The last monthly blog post, “Train Smarter, Not Harder; The Science of Load Management and Risk of Injury” served as an introduction to the concept of managing load and how our new ‘Workload’ metric has been designed to simplify this process. This month’s feature is a platform to explore this new feature in detail, outlining the benefits and implications towards performance and injury reduction. Overall, it encompasses all the core GPS metrics that define our PlayerData EDGE technology - taking complicated data and drowning out the noise, so as a player or coach you hear exactly what is needed.

How do we define workload and how is it represented?

Across the accepted academic literature there are several definitions of workload (Bowen et al., 2020). A common theme amongst all the definitions is the recognition of training and match load, with workload often being used interchangeably to describe both. Hence, to simplify the process, our Workload Metric brings together load exerted across training and match days to present a simple 1 to 10 score for any given session.

Specifically, our Workload metric involves a holistic assessment of performance which encompasses three core metrics; volume, intensity and workload. Volume examines the total distance covered by an athlete relative to their baseline distance covered across the previous 28 days. Intensity encompasses various metrics, including distance covered, frequency of accelerations and decelerations, as well as distances covered during high-intensity running, and sprinting achieved per minute on average during a session. These metrics are then compared to the athlete's baseline performance over the preceding 28 days. Each comparison is then equally weighted and averaged to produce an intensity score.

When looking at today’s performance compared to the baseline established over the previous 28 days, we establish a standardised score for both intensity and volume. Moreover, these scores are then averaged out to derive our Workload measure, and presented on a standardised scale from 1 to 10, with 5 operating as the reference point for comparative performance outcomes, serving as the measure for typical performance. 

Why is workload important?

‘Workload’ presents an explanation of load exposure through the combination of several different variables. Every athlete has a natural threshold for how much load they can withstand. Through this new metric we are hoping to aid a coach’s process in identifying those who are perhaps struggling with the intensity, those performing above standards, and those that need a hand reaching the desired level of application. It’s important to note that the higher the Workload does not always mean better, as athlete’s are known to be put at risk when relative load is alarmingly low and increasingly high. For example, if the Workload rating for the session was a 6.5 but one athlete shows a 2.0, then this may be an indication of an undiagnosed injury or fatigue. In contrast, if the average for the session was 4.0 but an athlete shows a 9.0 rating then this can show that their fitness levels may not be where they need to be and their risk of injury during competition will most likely be higher.

How does it impact session planning?

In a practical setting, coaches will seek to use periodisation methods to help structure training and ensure peak performance on a match day. This concept refers to the specific intensity levels of training sessions during the week and how coaches structure training to reduce levels of fatigue and stress, whilst pushing the likelihood of success in a competitive environment. Being able to quickly view the Workload rating from 1 to 10 for any given session can immediately show coaches how hard their team worked as a group. They can then look to discern if the desired intensity was met, if not,  for next time they could change the number of repetitions in a drill or if intensity was exceeded, they could reduce the length of the session.

Overall

Workload presents itself as a variable that can be used by coaches to simplify the process of which data is collected and then analysed. Relative load made simple, no need to spend hours deciphering large data sets - workload serves as an essential monitoring tool for elite sporting performance.

References

1. Bowen, L., Gross, A. S., Gimpel, M., Bruce-Low, S., & Li, F. X. (2020). Spikes in acute:chronic workload ratio (ACWR) associated with a 5-7 times greater injury rate in English Premier League football players: a comprehensive 3-year study. British journal of sports medicine, 54(12), 731–738. https://doi.org/10.1136/bjsports-2018-099422