The Maverick Evidence Standard

Evidence before theatre.

Eight rules for deciding whether a claim, test or technology deserves influence over a human-performance programme.

Why this exists

Elite adoption is not the same as evidence.

High-performance environments attract technology, confident claims and dashboards full of numbers. Some create genuine value. Some measure the wrong thing precisely.

Our responsibility is not to reject novelty or worship research. It is to combine the best available evidence with measurement quality, professional judgement and the reality of the person in front of us.

The eight rules

What every measurement must survive.

01

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.

02

Validity is specific

A tool can be reliable without measuring the quality people claim it measures. We separate repeatability, validity and practical usefulness.

03

Context changes meaning

A reaction time, force value or recovery marker only becomes useful when the conditions, athlete and training phase are understood.

04

Trends outrank snapshots

Repeated observations under comparable conditions usually carry more decision value than one impressive test.

05

The component stays visible

A summary score may help communication. It must never conceal the signals, assumptions and uncertainty beneath it.

06

Transfer must be examined

Improvement in a task is not automatically improvement in racing or leadership. We look for evidence that the capacity survives the target environment.

07

Uncertainty is reported

When the evidence is early, mixed or absent, we say so. Confidence is not improved by hiding the boundary.

08

The result must change a decision

If information cannot alter training, recovery, preparation or referral, collecting it needs a stronger justification.

Technology adoption

From interesting signal to operational tool.

01

Question

What uncertainty or decision problem are we trying to reduce?

02

Evidence

What does existing research support, and where are the limitations?

03

Reliability

Can we reproduce a sufficiently stable result under known conditions?

04

Field trial

Does the tool remain usable inside the actual coaching environment?

05

Decision rule

What result changes the programme, and what result does not?

06

Review

Does continued use still justify its cost, time and influence?

Disclosure

Tools do not coach people.

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.

Do not collect more data. Make a better decision.

Bring us the performance question, the data you already have and the decision it needs to inform.

Start the conversation