For trainers

• What each sensor physically measures, and what the device derives from it.
• Measured quantity, derived metric, inferred construct: the further from the measurement, the more assumptions.

Ask the room: Name one wearable you already use, and say out loud what physical quantity it actually measures.

• The device market, read by category rather than brand.
• Cost is a design constraint, not a quality ranking: what will we actually use every week?
• Validity, reliability and ecological validity; the four things to read in a validation abstract.

Work through together: Mehmet's choice on a season budget of €1,200. Change the weights in front of the group and watch the ranking move.

Tool: Choosing a device on a real budget

Group task: In small groups, each coach fills in the device selection matrix for their own budget. The group challenges the weights, not the winner.

Template: A2, Device selection matrix

• The consent baseline: do not deploy a device without an informed consent process in place.

Reflective prompt: Write down one device you use or are considering, the sensors it contains, one coaching question it should answer, and one limitation for your sport. Keep this note. Module 5 needs it.

Self-check: Which of these is a measured quantity rather than a derived metric: total distance, linear acceleration, PlayerLoad, sprint count?

• External load is the dose prescribed by the coach. Internal load is the body's response to that dose.
• Always read external and internal load side by side. The same dose at a higher internal cost is an early sign of accumulated fatigue.

• What live dashboards offer, the five visualisation families, and the usual data-quality problems.
• Stat Pack #1, by hand, on the board: sRPE 420 AU, HR fraction 0.727, TRIMP about 94 AU, ACWR 1.375.
• Reading the ACWR: what it does well, and what it cannot do.

Work through together: Compute the three metrics of the worked session with the group, then check them in the calculator.

Tool: Load calculator: sRPE, TRIMP and ACWR

Group task: Each coach computes sRPE for last week's sessions and, if they have four weeks of data, ACWR. Then, in groups, go through the weekly report with seven rows and decide which rows you would not put into the load total.

Tool: The weekly report that nearly went out wrong

Template: A4, Load calculation sheet

• Real-time feedback to athletes: what, when and how.

Reflective prompt: Take last week's heaviest session and compute sRPE, TRIMP and ACWR by hand. Then ask what decision, if any, those three numbers would have changed.

Self-check: Which live metric would you refuse to act on within seconds, and why?

• A baseline is a distribution, not a number: collect 4 to 6 weeks, standardise the conditions, compare athletes to themselves.
• Where wearables enter the plan: the week, the block and the season.

Ask the room: At which of the three levels does your own club already have a working routine, and at which is the data collected but never read?

• Recovery metrics: what HRV, sleep and wellness show, and what they do not.
• Triangulation: never act on one metric alone.
• Tapering with wearable confirmation.

Work through together: The triathlete in week 11. Take the decisions with the group, one stage at a time.

Tool: The triathlete in week 11

Group task: Each coach builds an individual athlete profile for one athlete. Coaches without data use the ten readings of the baseline builder. In groups, compare the flags and what each coach would do about them.

Tool: Baseline and reference-range builder

Template: A3, Individual athlete profile

• The measurement-burden trade-off: before adding a metric, ask what decision it will change.

Reflective prompt: Name one metric you currently collect that has never changed a decision. What would it take to either use it properly or remove it this month?

Self-check: An athlete's HRV is 8 ms below their individual mean, SD is 6 ms. Yellow, orange or red, and what do you do about it?

• What monitoring can change and what it cannot: modifiable and non-modifiable risk factors.
• Load management and its critics: ACWR is a useful prompt, not a verdict.
• Monotony and strain. Asymmetry: identify, document and refer.

• An early-warning system in five steps, and the escalation tiers.
• Five worked cases in five contexts.

Work through together: The point guard, three weeks out. Take the decisions with the group, one stage at a time.

Tool: The point guard, three weeks out

Group task: In groups by type of sport, complete the early-warning checklist for one squad. Three or four inputs, a threshold for each, and the action attached to each tier.

Tool: Early-warning system builder

Template: A9, Early-warning checklist

Reflective prompt: Write the three inputs your early-warning system will use, and the exact action attached to each tier. If you cannot name the action, the tier does not exist yet.

Self-check: An athlete shows ACWR 1.6 with stable wellness and sleep. What do you do first, and what would change your mind?

• Plan, do, check, act. The most important option is the last one: stop.
• The components of a defensible data-governance policy.

• Talking to athletes about their numbers: information invites collaboration, a verdict invites resistance.
• The five steps of a negative-news conversation: acknowledge, share, connect, invite, confirm.
• Who does what with each kind of data.

Work through together: Read the staff matrix of the slide with the group and ask where each coach's own staff would differ.

Template: A10, Staff roles for data (RACI)

Group task: Each coach answers the governance self-audit for their organisation as it is today. Then, in pairs, practise a negative-news conversation with the five steps and swap roles.

Tool: Data governance self-audit

• The five delivery pathways, for coaches who will run the programme themselves.
• The eight fields of the 90-day plan.

Reflective prompt: Return to the note you wrote in Module 1. Does the device you named still answer the coaching question you wrote beside it? If not, say so in your plan.

Self-check: Which single stop condition would you be most reluctant to write down, and what does that reluctance tell you?