The Real Science of Sport Podcast

Join DiscourseGareth 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 listenersShow notesIn 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 players 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.LinksThe question that inspired our Training Zone discussion - for Discourse members onlyRoss' recent paper on the risk of head injuries in elite women rugby playersThe NFL does not ban the 'tush push'. For nowArticle by Julian Savulescu on why doping should be allowed (an oldie!)

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

Join DiscourseNutrition 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 notesThis 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.LinksVingegaard on his concussion omissionThe UCI Concussion Policy that identifies all the right people to call for tests, but that frequently seems not to achieve thisDavid Epstein's recent article on fact checking and the illusion of expertiseOne example of the research studies used to sell BPC157, despite being in rats and showing nothing of the sort of promises companies make

Become a Discourse memberEnjoy the pod? Support us with a small monthly donation on Patreon and unlock access to our exclusive Discourse community—deep dives, hot takes, and smarter sport talk await!In this week’s Spotlight, we dive into the science behind an eye-watering nutrition number: 200 grams of carbohydrate per hour. That’s what elite Ironman Cameron Wurf reportedly consumed during a record-breaking bike leg in Texas. But does the body actually use it all—or is there a ceiling to sugar oxidation? Ross and Gareth break down a recent study comparing 120g and 90g per hour in trained cyclists, revealing how much of that fuel actually gets burned, and whether it has the purported effects on fuel use during exercise. Before we hit the carb overload, we’ve got a mix of big stories from across the sporting world:🎾 IV drips and bans in tennis – Australian pro Max Purcell has been hit with an 18-month doping ban for intravenous vitamin infusions. We unpack the rules, his case and discover some other athletes who have fallen foul of the IV rule🏏 Cannabis and cricket – South Africa’s Kagiso Rabada served a one month suspension for a ‘recreational drug’. We revisit the criteria WADA uses to ban substances and ask: should cannabis really be on the list?🏃‍♂️ The teen sprint takeover – A 17-year-old ran a wind-assisted 9.92s, with two ninth-graders just behind him, breaking 10.2s. They join Gout Gout as teen phenoms with bright futures🔬 Publish, perish—or post? – We reflect on a growing reality in science: if researchers aren't visible and able to communicate beyond journals, they risk irrelevance. Is it now “share or disappear”?Show notesThe long detailed piece by Ben Rothenberg on the Max Purcell doping banRyan Lochte got done for the same offence, no investigation needed - he served himself up on an Instagram post!A Newsweek article, published after Sha'Carri Richardson's cannabis ban, on how the drug came to be on the WADA listInteresting piece on Gout Gout's coach, Di SheppardArticle on Cam Wurf's Ironman fuelling strategy that kicked off today's main topicWADA's scientists defend cannabis' presence on the banned listRecent review showing no performance enhancing effects of cannabisThe Podlogar article comparing 90 to 120 g/h that we discuss

Join The Discourse CommunityIf you enjoy the podcast, you’ll love our Discourse community. Become a member of “The Science of Sport” community by joining with a small monthly pledge on Patreon — and be part of the conversation behind the conversation.Show notesIn this week’s Spotlight, we open with a brisk roundup of major stories from the world of sport and policy. We look at new developments following the UK Supreme Court ruling on the Equality Act, including the first tangible policy response. We also revisit the resolution of the tragic ice hockey case involving manslaughter charges, and World Athletics’ announcement of its “Ultimate Championship” event—an innovative idea, but not without flaws. Gareth raises some pointed criticisms about the competition format and the puzzling exclusion of key athletics disciplines.Next, we talk talent. The NFL Draft always offers a window into the world’s most elaborate selection process—but also its inefficiencies. We reflect on how early selection often produces more busts than brilliance, yet remains largely unchanged due to structural inertia. A 14-year-old’s blistering 35-ball century in the IPL leads us to discuss a surprising link between cricket scoring and endurance pacing, and how this informs the Duckworth-Lewis-Stern method.From there, we shift to the core topic of the episode: scientific integrity. Gareth reflects on our recent Spotlight's deep dive into how scientific papers are made, and our most recent feature podcast on the Boston Marathon and Mike's experiences testing Puma's new shoe. The conversation expands into questions of independence in scientific research and evidence, with specific reference to Puma’s bold claim that their new shoe is “the fastest ever", and why that statement is, at best, premature. But we also give credit where it’s due, praising the transparency and almost certain publication of the results of the brand’s testing, as well as the researcher's realism about trust in their lab's research.And amid it all, Ross shares some personal news—stepping away from his School Academy High Performance and development role, while reflecting on missed opportunities and unrealized HP philosophies.LinksThe Scottish FA acts to protect women's footballAnd the English FA are, apparently, considering itThe case against ice hockey player Matt Petgrave is droppedAn analysis of draft picks that shows how high the proportion of "busts" isHere's a preprint of the Hoogkamer evaluation of the Puma supershoe - this is not peer-reviewed yet, but I strongly suspect that a peer reviewed version of this is on the horizonThe best community discussion you'll read on Supershoes, courtesy our Discourse members (Members only access - you know what to do!)

