Sample report

What a coach gets after a sprint assessment

This is the real report component, rendered from sample data. The score, the limb split, the three domains and all twelve checks agree with each other, because they are all worked out from the same twelve answers.

There are no athlete photos here. In a real report each check carries the frame it was scored from, and those frames belong to the athlete, so this sample shows our position figures in their place.

S-MAS
LATEST 7 Feb 2026

Sample athlete

Very poor · significant suboptimal mechanics7/12
0–123–567–1112
Left · worse
TO1
MVP2
LS
TD3
MS1
Right
TO1
MVP
LS
TD2
MS1
Left 7/12Right 4/12
Most affected Back-side5/8 · 63%
atleetiq.com · Sprint Mechanics Assessment
Run one on your own athlete
Overall & limbs
Left limb
7/12
Very poor
Right limb
4/12
Average
How this compares
036912
This athlete 7 Typical range 1.5–6.9

Bramah · 136 elite footballers · mean 4.2 (men) / 3.8 (women), SD 2.7. Elite footballers, not school sprinters, so treat this as a reference point, not a target.

Limb difference 3-point difference: the left limb scores worse. Watch it across sessions before acting on the side — which side reads worse is not stable test to test. Bramah does not rank limb difference against the mechanical focus.

For context: in Bramah’s cohort right limbs scored about half a point worse than left on average — small side differences are normal.

Conditions
Synthetic trackSpikes240 fps
Each leg was filmed on its own run, so both were seen clearly. This matches the S-MAS protocol.
The 3 domains
Back-side mechanics Most affected5 / 8· 63%
L
R
Overstride 5 / 10· 50%
L
R
Lumbo-pelvic control 1 / 6· 17%
L
R

These combine both limbs, and the left scores 3 points worse. Worth watching, not chasing.

The 5 sprint phases

Both limbs, each phase, what we check, pass or fault. The pip is that phase's fault count.

Left · worse
1
TO
2
MVP
LS
3
TD
1
MS
Right
1
TO
MVP
LS
2
TD
1
MS
  • Toe-OffTrailing Limb Extension
  • MVPBack KickTrunk & Pelvic RotationLumbar Extension / Anterior Pelvic Tilt
  • Late SwingThigh Separation
  • Touch-DownForward LeanLumbar Extension / Anterior Pelvic TiltThigh SeparationFoot Contact vs CoM DistanceShin AngleFoot Inclination
  • Mid-StanceVertical Collapse
The 12 checks

3 of 12 checks differ between limbs. The score gap alone understates it. These are where the difference actually shows up.

Q2Back KickLR

Is the heel of the trailing limb above the calf of the trailing leg?

Shin should not be higher than parallel with the floor.

Left
Fault
Right
Pass
Q5Lumbar Extension / Anterior Pelvic TiltLR

Does the athlete appear to be in anterior pelvic tilt or lumbar extension?

Excessive lower back arching, elevated chest, "bum behind the body".

Left
Fault
Right
Pass
Q9Foot Contact vs CoM DistanceLR

A line is drawn horizontally from foot contact to the CoM. Is there space for another foot?

Left
Fault
Right
Pass
Same on both sides: 9 checks
  • Q1Trailing Limb ExtensionBoth fault
  • Q3Trunk & Pelvic RotationBoth pass
  • Q4Thigh SeparationBoth pass
  • Q6Forward LeanBoth pass
  • Q7Lumbar Extension / Anterior Pelvic TiltBoth pass
  • Q8Thigh SeparationBoth fault
  • Q10Shin AngleBoth fault
  • Q11Foot InclinationBoth pass
  • Q12Vertical CollapseBoth fault
Progress over time
3 assessments · combined score /24▼ 2 improved

S-MAS · tool and reliability: Bramah et al., Am J Sports Med 2024;52(6):1608–16. intra-rater ICC 0.83, inter-rater 0.80, SEM ±1. Injury association: Bramah et al., Br J Sports Med 2025. Each point ≈ +33% hamstring-injury rate (IRR 1.33, 95% CI 1.01–1.76), per limb, associative not causal. Coaching feedback, not a medical diagnosis.