The ACE Model for Video-Based Feedback Design

AnalysisPro's monthly AP Clubhouse session recently welcomed Darren Lewis and Dr Denise Martin to talk through a question that doesn't get asked enough: how do you actually design a video-based feedback session, rather than just deliver one? Video-based feedback gets delivered constantly across sport, but it rarely gets designed with the same intent as a training drill or a game plan.

That's the gap Darren Lewis and Dr Denise Martin wanted to fix. The pair recently joined AP Clubhouse, AnalysisPro's monthly members-only session for customers, to walk through their framework for designing video-based feedback: the ACE Model.

Who Built It

Darren spent 16 years as an analyst, 12 of them between Bath Rugby and Gloucester and now consults with teams looking to get more out of their video sessions. Denise started as a science teacher before moving into GAA sports analysis and research ATU Galway. Their research started with a question about how video sessions get designed in the first place: when coaches put a review together, is anybody actually learning anything from it?

Their research, a systematic review of 39 studies across multiple sports, found plenty of guidance on what good looks like on the pitch but almost none on what good looks like in the video room. The ACE Model is their answer, built around three principles: Aims, Content, and Evaluation.

"Video is the most powerful feedback tool we have in performance sport. It enables reflection, empowers discussion, and helps athletes and coaches make better decisions. But there's never been any real guidance on how to design it properly, or how to know what effect it's having. ACE came out of that gap. What I want this model to do is raise awareness of those decisions and hand people a shared way to talk about them. Different coaches will take different things from it, depending on their own context and what they're already doing with video." - Darren Lewis

The Goal: Readiness to Perform

Before getting into the model, Denise gave the target outcome a name: "readiness to perform." Athletes leaving a video session should feel it was worthwhile and constructive, not something to dread. They should see what the coach wants them to see, remember it, and be able to translate it into action on the pitch.

Miss any of these and the session has limited value, no matter how polished the footage looks.

1. Aims

Every session should start with a clear aim, decided before a single clip gets pulled. The research identified five recurring aims:

• Building a shared model of performance

• Helping players evaluate and reflect on their own game

• Lifting motivation and confidence

• Getting ready for the next opponent

• Flagging specific things to work on

A session can serve more than one aim. Without at least one stated clearly, though, there's nothing to design around, and nothing to evaluate against afterwards.

2. Content: 10 Interdependent Decisions

This is where most of the practical work happens. The model sets out 10 design decisions coaches and analysts make when building a session: key message, valence (the balance of positive and negative content and emotional tone), timing and duration, setting, technology, scaffolding, clip selection, number of clips, session leadership, and focusing attention.

Darren's framing for this stuck: think of it as a deck of cards. Change one decision and the whole hand changes. Say the review has to fit into a twenty-minute slot at the start of the next training session. Straight away, your clip count drops, the number of key messages you can deliver shrinks, and there's less room for scaffolding.

Two decisions worth calling out on their own:

Focusing attention. The purpose here is to get everyone looking at the same thing, especially in clips packed with context where there's a lot going on. One exercise during the session used an optical illusion clip. Some attendees spotted a duck, others a rabbit, in the same image. Same idea applies on the touchline: without a clear prompt, people watching the same footage can walk away with a completely different read on it. This is exactly where telestration tools like Nacsport's KlipDraw come in. Drawing directly on the frame takes the guesswork out of what to look at.

Clip selection and number. Too many clips and players hit overload. Too few and the message doesn't land. Both decisions tie back to the stated aim: clips should serve the message, not just look good. If you're tagging in Nacsport, the dashboard and clip filters narrow this down for you. The real decision left is which moments deserve a slot in the session.

3. Evaluation: The Most Neglected Step

Evaluation is the part most coaches skip, and that's reflected in the research too, it's the area with the least evidence in the literature. You can plan a session in detail and still have no real idea whether it worked.

The model breaks evaluation into three either/or decision points:

• Delivery vs reception: how the session was delivered, versus how it was actually received

• Informal vs formal: a quick chat after training, versus a structured survey or test

• Internal vs external: staff reviewing their own sessions, versus an outside perspective

One simple method discussed on the night: post-it notes. Ask players to write down one thing they're taking away as they leave. It costs nothing and tells you immediately whether the message landed, or whether everyone just remembered the duck.

What It Looks Like in Practice

Two practical applications came up repeatedly. The first is planning a single intervention: pick an aim, work through the content decisions, deliver, evaluate, move to the next session. The second is planning a whole season around the model.

One attendee, working in an academy setting, talked about mapping out what players need to know by each stage of the season, then using video sessions to build towards that rather than treating each one as a one-off. Another, working with school-age players, uses video reviews to teach reflection and evaluation skills directly, getting players to assess other teams' footage before turning that same critical eye on their own.

Neither approach needs expensive kit. Both come down to the same thing: a clear aim before the session gets built, and some thought about what happens once it's over.

Help Shape the Model

Darren and Denise are now asking coaches, analysts, and video coordinators to put the ACE Model into practice and report back on how it went. Sign up and you'll get a free toolkit:

• A short welcome video walking through the steps

• The ACE Model infographic

• A simple design worksheet

• A quick survey to share how your session went

Sign up to help evaluate the ACE Model

AP Clubhouse runs monthly for AnalysisPro customers, with guest speakers from across coaching and performance analysis. If you'd like to join a future session, please get in touch with your account manager.