In this round-up of the two big spring marathons—Boston and London—Mike and Ross rate the performances of the top athletes while debating whether pacesetters should be used in major marathon events. The team then delve into the ultra-competitive world of shoe tech, where Mike gets to do a running economy test in a pair being touted as the world's fastest running shoes.SHOW NOTES:Results of the testing done by the University of Massachusetts Amherst on Puma's Fast-R 3Study on how shoe mass affects running economyThe study we discussed that shows how a 1.1% improvement in metabolic cost of running translates into a 0.78% improvement in performanceThe original Vaporfly study that got the ball rolling on the 4% benefit, for comparison of methods

Join our Discourse CommunityThe Science of Sport is more than a podcast — it’s a growing community of curious, thoughtful people in sport and sports science. Join our Discourse by pledging on Patreon and tap into the deeper conversations.Show NotesWhere do scientific papers come from?In this week’s Spotlight, our main focus is a “birds and bees” conversation of the scientific world. Ross walks Gareth through how a research paper is conceived, conducted, and eventually delivered into the world through publication in scientific journals. We break down what is essential to how a paper fits into the larger sports science puzzle, and share some insider tips for reading research with a critical eye. We explore why the “why” behind a study matters more than most people think—and how every piece of research fits into a much bigger picture. Plus, we dive into the obligations and ethical requirements researchers face, and why transparency, study design, and disclosure are the foundations of real science.But before we get to that deep dive, we tackle a mix of stories from the world of sport:🏃‍♀️ A sub-4-minute mile for women?There’s fresh talk of breaking the barrier—but Ross is sceptical. Is this genuine progress or just another gimmick? We explore what it would mean if it happened, and what will need to be thrown behind the world's best athlete to make it possible.🚴‍♂️ Durability > sprint capacity?From Remco’s win over Wout in Brabantse Pijl to takeaways from the Boston Marathon, we examine how this underrated concept—producing a fresh performance while fatigued deeper into a race—plays out in real-world results.🎾 Doping rules, showers, and sample tampering.A new controversy in tennis gets us talking about anti-doping protocols, and some of the wildest attempts in history to game the systemIt’s science, scepticism, and sport—exactly how we like it.LinksThe two papers we discussed in our "Birds and Bees" section:Greg Roe's Rugby paper: Spot the DifferenceNic Tam's Barefoot running paper: We don't all adapt like the story book saidThe Breaking 4 campaign launchesTennis on the defensive about the anti-doping shower policy

We’ve got a blockbuster episode of Spotlight for you today.We kick things off with an important discussion around women’s sport and transgender athlete policies, following a landmark ruling from the UK Supreme Court on the legal definition of “woman” in the Equality Act. We know this topic won’t be for everyone, so if you'd prefer to skip ahead to the sports performance and race insights, you can jump straight to that action at about 1:07:12 in the podcast.For those looking for insight on this important topic, Gareth and I unpack the Supreme Court decision—a ruling with far-reaching implications. We’re joined by Helen Joyce, a leading women’s rights advocate who was in the courtroom for the verdict. She explains why the decision matters, what it means for sports governing bodies, and how it could reshape the future of competitive sport.Then we shift gears into performance talk: world records fell in the pool and in the discus, and we explore how weather and tech have combined to break new ground. Paris-Roubaix delivered two standout races. In the women’s event, race savvy beat strong legs (for once) as Pauline Ferrand-Prévot stormed to a solo victory in the Roubaix Velodrome. In the men’s race, we got another much-anticipated clash between Pogacar and van der Poel. We break down the physiology behind their efforts, the tactics—including van der Poel’s composed response to Pogacar’s crash—and how plain bad luck robbed the race of a deeper duel.Gareth also dives into the UK’s gym boom. With more people training than ever, we ask: is it all good news? Or is there more to the story? And finally, we celebrate our Discoursers—listeners and athletes around the world who’ve been tearing it up in races. Gareth shares some standout performances, and we invite you to join the community for world-class training insight and support.Show notesJoin our Discourse communityIf you enjoy the podcast, you’ll love our Discourse community. Become a member of “The Science of Sport” community by joining with a small monthly pledge on Patreon — and be part of the conversation behind the conversation.Links to topicsThe UK Supreme Court Decision discussed in the first part of the showThe FA's Transgender Policy, and the Appendix for Risk acceptance that trans men are required to signBBC piece discussion implications for sportArticle on Paul Biedermann's world record being brokenDiscus records galore in RamonaGareth's discussion on Discourse about the gym membership increase (Members only)

In this Spotlight episode, Ross and Gareth tackle a provocative question: should sports embrace fatigue to make the show better? We kick off with rugby union, where fresh legs off the bench and player welfare are fuelling debates about injury risks. But things quickly get philosophical. Some sports are basically designed to test how much fatigue you can take. Others are compromised when fatigue creeps in — skills drop, mistakes rise — yet fatigue also cranks up the drama and emotion. So, which sports thrive when athletes are running on empty, and which ones fall apart? And what would happen if you dialed up fatigue across the board — would it wreck the sport or make it even better?We also take a quick spin through the opening Grand Slam Track meeting in Jamaica, and peek ahead to the LA Olympics, where a bunch of new sports and events just got announced. Plus, concussion protocols and management are in the spotlight: a study from Scotland provides the first results on the lowering of tackle height in the community game; cyclist Elisa Longo-Borghini was pulled mid-race at Flanders; and Aussie cricketer Will Pucovski retired after his 13th concussion. Finally, we throw out a few predictions for Paris-Roubaix this Sunday. Got thoughts on these topics? Come chat with us on Discourse — link’s in the show notes!Show notesTo get stuck into these and other conversations in sports science, become a Patron of the podcast here, and then jump into the Discourse forum hereLinksThe Guardian article on the new events for the LA OlympicsWorld Rugby announces no evidence that the forwards-backs bench split needs to be changedIn 2023, I did a video presentation on the substitutes/fatigue injury risk issue, and you can watch that hereHere is Discourse member Hamish Gornall's paper on the tackle height findings from ScotlandReport on Longo-Borghini's Flanders crash and subsequent removal with concussionWill Pucovski's retirement due to repeat and worsening concussions