The Coretex Athletic Review

This week’s episode reviews a 2026 paper published in Sports Medicine – Open titled:Predictors of Latent Reaction Speed in Athletes: The Role of Performance Level and Stress Tolerance at Different Competitive Levels by Katrina Volgemute and colleagues.The study examines how reaction performance—modeled as a combination of stimulus recognition, decision-making, and movement execution—is related to two factors:Performance efficiencyStress tolerance (ability to maintain performance under cognitive load)Across 300+ athletes (amateur, pre-elite, elite), the authors found small but statistically significant relationships between these factors and reaction performance—but only within the pre-elite group.No significant relationships were observed in amateur or elite athletes.The findings suggest that the relationship between psychological factors and reaction performance may be stage-specific, rather than consistent across development.Key ideas:Reaction performance is not a single metric—it reflects multiple processes working togetherStress tolerance and task efficiency showed small associations with reaction performanceThese relationships were only detected in pre-elite athletesDevelopment stage may influence which factors are most closely tied to performanceAs always, the goal is to stay true to the research while exploring how these ideas might fit within athlete development.Listen / Follow / Contact:YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CoretexGoaltendingInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/coretexathletics/Email: [email protected]

Episode 21 takes a look at a research paper out of Lesgaft University in Russia exploring how goaltender training can be structured to better reflect the realities of game play.The article, “Structure of the Technical-Tactical Training Methodology for Ice Hockey Goaltenders aged 15–17, Based on Action Variability Under Conditions of Uncertainty,” proposes a four-block framework built around one core idea:The game is unpredictable. Training usually isn’t.Most traditional development models rely on linear progression—clean reps, stable conditions, and step-by-step mastery. But real game environments are non-linear. Every pass, bounce, screen, or rebound changes the problem in real time.This episode breaks down the authors’ proposed model:• Block 1 – Stability (predictable, controlled reps)• Block 2 – Single-variable variability (one element changes)• Block 3 – Multi-variable uncertainty (traffic, rebounds, sequences)• Block 4 – Time pressure (decision-making under compressed time)The key concept is “controlled variability”—treating uncertainty as something that can be deliberately scaled within training, rather than something that only exists in games.The episode also explores:The gap between practice performance and game transferWhy clean technique doesn’t always hold under pressureThe difference between linear training models and nonlinear game environmentsHow coaches might think about designing drills that better reflect real playThis is a goalie-specific paper, but the framework applies more broadly to athlete development, decision-making, and skill transfer across sport.YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CoretexGoaltendingInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/coretexathletics/Email: [email protected]

This week’s episode breaks down a 2005 paper from Applied Cognitive Psychology by Abernethy, Baker, and Côté examining whether pattern recognition skills can transfer across sports.The study compares expert and non-expert athletes in basketball, netball, and field hockey using a pattern recall task based on real gameplay sequences.The key question:Can expertise in one sport carry over to another through shared perceptual-cognitive skills?Results show:Experts outperform non-experts in recalling structured patternsSome evidence of transfer across sportsBut transfer is inconsistent and highly dependent on contextMore recent research suggests that transfer is not general, but constrained by structural similarity between sports—specifically the type of information athletes are attuned to.This episode walks through:What defines expert performanceHow pattern recall is testedWhere the findings hold upAnd where they fall shortThe takeaway:It’s not that skills broadly transfer across sports—it’s that perception transfers when the underlying structure is similar.YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CoretexGoaltendingInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/coretexathletics/Email: [email protected]

