Analyzing sports objectively may also help us chance some long-standing tests that are truly misleading. For example, the Cooper test is one that is commonly used but not very useful. It entails running one and one half miles in a target time. It is a continuous run test, and athletes are successful if they can run it at consistent steady pace. The problem is, few sports are played at a consistent, steady pace. (Think of a soccer player's movements during a game.) This leads to the players training for the test, rather than training for the game.

Another example is the continued infatuation with the 60 yard dash as a speed test for baseball. The distance is based on the fact that the distance between bases is 30 yards and the sum of the distance from first to third base is 60 yards. This test is timed as a straight sprint. However, to run from first to third, even when the player is very efficient at the turn at second base, is at least 64 yards. In addition, this is not a straight-ahead run. The athlete's ability to turn that distance in a semi-circle pattern is a huge factor in his success. In most game situations, the longest distance a baseball player runs in a straight line is 30 yards. It would be better to use a 30 yard sprint and a timed sprint on the base path from first to third as performance tests. That will provide a better speed profile in relation to the demands of the game.

The 40-yard test in football is another example of a little bit of factual information being distorted. Except for receivers and some special team's players, the only time most players run in a straight line is when they run on and off the field. Yet an inordinate emphasis is still placed on this test.

A thorough game analysis can help you develop tests that accurately assess what your athletes will face in game conditions. Just as important, it will also supply you with concrete evidence to show sport coaches an alternative to the tests they grew up with and do not question.