 m vs PHV norms
Illustrative sample data · rendered by the live product components
Every test normalised so up always means better — including sprint times. Coaches add any test to the overall curve and separate real change from session-to-session noise.
Illustrative sample data · rendered by the live product components
Ranking flow
Groups — median split
Illustrative sample data · rendered by the live product components
Rank the squad on any two tests and watch each player's standing shift — then split at the medians to see who needs which training emphasis. Two athletes with similar totals can need opposite programmes.
How our process works
Sport-specific batteries, run at your club with lab-grade equipment. The only stage that happens on a pitch — everything after it is the platform.
e.g. jumps, sprint splits, Yo-Yo — selected per sport and age group
What we measure →Every result lands in a secure longitudinal athlete profile, then raw values become percentiles against international norms — by sex, age group and biological maturation (PHV).
z-scores, LMS norms, measurement-error thresholds on every comparison
The methodology →Numbers become meaning: strengths and gaps ranked across three reference frames, real change separated from session-to-session noise, every derived value explained in plain language.
“within typical variation” vs “meaningfully improved”
Coach tools turn interpretation into action: squad-level comparisons, development groups, and example training emphases per athlete — decision support, not just data.
two athletes with similar totals can need opposite programmes
Re-test, and every view updates: progress curves, meaningful-change flags, development tracked across seasons. The cycle restarts — and the value compounds with every pass.
⟲ back to assessment — same tests, years apart, a real development curve
Sports we work with
An age-specific battery across three development stages — what we measure changes with what matters at each age.
U10 · Foundation years
14 tests, from perceived competence to anthropometrics
U14 · Development years
15 tests, from perceived competence to anthropometrics
U18 · Elite pathway years
15 tests, from perceived competence to anthropometrics
Scientific foundation
Two 12-year-olds can be four biological years apart. Maturity offset (Mirwald et al., 2002) anchors every comparison to development stage, not birthday.
Results read against published international datasets — by sex, age group and maturity stage — with the source cited on every metric.
Percentiles on the full five-band scale, with the norm's confidence interval shown — the report says what the data supports, and no more.
The battery follows the athlete across stages — what we measure changes with what matters, and the record compounds season over season.
Full methodology, with sources — read the science →
Packages
Every package includes the platform — reports, longitudinal tracking and the coach tools. What changes is how many athletes, how often, and how much interpretation comes with it.
Clubs and academies
A full squad assessed on one test day, with coach-facing comparison tools.
Pricing on request
Single athletes
One athlete, assessed properly and tracked against the right reference group.
Pricing on request
Performance staff
Longitudinal monitoring across a season, with interpretation, not just numbers.
Pricing on request
Federations and multi-site organisations
Scoped to what you already run — including your own normative data.
Pricing on request
Squad size, travel and testing frequency all change the cost, so we quote per club rather than publish a number we'd have to caveat.
An assessment gives every athlete a report you can act on, and gives you the coach tools to compare them fairly — decisions a coach can defend.