For years, resistance training in youth has been surrounded by caution—concerns about stunted growth, growth plate damage, and unnecessary injury risk.But where did those ideas actually come from?In this episode, I break down two research papers examining resistance training in young athletes, with a focus on what the evidence actually shows. We look at how strength develops in youth, why improvements are largely neural early on, and how properly structured training fits into long-term athletic development.More importantly, we address the origin of the long-standing myths—and whether they hold up under scrutiny.Why astronauts train in microgravity—and what happens when the body loses loadThe load-dependent nature of muscle, bone, and nervous system functionThe origins of resistance training myths in youth populationsNeural vs muscular adaptations in younger athletesEffect sizes and what they tell us about real performance changesStrength, power, and movement outcomes from resistance trainingInjury risk: what the research actually showsWhy supervision and program design matterProperly structured and supervised resistance training is not only safe for youth—it’s one of the most effective tools we have for improving strength, movement quality, and long-term athletic development.The issue was never resistance training itself. It was how it was being done.Granacher et al. (2016)Effects of Resistance Training in Youth Athletes on Muscular Fitness and Athletic Performance: A Conceptual Model for Long-Term Athlete DevelopmentFrontiers in Physiology(2026 Paper – add full citation once finalized)YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CoretexGoaltendingInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/coretexathletics/Email: [email protected] you found this useful, share it with a coach, parent, or athlete who still thinks kids shouldn’t lift weights.

What actually is perfectionism?In sport, it’s often treated as a positive trait—high standards, attention to detail, relentless work ethic. But this episode breaks down a foundational paper that challenges that assumption.Based on A Dual Process Model of Perfectionism (Slade & Owens, 1998), this episode explores how perfectionism isn’t one single construct, but two fundamentally different processes:– One driven by the pursuit of success– The other driven by the avoidance of failureSame behavior, different system.Positive vs negative perfectionismReinforcement theory (why athletes do what they do)Approach vs avoidance behaviorHow perfectionism develops over timeWhy two athletes can look identical, but experience performance very differentlyFollow / SupportYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CoretexGoaltendingInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/coretexathletics/Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/coretexathleticreviewContact: [email protected]

“Playing up” is one of the most common—and often unquestioned—development decisions in youth sport.In this episode, I break down a recent study examining how academy football coaches actually make those decisions. Rather than measuring outcomes, this research focuses on coach perception—what they look for, how they justify it, and where things can go wrong.We explore how factors like biological maturation, social environment, and communication shape the playing-up process, and why it may not be the development advantage it’s often assumed to be.Playing-UpA younger athlete competing in an older age group to increase challenge.Relative Age Effect (RAE)Bias toward athletes born earlier in the selection year.Relative Growth Effect (RGE)Advantage based on biological maturation rather than chronological age.Challenge Point TheoryOptimal learning occurs when task difficulty slightly exceeds current ability.Playing up is not inherently beneficial—it is highly context-dependent.Coaches often rely on subjective evaluation, which can be influenced by early maturation.Social environment—especially parents and peer group—plays a major role in outcomes.If an athlete is not meaningfully involved (touches, decisions, reps), development may decrease.Playing up may redistribute opportunity, rather than create new development.Evaluate athletes across:TechnicalTacticalPhysicalPsychosocial domainsEnsure:The athlete can stay involved in playThe physical mismatch is manageableCommunication with player and parents is clearConsider blended approaches:Majority reps at appropriate levelStrategic exposure to higher levelsSmall sample size (10 coaches)UK academy system onlyBased on coach perception, not performance outcomesFindings are not universally generalizableYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CoretexGoaltendingInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/coretexathleticsPatreon: https://www.patreon.com/coretexathleticreviewEmail: [email protected]

This episode breaks down a 2026 narrative review examining the physiological and performance effects of long-haul travel and jet lag in athletes.I explore the difference between travel fatigue and jet lag, the role of circadian rhythms and the suprachiasmatic nucleus, and why disruptions in sleep, hormones, and nervous system function don’t always translate into predictable performance outcomes.The takeaway isn’t that travel ruins performance—it’s that the relationship between physiology and performance is far more complex than most people assume.The difference between travel fatigue and jet lagHow the circadian system (SCN, peripheral clocks, zeitgebers) regulates performanceWhy eastward travel is harder than westward travelThe concept of phase delay vs phase advancePhysiological disruptions:SleepHormones (cortisol)Core body temperatureHeart rate variability (HRV)Why performance outcomes are inconsistent across studiesWhich performance domains are most affected:Aerobic capacityCoordinationSkill executionWhy strength and power are less consistently impactedThe limits of current interventions:Light exposureMelatoninCaffeineTravel clearly disrupts the body’s internal timing systemPhysiological changes are consistent—but performance changes are notEffects are context-dependent:sport typetiming of competitionindividual differencesAthletes can often compensate in the short termCurrent intervention strategies lack strong, consistent evidenceDo Long-Haul Travel and Jet Lag Affect Athletes’ Physiological, Humoral and Performance Outcomes?Benito et al., 2026Published in Sports🎙 Coretex Athletic ReviewYouTube: youtube.com/coretexgoaltending Instagram: Coretex AthleticsPatreon: https://patreon.com/coretexathleticreviewjet lag, circadian rhythm, travel fatigue, sports science, athletic performance, sleep, recovery, physiology, coaching, human performance

