Athlete testing · Performance index · AI narratives

Intelligent Athlete Management System

Assessment, Prescription, and Monitoring — all with weighted index scoring, and explained in plain language against the athlete’s own results. No sports scientist required to read the output.

Coach driven. AI assisted.
Six Sigma inspired.
Performance analytics made simple.

Start your subscription See how it works Built for teams, academies and combines

Test resultsSpring block · wk 6

M. Okonkwo Outside back · U21 · Men's Rugby

Test	Result	vs. last
40 m sprint	4.91 s	−0.08
10 m split	1.74 s	−0.04
CMJ height	58.2 cm	+3.1
5-0-5 agility	2.44 s	±0.00
Back squat 1RM	162 kg	+7
Yo-Yo IR1limiting	16.4	−1.2
Broad jump	2.61 m	+0.05

Performance narrativeGenerated · Sep 24

Mark's speed and power both moved in the right direction this block. The 40 m dropped 0.08 s to 4.91 and CMJ height rose 3.1 cm to 58.2 — consistent with the 7 kg gain on back squat, and enough to lift his index from 74 to 78.

The limiter is repeated-effort capacity. Yo-Yo IR1 fell 1.2 to 16.4, which sits below the U21 outside-back norm and is now the lowest-scoring dimension in his index. Change-of-direction held flat, so the agility work is maintaining rather than building.

01Reintroduce extensive tempo twice weekly — aerobic base is the ceiling on his index right now.
02Hold current strength volume; the transfer to sprint and jump is already showing.
03Retest Yo-Yo in 3 weeks before adjusting the agility block.

Was this useful? Coach ratings train the next prompt

The gap

Most testing platforms stop at the chart.

Twenty dimensions of data, rendered as a radar plot, and the interpretation left to the coach. That works if you employ a sports scientist. If you don't, the testing program quietly becomes a spreadsheet nobody opens between combines.

CoachLOGIC closes that last step. The index is computed the same way every time — deterministic, auditable, no model involved. The explanation on top of it is what turns a number into a training decision.

M. Okonkwo · index 78
every axis a 0–100 score, so the shape means something

The chart was never the product. The decision the coach makes on Tuesday morning is the product.

The core loop

Five steps, and the fifth is the one nobody else does.

Everything in CoachLOGIC serves this sequence. Steps one through four are deterministic — the same inputs always produce the same index.

Define tests

Units, thresholds and scoring direction per test. Lower is better for a sprint; higher for a jump.

Enter results

One athlete at a time on the field, or a whole squad by CSV after a testing day.

Compute index

Weighted combine scoring you configure per sport and position. Computed, never estimated.

Rank & compare

Leaderboards across squads, side-by-side athlete comparison, and position norms by competition level.

Explain it

A written narrative: what improved, what's limiting the score, and two or three things to work on.

Coach driven. AI assisted.

The AI works inside the workflow, not in a chat box.

There is no prompt for a coach to get right. CoachLOGIC decides what to ask and what data to ask it against, at the three points where it changes a decision.

Test definition

Set the catalog up correctly

Units, thresholds and scoring direction per test, and the weightings that turn them into an index for a given sport and position. Get this right once and every score downstream follows it.

Assessment

Read what the testing says

What improved and what regressed, with magnitudes. How the athlete sits against position and competition-level norms. Which index dimensions are holding the overall score down.

Improvement

Say what to do next

Two or three concrete training priorities, tied to the dimension that is limiting the index — then monitored across the next testing block to see whether they moved it.

Coaches rate every narrative the system produces, and those ratings are the signal the prompts are tuned against. The coach stays the decision-maker; the AI does the reading.

Grounding

Rules the narrative cannot talk its way out of.

An explanation coaches can't trust is worse than no explanation. These constraints are enforced where the data is fetched, not requested politely in a prompt.

Every number is citedEach quantitative claim traces to a test result in the athlete's record. Nothing is inferred to fill a gap.
No medical claimsNo injury, diagnostic or clinical language. It is a performance tool and it stays inside that boundary.
Thin data says soFewer than three tests and the narrative states its own uncertainty rather than projecting a trend from two points.
Norms only where they existAn athlete is compared to a position and competition-level norm only when a matching standard is on file.
Your data stays yoursOrganization scope is injected from your sign-in token server-side. The model is never asked which organization to read, so it cannot widen its own access.

The platform

Everything a testing program actually runs on.

Test configuration

Define each test once — unit, direction, thresholds — and every score downstream follows it.

Weighted index

Combine scoring you configure per sport and position, so a prop and a winger aren't judged on the same curve.

Athletes & squads

Records by team, position, sport and competition level — the dimensions your norms are built on.

Bulk result entry

CSV import for a whole testing day, or single-athlete entry pitchside on a phone.

Leaderboards

Rank across a squad or a whole academy, and compare any two athletes side by side.

Printable reports

The athlete report a parent or a recruiter can be handed, straight out of the same data.