How Better Athlete Testing Builds Better Training with Dashr Systems’ Chase Pfeifer
Testing Should Make Training Better
Athlete testing is only valuable when it improves the decisions coaches make afterward. In this episode, Dashr Systems founder Chase Pfeifer joins Thomas Newman to discuss how speed, jump, and change-of-direction testing can provide useful information without turning the process into a complicated sports science project. The goal is not to collect as much data as possible. It is to identify the measurements that matter, test them consistently, and use the results to guide training, evaluate progress, and communicate more clearly with athletes.
Building Technology Coaches Can Actually Use
Dashr Systems began with an effort to create a more affordable and accessible timing solution for coaches. Pfeifer explains how early versions of the system were built using simple sensor technology before developing into app-controlled laser timing equipment. That origin shaped the company’s approach to product design. Equipment used in sports must be durable, portable, easy to set up, and reliable in unpredictable environments. A technically impressive device has limited value if coaches cannot operate it efficiently during a busy testing session.
Accuracy Requires More Than Expensive Equipment
Performance testing often creates debates about which technology or protocol is most accurate. Single-beam and dual-beam timing systems, for example, can produce different results because an athlete’s arm or leg may break the beam before the torso crosses the line. Dashr addresses some of these challenges through software corrections and improved sensor technology. However, Pfeifer emphasizes that equipment alone cannot guarantee reliable data. Coaches must use consistent starting positions, distances, instructions, and testing conditions if they want to compare results over time.
Choosing Tests That Matter
A good testing program does not need dozens of assessments. Pfeifer discusses how Nebraska historically used a small group of tests, including sprinting and jumping measures, to evaluate athletic ability and guide development. The exact tests should depend on the sport and the qualities the program is trying to improve. A short sprint may provide valuable information about acceleration, while a vertical or broad jump can offer insight into explosive ability. Testing becomes less useful when coaches collect numbers without understanding how they relate to performance or training goals.
Data Can Build Confidence
Testing is not only about identifying weaknesses. When athletes can see objective progress, data can reinforce confidence and increase accountability. A faster sprint time or improved jump result gives athletes evidence that their work is producing change. It can also help coaches explain why a program is being adjusted. At the same time, testing must be handled carefully. Poorly controlled testing or misleading comparisons can damage trust, especially when athletes believe a result does not reflect their actual ability.
Prepare Before Testing Day
One of the simplest ways to improve athlete testing is to conduct a complete dry run before the real event. Coaches should confirm that the equipment works, the app is connected, the distances are correct, and everyone understands their role. Athletes should also know the testing procedures before a combine or high-stakes evaluation. Familiarity with the start position, timing method, and number of attempts allows the test to measure performance rather than confusion.
The Future of Athlete Measurement
Pfeifer sees athlete testing moving toward more integrated systems that combine timing hardware with cameras, rangefinders, LIDAR, and software-based movement tracking. These tools may eventually provide detailed acceleration profiles and multidimensional performance data with less equipment. As measurement becomes more advanced, coaches will still need to protect athlete privacy and determine who owns and controls the information. The technology will continue to change, but the central purpose should remain the same: collect trustworthy data and use it to create better training.