Patreon: https://patreon.com/coretexathleticreviewYouTube: https://youtube.com/@coretexathleticreviewWhen people talk about NIL deals and athletes getting paid in college sports, it often sounds like something entirely new. A sudden break from the traditional model of amateur competition.In this episode I explore the long history of athlete compensation in American college sports using the research article:“Compensation for College Athletes: The American Saga of Commercialization in Intercollegiate Sports” by John Robert Thelin and Eric A. Moyen.Rather than presenting a brand-new system, NIL may simply represent the latest chapter in a century-long tension between amateur ideals and commercial reality.Topics explored in this episode include:• Early amateur ideals in college athletics (1900–1930)• Informal compensation through scholarships, campus jobs, and boosters• The rise of television and the first major media contracts• The 1984 Supreme Court case NCAA v. Board of Regents• The commercialization boom of the 1990s and 2000s• Corporate sponsorships and sports marketing companies like Host Communications and Learfield• University trademark licensing and the growth of collegiate merchandising• The contradiction between nonprofit universities and billion-dollar college sports• Legal challenges leading to NCAA v. Alston• The emergence of NIL collectives and modern athlete compensation• The uncertain future of revenue sharing and athlete employment statusCollege athletics have always balanced two competing identities.On one side: education, amateurism, and student development.On the other: media, entertainment, and big business.The NIL era may feel like a revolution.But when viewed through the full history of college sports, it might simply be the next phase of a story that has been unfolding for more than a hundred years.Article referenced in this episode:Thelin, J. R., & Moyen, E. A. (2026).Compensation for College Athletes: The American Saga of Commercialization in Intercollegiate Sports.Journal of Policy History, 38(2), 107–129.

In this episode I examine the research paper “Coaching Legacies: Influence Propagation Through Temporal Social Networks” by Gordana Marmulla, Geoff Dickson, Hagen Wäsche, and Ulrik Brandes.The study explores a fascinating question: can the influence of a coach actually be measured?Using more than a century of data from the Australian Football League (AFL), the researchers constructed a temporal social network linking players and coaches across generations. The model tracks how coaching philosophies may propagate when athletes later transition into coaching roles themselves.Key ideas explored in the episode include:• The concept of coaching lineage and how ideas propagate through generations of coaches• How players who become coaches carry forward elements of their previous coaching environments• The construction of a temporal social network linking players and coaches across more than 100 years of AFL history• The balance between inherited influence from past coaches and independence as new coaches develop their own philosophy• Why influence in a coaching network does not necessarily align with wins, championships, or coaching longevityThe paper ultimately shows that coaching influence can spread through chains of relationships across decades, creating what is essentially a “coaching family tree” inside a sport.Article discussed:Marmulla, G., Dickson, G., Wäsche, H., & Brandes, U. (2023). Coaching Legacies: Influence Propagation Through Temporal Social Networks in the Australian Football League.Connect with Coretex Athletic ReviewYouTubehttps://www.youtube.com/@CoretexGoaltendingInstagramhttps://www.instagram.com/coretexathletics/Patreonhttps://patreon.com/[email protected]

