Join Discourse

Gareth Davies, Mayor of The Real Science of Sport, is ready to welcome you as a citizen of our VIP community! To join the conversation, make a monthly pledge at Patreon.com and get access to the shared expertise and passion of fellow listeners

Show notes

In this week’s Spotlight, we tackle an intriguing training question from a listener in our Discourse community: do short surges during easy or moderate training days undermine the training benefit? To explore this, we look to the current Giro d’Italia, where Richard Carapaz and rising star Isaac del Toro offer real-world examples of how intensity, even in brief bursts, may create a significant physiological cost. While small deviations from planned intensity are not only acceptable but often necessary, trouble arises when these efforts become too frequent or too intense. We introduce the concept of a physiological budget, and how consistent overspending can lead to a kind of training “bankruptcy,” where the cost outweighs the benefit. We break down how it's the intensity that exponentially increases physiological stress, and how to manage that cost wisely in your own training.

Then we shift gears to rugby, where the red card rule is about to undergo a significant transformation. Under the new law, a team will no longer play with 14 men for the rest of the match—after 20 minutes, they can bring on a replacement. In response to split opinion in the Rugby community, Gareth asks: “What’s the big deal?”. Ross explains why this change has divided the sport, delving into the broader context of concussion prevention, and how sanction was meant to carry the message for behaviour change. Ross shares insights from his newly published paper showing that women are concussed in the same way as men, adding a crucial layer to the ongoing head injury debate.

In our news wrap, we stay on safety, where the NFL has decided not to ban the controversial "tush push". We examine how that decision parallels rugby’s own risk-management principles. Beatrice Chebet ran the second-fastest 3000m in history last week, putting herself onto a controversial list of Chinese names who had appeared to move that World Record out of reach. Ross offers a prediction that it's a matter of time before the WR falls to Chebet (along with others).

And the Enhanced Games claim a “world record” performance of its own, leading us to again discuss the ethics, science, and inevitable sales pitch driving the campaign, and why giving oxygen to the now transparent anti-aging commercial objectives of the Games may not be a good idea.

Links

• The question that inspired our Training Zone discussion - for Discourse members only
• Ross' recent paper on the risk of head injuries in elite women rugby players
• The NFL does not ban the 'tush push'. For now
• Article by Julian Savulescu on why doping should be allowed (an oldie!)

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Cocodona 250-mile (402 km) trail run is one of the toughest endurance challenges in the world, as athletes battle the extreme distance, sleep deprivation, nutritional challenges, muddy trails and 12,500 m of elevation. Trail legend Ryan Sandes finished second in 2025 and talks to host Mike Finch and guest co-host Sean Robson about his motivation for competing, his training regimen and his own experience competing in this extreme challenge.

NOTES:

Check out more on the Cocodona 250 HERE

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Join Discourse

Nutrition tips, training insight, performance debates, sports opinions — if you’re into it, we’re talking about it. Become part of the “Science of Sport” Discourse community via Patreon.

Show notes

This week on Spotlight, we take a tour through some of the big stories in sport and sports science right now—from race tactics and concussion protocols to doping ethics, expert credibility, and how we identify and develop talent.

We start with a lively discussion on the Giro d’Italia and that gravel stage. Was it thrilling unpredictability—or dangerous chaos? As the General Classification gets a dramatic shake-up, we debate whether the pursuit of entertainment justifies what some see as random, unfair risk and compromised race integrity. Do stages like this belong in a Grand Tour, or are they an unwelcome injection of chance into a sport built on precision and control?

From there, we shift to cycling’s ongoing concussion challenges. Jonas Vingegaard’s recent comments compel questions about whether current policies do enough to manage brain injuries. Despite a policy that asks multiple people in the race to identify possible cases, the sport appears to be struggling to accurately identify who gets tested, when and how. Are critical medical decisions still slipping through the cracks because the wrong people, with misaligned incentives, are being asked to make them under pressure?

Then it’s time for our first featured topic: the evolution of the Enhanced Games. With swimmer James Magnussen chasing a chemically-aided world record and a million-dollar prize, we unpack the ethical and medical dangers of performance enhancement. What are the risks—for athlete health, for fairness, and for the messages it sends to the next generation?

Next, we ask: How do you know who to trust? In an age of slick communication and pseudo-expertise, we explore the credibility of experts, and discover why true experts often sound less confident, not more. Ross explains how confidence can be a red flag, and why uncertainty and nuance are often markers of real scientific thinking.

Finally, we dive into the messy reality of Talent ID. Ross explains four common errors—especially the “ghosts” created when resource-strained systems make early, high-stakes decisions that can harm both performance and people.

We close with a brief segment on doping in Ironman, and why the “contaminated meat” excuse likely doesn’t hold up—though science says it’s not entirely impossible.

Links

• Vingegaard on his concussion omission
• The UCI Concussion Policy that identifies all the right people to call for tests, but that frequently seems not to achieve this
• David Epstein's recent article on fact checking and the illusion of expertise
• One example of the research studies used to sell BPC157, despite being in rats and showing nothing of the sort of promises companies make

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.