The question comes before the tool
We define the performance question first. A device does not earn a place simply because it can produce a number.
The Maverick Evidence Standard
Eight rules for deciding whether a claim, test or technology deserves influence over a human-performance programme.
The eight rules
We define the performance question first. A device does not earn a place simply because it can produce a number.
A tool can be reliable without measuring the quality people claim it measures. We separate repeatability, validity and practical usefulness.
A reaction time, force value or recovery marker only becomes useful when the conditions, athlete and training phase are understood.
Repeated observations under comparable conditions usually carry more decision value than one impressive test.
A summary score may help communication. It must never conceal the signals, assumptions and uncertainty beneath it.
Improvement in a task is not automatically improvement in racing or leadership. We look for evidence that the capacity survives the target environment.
When the evidence is early, mixed or absent, we say so. Confidence is not improved by hiding the boundary.
If information cannot alter training, recovery, preparation or referral, collecting it needs a stronger justification.
Technology adoption
What uncertainty or decision problem are we trying to reduce?
What does existing research support, and where are the limitations?
Can we reproduce a sufficiently stable result under known conditions?
Does the tool remain usable inside the actual coaching environment?
What result changes the programme, and what result does not?
Does continued use still justify its cost, time and influence?
Disclosure
Maverick uses specialist technologies where they add useful information. Brand names may be identified when they clarify the method, including Soma NPT, Kinmetrix, Usono, OmegaWave and Meloq.
Use of a platform does not mean every output is accepted uncritically. Commercial access, collaboration or familiarity never replaces independent judgement. When a material commercial relationship applies to published content, it should be disclosed.
Bring us the performance question, the data you already have and the decision it needs to inform.
Start the conversation