In this episode, I walk through one of the foundational papers in sport economics:Who Wins the Olympic Games? Economic Resources and Medal TotalsAndrew B. Bernard & Meghan R. Busse (2004)Review of Economics and StatisticsThe question is simple:If Canada has roughly seven times the population of Finland, shouldn’t that show up proportionally in medal counts?The intuitive answer is yes.The data says otherwise.In this episode we explore:• Why population does not scale linearly with Olympic success• What it means to model medals as a “production process”• Why economists use the logarithm of population instead of raw population• How diminishing returns are built directly into the math• The role of GDP and total economic scale• The host nation effect• Why success tends to persist across Olympic cyclesThe key takeaway:Scale matters.Wealth matters.But once countries are already large and economically developed, the marginal advantage of additional population shrinks.At national levels, countries are already sampling from the extreme right tail of human ability.Which raises a deeper question:If population advantage compresses at elite levels…what actually separates nations?That’s where we’re headed next.If you’re enjoying the deeper systems-level analysis of sport, you can support the show here:patreon.com/coretexathleticreviewYou can also connect with me:YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CoretexGoaltendingInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/coretexathletics/Email: [email protected]

In this episode of the Coretex Athletic Review, I head west to examine a 26-year longitudinal study tracking the physiological profile of one particular NHL franchise from 1979 to 2005.The researchers followed the team through five Stanley Cup championships, collecting pre-season data on body composition, anaerobic power, aerobic capacity, grip strength, abdominal endurance, and flexibility.The common assumption is that championships track with physiological dominance. Bigger, stronger, more powerful teams should win more banners.But when we isolate the five championship seasons within the dataset, something unexpected appears.Those dynasty teams were not at the top of the 26-year physiological distribution.The largest players.The highest peak anaerobic outputs.The greatest absolute VO2 values.Those all came later.Without banners.So if physiological escalation does not neatly predict championships, what does?This episode explores:Longitudinal changes in NHL player size and performance from 1979–2005Positional physiological differences between defensemen, forwards, and goaltendersThe relationship between pre-season fitness and team successAnd the question that remains when the engines are optimized… what about the drivers?Research Article Reviewed:Quinney, H.A., Dewart, R., Game, A., Snydmiller, G., Warburton, D., & Bell, G. (2008). A 26 year physiological description of a National Hockey League team. Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism, 33, 753–760.Follow Coretex Goaltending:YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@CoretexGoaltendingInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/coretexathletics/For questions, feedback, or collaboration:[email protected] you enjoyed the episode, consider leaving a rating, liking, or subscribing.

In this episode, I examine the physiological profile of elite ice hockey goaltenders through the lens of a 2021 systematic review and meta-analysis published in the International Journal of Exercise Science.While much of the goaltending literature focuses on perceptual and psychological performance — anticipation, reaction timing, and decision-making — this paper compiles the limited but growing body of research examining the physical and physiological characteristics of the position.Why goaltenders are often excluded from broader hockey physiology researchThe structure of a systematic review and what PRISMA meansAnthropometric comparisons between professional and amateur goaltendersAerobic capacity (VO₂max) differences across levelsAnaerobic peak power findingsGrip strength, abdominal endurance, and flexibilityWhat standardized fitness testing captures — and what it likely missesProfessional male goaltenders were not meaningfully taller than amateurs in the pooled data.Amateur male goalies showed higher VO₂max values than professionals.Professional goalies demonstrated greater relative peak anaerobic power.Grip strength and core endurance appeared stronger in professional goalies.Flexibility distinguished goalies from skaters but did not clearly separate levels.Standardized lab testing may not fully capture position-specific performance demands.This episode focuses on physiological profiling within the goaltender position.Part 2 will zoom out to examine physiological differences between forwards, defensemen, and goaltenders at the NHL level.Marcotte-L’Heureux, V., Charron, J., Panenic, R., & Comtois, A. S. (2021).Ice Hockey Goaltender Physiology Profile and Physical Testing: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.International Journal of Exercise Science.YouTube:https://www.youtube.com/@CoretexGoaltendingInstagram:https://www.instagram.com/coretexathletics/Email:[email protected] you enjoyed the episode, consider subscribing and sharing.Next week: positional physiology at the NHL level.

