Turn every session into data: performance and load, in real time.
A club or venue wants objective positional and load data in training and competition to support performance, workload management and injury prevention.
The programme and figures on this page come from an earlier work by our advisers. The client name is withheld under NDA. Figures are as reported at the time. Named references are available under NDA when you engage.
Results in this engagement
UWB positional accuracy for analytics.
Speed, distance & load per athlete.
Workload management to support injury prevention.
Earlier work by our advisers. Client name withheld under NDA. Client name withheld under NDA; figures as reported at the time. Named references available under NDA. We model your own numbers when you engage.
The challenge
Wearable-only data misses spatial context. Manual analysis is slow. Coaches want trustworthy, real-time metrics they can act on.
Our approach
- UWB anchors around the pitch / court for sub-metre positional data.
- Athlete tags capturing speed, distance, accelerations and load.
- Real-time dashboards for coaching and medical staff.
- Load thresholds and alerts for workload management.
- Integrate with performance / analytics platforms.
Technology & integration
Stack deployed: UWB RTLS anchors + athlete tags, high-rate positioning, analytics platform.
Integration: Performance analytics, medical / load-management systems, video.
Related: · UWB vs BLE
Baseline, method, period and what we excluded.
This page describes an engagement our advisers led in earlier roles. The client name is withheld under NDA. Figures are as reported at the time, with published industry sources where noted.
- Baseline: Session load from GPS/IMU; limited precision for pitch position drills.
- Method: UWB position joined to load metrics; sports-science review of dose and drill compliance.
- Period: Training microcycles on club facilities.
- Excluded: Match-day broadcast metrics as the programme KPI.
Programme context
Multi-sport athlete load tracking generalises the same pattern: wearable locating + IMU, integrated to medical systems, with strict purpose limitation.
Broadcast metrics are not the programme KPI.
Outcomes in this engagement and how they were earned
Outcomes: injury-risk conversations grounded in data, better session planning, auditability of interventions.
Lessons from this engagement
Lessons: consent and athlete buy-in; clock sync across venues; avoid one-season novelty projects.
Deeper problem framing
Multi-sport programmes stall as one-season novelties without medical integration and consent clarity.
Approach
Wearable locating + IMU; medical system join; consent; venue clock sync; multi-year ownership.
Outcomes and measurement
Intervention auditability, session planning quality, injury-risk conversation quality.
Governance, risk and what we refuse to claim
Figures from this engagement only. Your payback depends on adoption, integration quality and exception labour, not tag unit cost. Named references under NDA on engagement.
We challenge any supplier who asks you to accept demo-day averages as production truth.
Implementation sequence and change management
Multi-venue clock sync; consent lifecycle; medical system integration; season-to-season ownership funding; purpose limitation audits.
KPIs: intervention auditability, load-discussion quality, retention of programme beyond year one.
Buyer checklist, supplier challenges and engagement shape
For athlete load, fund multi-year medical integration and consent operations beyond the first season.
Buyer checklist before you sign: (1) written system of record for events; (2) acceptance tests with 95th-percentile performance under real interference; (3) integration owner named in IT/OT; (4) privacy or labour consultation path if people are tagged; (5) cybersecurity zoning sketch; (6) five-year TCO including batteries, spares, recalibration and SLA escalations; (7) exit/export terms so you are not hostage to a cloud tenant; (8) a pilot that can fail without political punishment.
Supplier claims to challenge in this pattern: brochure accuracy without production load; 'compliance included' without artefacts; ROI that assumes perfect adoption in 30 days; references that cannot be called under NDA; install partners who have never worked your vertical's overlays; shared support accounts; and any design that dumps locating onto a flat plant or clinical VLAN.
How TRACIO typically engages: stage-1 architecture and measurement design; independent shortlist and RFP language; pilot acceptance criteria; then optional implementation oversight or programme rescue if a prior pilot stalled. We don't sell hardware, so our advice stays independent. Pages like this one exist so you can prepare the workshop. Your numbers replace every planning band when we model payback.
Risk register themes that recur: mute fatigue on alerts; shadow spreadsheets reappearing beside the platform; battery logistics understaffed; master data too weak to support identity; works-council or IG review starting too late; and success declared on demo day before night-shift reality.
Document baseline windows explicitly: what you measured, for how long, which shifts, and what you excluded. Investment committees and auditors both punish fuzzy before/after stories. If your baseline is weak, spend two to four weeks fixing measurement before ordering anchors or portals. That discipline is cheaper than a stranded deployment and is the difference between a locating programme and a technology souvenir.
Training and communications plan: who explains purpose to operators, how often refreshers run, how contractors are inducted, and how successes are fed back without turning safety systems into league tables. Budget a champion network on each shift. Platforms do not adopt themselves. Where unions or works councils exist, share the purpose statement and retention rules early. Surprise monitoring is how programmes die. Finally, schedule a formal gate review against the written criteria; celebrate a no-go if evidence is weak. Expanding failure is not delivery.
Last updated:
Load and performance data
Independent advisory means the radio is chosen last. After the job, the constraints and the system of record are clear.
The coaching question first
What decision changes if location/load data is trusted?
Neutral on wearables and RTLS
Fit to venue RF and medical/performance workflows.
Into the performance stack
Feeds the tools analysts already open, not a parallel toy.
Measurement
Baseline: session load samples and medical/availability notes the club already keeps. Pilot: one squad or age group with wearable/RTLS load reconciled to the performance system. Steady-state: session compliance, load outliers flagged, and staff time to assemble reports. No medical claims beyond what club science will publish.