Athleticism Rating System Using Standardized Scoring Algorithms

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current athleticism rating and performance measuring systems are largely subjective, lacking the ability to objectively compare athletes across different skill levels and sports, and fail to provide real-time data access and customizable evaluation methods.

Innovation Solution

A system that uses a standardized calculation to assign a score from 1-100, allowing for customizable athletic tests and measuring units, and provides a leaderboard for real-time data collection and comparison, enabling objective rating and seamless data sharing across various athletic groups.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Measurement precision

If subjective evaluation methods are used for athlete assessment, then the evaluation process is simple and quick, but the accuracy and objectivity of the rating is poor

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveathletic performance rating accuracyVSAvoidevaluation system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent replaces subjective mechanical evaluation methods with an automated computer-based system that objectively measures athletic performance parameters. The system uses software algorithms to process test results and generate standardized ratings, eliminating human bias while maintaining measurement accuracy.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #28Mechanics substitution (Replace mechanical system)

Solution Approach 2:

The system transforms qualitative athletic assessments into quantitative parameters by assigning numerical scores (1-100) to various athletic characteristics. This parameter transformation enables objective comparison and ranking of athletes across different skill levels and sports disciplines.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

2Adaptability or versatility

If athletes are evaluated using common exercises and drills, then the comparison process is straightforward, but the ability to stratify by age and skill levels is limited

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveathlete stratification capabilityVSAvoidevaluation process simplicity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The evaluation system dynamically adjusts testing parameters and scoring criteria based on the athlete's age, skill level, and sport category. The system automatically selects appropriate drills and exercises from a database and configures scoring scales to be fair across different athlete populations.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system segments athletes into distinct categories based on age groups, skill levels, and sports disciplines. Each segment has customized evaluation criteria and scoring parameters, allowing fair comparisons within homogeneous groups while maintaining overall system simplicity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

3Reliability

If manual data collection methods are used, then the system is simple to implement, but manual data entry errors occur and real-time data access is limited

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedata accuracyVSAvoiddata collection system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system enables self-service data collection through automated electronic forms and digital timers that automatically capture athletic performance data. Coaches and testers simply initiate tests, and the system automatically records results, eliminating manual data entry and reducing errors.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The system provides real-time feedback by immediately processing test results and generating ratings as athletes complete their performances. The system displays instantaneous feedback on performance metrics and compares results against established benchmarks, enabling immediate action on performance improvement.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

4Adaptability or versatility

If standardized athletic tests are used across all athletes, then the comparison process is simplified, but the ability to customize evaluation methods is reduced

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveevaluation customization capabilityVSAvoidtesting system complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system provides a universal platform that can accommodate multiple types of athletic tests, drills, and evaluation methods within a single integrated system. Coaches can select from pre-configured test protocols or create custom evaluations, and the system handles all variations through unified processing algorithms.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Data Source

PatentUS10758808B2Athleticism rating and performance measuring systems
Publication Date: 2020.09.01 UNIVERSAL ATHLETIC TESTING LLC
  • US10758808B2 patent drawing
  • US10758808B2 patent drawing
  • US10758808B2 patent drawing

AI summary

An athleticism rating system and related athletic performance measuring systems is described. The athleticism rating system evaluates individual athletes against an athletes' definable skill tests which are common such as weight lifting, running or cycling times or standardized tests or a custom set of athletic performance tests. The related performance measuring system preferably is a user configurable software system that is configurable to be used on a computer system such as a laptop or desktop, smart phone or tablet and it ensures quick, easy, and accurate collection of athletic event data. In one disclosed embodiment, the performance rating system provides seamless athletic data collection and rating of athletes.