In this episode, I walk through a recent doctoral dissertation from the University of Alberta examining the rise of independent (non-sanctioned) youth hockey in Alberta.Rather than debating which system is “better,” this episode takes a slower, more deliberate approach. The goal is to faithfully unpack the research as it was written, section by section, and understand how parents, coaches, and directors explain and justify their involvement in independent hockey environments.Only after working through the paper in full do I offer my own reflections—clearly marked as opinion—based on a decade of experience coaching and directing within the sanctioned hockey system in Alberta.What “sanctioned” vs “non-sanctioned” hockey actually means in AlbertaWhy independent hockey has expanded in recent yearsHow development is understood, marketed, and justified across different stakeholdersThe role of prolympic values (performance, efficiency, optimization) in youth sportHow parents navigate uncertainty and responsibility in pathway decisionsWhy coaches experience both autonomy and constraint in independent systemsHow directors frame hockey as a market and a productWhy development language can coexist with performance-driven practicesThe risks of silo-fication and diluted competition environmentsThe episode is based on a 194-page PhD dissertation completed in 2025 by Dallas Ansell at the University of Alberta:From the Outdoor Rink to Development Incorporated: Parent, Coach, and Director Navigation of Player Development in the Prolympic Field of Independent Youth HockeyThe study uses:Qualitative interviews with parents, coaches, and directorsObservations of practices and gamesA sociological framework grounded in Bourdieu’s concepts of field, capital, and doxaImportantly, the paper:Does not measure performance outcomesDoes not claim one system develops players betterDoes not assign blame to any single groupIt focuses on meaning, justification, and structure, not solutions.In the final section of the episode, I share my own concern—not about the existence of alternative hockey options, but about the fragmentation of elite talent across multiple parallel systems.When top players rarely encounter true best-on-best competition, match quality suffers, assessment becomes noisy, and perceived skill can become inflated.As one downstream signal, I reference my own long-term tracking of Alberta-born representation on Canada men's national junior ice hockey team rosters. While not evidence of causation, the trend raises questions worth asking—especially when considered alongside increasing population share and growing pathway fragmentation.World Junior selection reflects player cohorts from nearly two decades earlier, and population growth does not translate cleanly into hockey participation—particularly in immigration-driven provinces. This is not a one-to-one comparison, but a signal that merits further examination rather than a definitive conclusion.This episode is not about defending or attacking any league, association, or governing body. It’s about understanding how youth hockey systems evolve, how choices are justified, and what unintended consequences may emerge over time when development and performance become increasingly intertwined.

We often hear that “you never forget how to ride a bike.”But in sport, that saying hides an important qualifier.In this episode of the Coretex Athletic Review, Evan Kurylo examines a recent 2025 meta-analytic review on procedural skill retention and decay to explore what actually happens to athletic skills during periods of non-use or intermittent use.Rather than asking whether skills disappear, the research asks a more precise question: which aspects of performance are most vulnerable when a skill isn’t being used regularly?The answer turns out to be less about forgetting and more about loss of precision, consistency, and calibration.Why common sayings (like “the customer is always right” or “you never forget how to ride a bike”) often lose important qualifiers over timeWhat procedural skills are — and why they differ from simply “knowing” somethingWhat a large-scale meta-analysis can (and cannot) tell us about skill retentionEvidence that procedural skills are retained, but not staticWhy accuracy and precision are more vulnerable than raw execution or speedHow patterns of use matter more than time passing aloneA cautionary note on skill scaling — why retained skills may still need recalibration as strength, speed, or body size changesWhy offseason decisions depend heavily on goals, context, and training cultureProcedural Skill Retention and Decay (2025)A meta-analytic review published by the American Psychological AssociationAuthors: Christopher Tatel & Philip AckermanThis paper synthesizes findings from hundreds of studies across sport, medical training, military tasks, transportation, and laboratory motor learning to model how procedural skill performance changes following periods of non-use or intermittent use.Procedural skills don’t simply disappear when practice stops.What changes first is how precisely and consistently those skills are expressed — and, in many sports, whether they’re still appropriately scaled to the athlete’s current physical system.Retention is not the same as readiness.The Coretex Athletic Review examines one piece of research per episode and breaks it down without hype, prescriptions, or shortcuts.New episodes release every Thursday at 6:00 a.m. Mountain Time.Listen on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or watch on YouTube.Coretex Goaltender Development is currently rebranding to Coretex Athletics, continuing its focus on goaltender development while expanding into athletic research and education.

