How to Assess and Progress a Training Plan

Finishing a training block is not the end of the process. It’s the beginning of the next one.

Every completed block gives you new information about the athlete. Your job is to use that information to decide what happens next. Just like physical training, cognitive training requires progressive overload. If the brain is exposed to the same stimulus for too long, it adapts and progress slows. Every new block should provide a fresh challenge based on what the previous block revealed.

The process is simple.

Baseline → Train → Re-test → Assess → Build the Next Block → Repeat

Every block should begin and end with a baseline. The comparison between those two baselines tells you what improved, what stalled, and where the next block should focus.

Without a baseline comparison, you’re simply guessing.

Think of it like strength training. If an athlete finishes a block with strong quads but weak hamstrings, the next programme places more emphasis on the hamstrings while maintaining the quads. Cognitive training follows exactly the same principle. Strong attention but weak decision making means the next block should place more emphasis on decision making while continuing to maintain attention.

Every task should be reviewed using three metrics.

Reaction Time tells you how quickly the athlete responds.

Variation tells you how consistent those responses are.

Accuracy tells you how often the athlete responds correctly.

Always assess these three metrics together.

To confirm genuine adaptation, each metric must improve by at least 5% individually.

Reaction Time → 5% faster

Variation → 5% lower

Accuracy → 5% higher

A combined average is not enough. An athlete can become faster while making more mistakes, or become more consistent without becoming faster. Looking at all three together confirms balanced adaptation.

If only one or two metrics improve, adaptation is only partial. That isn’t a failure. It simply tells you where the next block should focus.

Once you’ve compared the baselines, classify each cognitive demand.

A strength is a demand where all three metrics improved by at least 5%. These demands should remain in the programme, but they no longer need to receive the majority of the training load.

A weakness is any demand where one or more metrics failed to improve by at least 5%. These are the areas that should drive the design of the next block.

Don’t be concerned if athletes struggle on these tasks. Harder tasks often create the greatest adaptation because they push the brain closer to its current capacity. If a task is challenging, it is usually providing the stimulus needed for improvement.

Once you’ve identified the weaker demands, direct more training towards them.

Use a 2:1 ratio when adaptation was generally good but one demand still needs more work.

2 weak demand tasks → 1 strength task

Use a 3:1 ratio when one demand is clearly limiting performance.

3 weak demand tasks → 1 strength task

These ratios can be applied in two ways. You can dedicate more sessions throughout the week to the weaker demand, or simply include more tasks targeting that demand within each session. Both approaches produce the same outcome. Choose whichever best fits the athlete’s programme.

The next block shouldn’t simply repeat the previous one. Use the assessment to gradually increase the training stimulus where it’s needed most.

This can be achieved by adjusting:

The goal is simple. Continue challenging the athlete where adaptation has not yet occurred while maintaining the strengths they’ve already developed.

Every completed block should lead directly into the next.

Run Baseline → Complete Training Block → Re-test → Review the Data → Identify Strengths and Weaknesses → Build the Next Block → Repeat

Each block should be built from the results of the previous one.

Over time, this creates a programme that continually adapts alongside the athlete instead of repeating the same workload. As strengths develop and weaknesses change, the training changes with them.