Are goaltenders really “wired differently”?Are defensemen calmer by nature?Are forwards inherently more volatile?In this episode of the Coretex Athletic Review, I examine a peer-reviewed study that puts long-standing hockey stereotypes under the microscope—not by testing performance or brain activity, but by exploring how players perceive each other.Using a social-psychology lens, this episode looks at whether perceived personality differences between hockey positions reflect true dispositional differences—or whether they are products of role demands, social identity, and in-group bias.Why hockey positions function as powerful social categoriesThe Big Five personality framework and how it’s used in sport psychologyHow players rate themselves versus how they rate positionsCommon stereotypes associated with forwards, defensemen, and goaltendersEvidence of in-group bias across positionsWhy perceived differences are stronger than actual personality differencesHow coaches may unintentionally confuse role demands with personality traitsThe strongest differences weren’t found in who players are—but in how players see each other.This episode is less about proving stereotypes right or wrong, and more about understanding how they form, why they persist, and how they influence coaching, communication, and athlete development.Personality Traits and Stereotypes Associated with Ice Hockey PositionsCameron, J. E., Cameron, J. M., Dithurbide, L., & Lalonde, R.Published in Journal of Sport Behavior (2012)

Elite sport moves fast.Athletes can be central figures in their sport one season and largely absent from the competitive conversation only a few years later. This episode explores what happens not just after sport ends, but what is quietly happening during an athlete’s prime that shapes how difficult the transition becomes.Using a recent doctoral dissertation by Amanda Workman-Vickers (2025, West Texas A&M University), this episode examines how collegiate athletes experience the transition from being an athlete to becoming something else — and why that transition is often destabilizing without being pathological.The fleeting nature of status in elite sportWhy performance often becomes a primary source of self-worth before retirementThe concept of identity limboWhy sadness and gratitude frequently coexist during transitionThe importance of natural vs abrupt career endingsHow simple exit meetings can provide meaningful closureStudy type: Qualitative, phenomenological doctoral dissertationParticipants: 10 NCAA Division II athletesSports represented: Football, basketball, baseball/softball, track & fieldCareer endpoint: All athletes exhausted eligibility or graduatedRather than framing retirement as a mental health crisis, this study highlights how identity destabilization often reflects a mismatch between the speed of high-performance systems and the slower pace of human identity adaptation.Most athletes don’t break when sport ends.But when performance has been doing identity work for years, the sudden loss of feedback, structure, and role clarity can leave athletes temporarily unanchored.This episode is not a critique of sport systems — it’s an examination of how they function, and how athletes experience the transition when the system inevitably moves on.Host: Evan KuryloPodcast: Coretex Athletic ReviewRelease Schedule: Weekly — Thursdays at 6:00 AM MST

Basketball, Goalies, and Perception–Action AsymmetriesWhy might basketball be a useful complementary sport for hockey goaltenders?In this episode, I explore that question through the lens of perception, not conditioning or skill transfer in the traditional sense. The discussion starts with multi-sport participation and why transfer appears more likely when sports share similar perceptual problems, even if the movements themselves are different.Using an older, Russian psychology paper as a starting point, I look at how athletes’ perception of space may become directionally tuned based on the demands of their sport. The study compared young basketball and hockey players and found that spatial representation differed depending on whether the sport primarily operated in the vertical plane (basketball) or the horizontal plane (hockey).The authors described this pattern using the term reverse perspective—a label that feels clunky and unintuitive today, but which helped surface an important idea: perception does not develop evenly. Instead, it adapts around the actions and spatial problems athletes are repeatedly asked to solve.From there, the episode reframes the findings using a more modern concept: perception–action asymmetries. Rather than viewing these patterns as perceptual errors or distortions, they can be understood as functional adaptations—certain dimensions of space are weighted more heavily because they matter more for successful action.The episode then brings this idea back to goaltending, examining how hockey heavily emphasizes horizontal information while still requiring accurate reads in the vertical plane through screens, tips, release height, and rebounds. Basketball is discussed not as a solution or fix, but as a different perceptual environment that may expose goalies to vertical spatial problems in ways hockey does not consistently provide.Importantly, this episode does not argue that playing basketball will improve shot-height recognition or replace hockey-specific training. Instead, it offers a conceptual framework for thinking about athlete development: what perceptual problems are athletes actually being asked to solve, and which ones might they rarely encounter?The goal is not prescription, but perspective.

Quiet Eye Isn’t Quiet | How Elite Athletes Actually SeeWe tend to think of vision as clear, continuous, and camera-like.In reality, it’s fragmented, selective, and heavily constructed by the brain.In this episode, I explore how elite athletes use their eyes under pressure — and why traditional “Quiet Eye” explanations fall short when applied to fast, open sports like hockey.Using a landmark on-ice eye-tracking study by Martell & Vickers (2004), we break down how expert defenders don’t simply hold their gaze longer, but instead use a rapid-to-stable cascade of visual attention: quick sampling early, followed by a final stabilizing fixation before action.This episode reframes Quiet Eye not as a single moment, but as the final phase of a much more dynamic perceptual process.Why most of your visual field is blurry — and why you never noticeHow the brain fills in blind spots and missing informationWhat “Quiet Eye” really means in closed vs open sportsWhy team-sport gaze research produced conflicting coaching adviceHow this study used live, on-ice eye tracking instead of video simulationsKey differences between elite and near-elite visual behaviorWhy elite athletes succeed with shorter fixations, not longer onesThe idea of a “quick-then-quiet” gaze cascadeImplications for hockey, goaltending, and skill developmentWhy training vision requires humility, not simple prescriptionsElite vision isn’t calm from the start — it’s efficient.Experts sample information rapidly, recognize patterns early, and only settle into a longer, stabilizing gaze once the situation collapses and action is inevitable.Quiet Eye still matters — but it’s earned, not forced.Martell, S. G., & Vickers, J. N. (2004).Gaze characteristics of elite and near-elite athletes in ice hockey defensive tactics.Human Movement Science, 22, 689–712.The Coretex Athletic Review explores sport science, perception, and performance through the lens of real research — with a bias toward practical relevance for coaches, athletes, and practitioners.

In this episode, I examine how athletes learn skills by watching others—and why perfect demonstrations may not always be the most effective teaching tool.I review a research study that explores whether learners benefit more from observing a flawless expert, or from watching someone make mistakes and correct them in real time. The findings have important implications for coaching, teaching, and skill development—particularly in early learning stages.This episode reviews a study by Anastasia Kitsantas, Barry J. Zimmerman, and Tim Cleary, published in the Journal of Educational Psychology titled The Role of Observation and Emulation in the Development of Athletic Self-Regulation. Participants:60 ninth-grade students with little to no prior experience in the taskTask:Learning a dart-throwing skill broken down into specific technical componentsPurpose:To examine how different types of demonstrations and feedback influence skill learning, confidence, motivation, and self-regulationParticipants were assigned to one of three modeling conditions:No model: verbal instruction onlyMastery model: a demonstrator performing the skill flawlesslyCoping model: a demonstrator who initially makes errors, then gradually corrects themEach group was further split based on whether they received simple verbal feedback during practice.Learners who observed a coping model:Performed the skill more accuratelyReported higher confidence (self-efficacy)Showed greater satisfaction and intrinsic interestLearners who observed a mastery model performed better than those with no model—but consistently worse than those who observed coping models.Social feedback during practice improved outcomes overall, but did not eliminate the advantage of coping models.Most notably, learners who observed coping models were more likely to attribute mistakes to strategy, rather than ability or effort—a pattern strongly associated with better learning and motivation.The study suggests that:Early learning benefits from seeing how mistakes are corrected, not just what “perfect” execution looks likeDemonstrations shape not only movement patterns, but how athletes interpret success and failureIntentional error-and-correction demonstrations may help athletes develop better self-regulation skillsThis episode explores how these findings map onto real-world coaching environments, particularly in group settings and early skill acquisition.Perfect demonstrations can establish standards—but learning how to adjust, correct, and adapt may require seeing imperfection first.

In this episode, host Evan Kurylo revisits The Mundanity of Excellence (1989) by sociologist Daniel F. Chambliss — an ethnographic study of Olympic-level swimmers that challenges how we think about talent, hard work, and athlete development.Rather than framing excellence as the result of dramatic breakthroughs, rare talent, or cutting-edge methods, Chambliss shows that elite performance emerges from mundane, highly structured daily behaviours embedded within different competitive cultures. Excellence, he argues, is not flashy — it is boring, consistent, and normalized.The episode opens with the idea that facts have a “half-life,” drawing on examples from medical science to show how some knowledge decays quickly while broader behavioural patterns tend to persist. From there, we explore Chambliss’s key concept of stratification — the idea that competitive levels are not just different in quantity, but in quality, culture, and expectations.The discussion also introduces an interpretive distinction between improvement within a level and advancement between levels, arguing that while performance can scale empirically within a stable framework, moving between levels often requires a conceptual shift in how training is structured. This idea is stress-tested with counter-examples and caveats, including early-stage learning, physiological adaptation, and late specialization.This episode is not about dismissing hard work or data, but about understanding when effort helps — and when it simply reinforces a ceiling.The “half-life” of facts and why some ideas age better than othersStratification in sport as culture, not just selectionQuantitative vs qualitative differences in athlete developmentWhy “more training” often fails to produce elite performanceThe Mission Viejo Swimming Club exampleExcellence as normalized, mundane disciplineConceptual vs empirical problems in developmentCounter-examples and limitations of Chambliss’s frameworkConnections to nonlinear pedagogy and skill acquisitionChambliss, D. F. (1989). The Mundanity of Excellence: An Ethnographic Report on Stratification and Olympic Swimmers. Sociological Theory, 7(1), 70–86.Within a level, performance often scales with effort.Between levels, advancement usually requires a change in structure.Excellence is rarely dramatic — it is built through boring, high-fidelity execution over time.This episode presents an interpretation of Chambliss’s work alongside modern perspectives from coaching and skill acquisition. Where applicable, limitations and counter-examples are discussed to avoid oversimplifying athlete development.

This episode explores how athletes make sense of fast, chaotic game environments using internal models, priors, and pattern recognition. Through the lens of Bayesian reasoning and Piaget’s concepts of assimilation and accommodation, we break down why anticipation is a skill, why young athletes often lag in perceptual processing, and why predictable drills don’t transfer well into games. A practical, clear look at the cognitive side of skill development.These aren’t quoted directly in the episode, but they underlie the explanations:Simply Psychology: Schemas, Assimilation & Accommodation⁠⁠https://www.simplypsychology.org/piaget-assimilation-accommodation.html⁠⁠Verywell Mind: Piaget’s Stages of Cognitive DevelopmentStanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Jean PiagetPiaget, J. (1952). The Origins of Intelligence in Children.Kahneman & Tversky – Judgment Under Uncertainty (base rate fallacy)Gigerenzer, G. – Risk Savvy (intuition vs statistics)Griffiths & Tenenbaum – Bayesian models of cognitionAbernethy, B. – Perceptual expertise in sportVickers, J. – Decision TrainingDavids, K. – Dynamics of Skill AcquisitionDan Morris book Bayes Theorem: A Visual Introduction for Beginners: https://a.co/d/eRmMNC3 Article: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/30024211/

Episode 1 — The Birthplace Effect: Population Size, Relative Age, and the Hidden Ecology of TalentThis episode reviews the landmark 2006 study by Côté et al. examining how birthplace population and birthdate influence elite athlete emergence across the NHL, MLB, NBA, and PGA.Topics covered:Why the strongest athlete representation comes from cities of 50,000–100,000Effect size comparisons: birthplace (3.51) vs. relative age (0.44)Why large metropolitan areas and rural towns under-produce prosEnvironmental and psychosocial explanations for the “Goldilocks Zone”Updated caveats from recent (2021–2024) researchPractical implications for parents, coaches, and development pathwaysLink to the original article: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17115521/Hosted by: Evan KuryloPresented by: Coretex Athletics