While technological innovations may have a transformative impact across all levels of sports, they are often developed and adopted in relation to high-performance sports. Several scholars within the field of sport science argue that athletic performance enhancement has come to be dependent on innovations in sports technology. For instance, as early as 2008, Lippi and colleagues argued that the ‘‘future limits to athletic performance will be determined less and less by innate physiology of the athlete, and more and more by scientific and technological advances’’. This has been echoed by others, such as Balmer, Pleasence and Nevill (p. 1018, 2012): “In the absence of technical or technological intervention, no general improvement in performance (i.e. across finalists) should be expected. Of course, this is not to say that an extraordinary performance could, for example, break a jumping world record, simply that, based on historic growth across finalists, there is no reason to expect further general improvement”. Similar arguments are also found in Rayvon Fouché’s book Game Changer -The Technoscientific Revolution in Sports (2017). What does all this mean? Simply put, elite sporting competitions, technologically advanced and innovative gear, training methods, injury prevention and data analytics can make up the ‘marginal gains’ or the thin line between winning and losing.

The focus on performance enhancement, data analytics and injury prevention related to high-performance sports mean that grassroots sports and sport-for-all programs are largely overlooked in public debates and research on technological innovations. This also applies to the development and adoption of virtual sports. The close ties between commercialized high-performance sports and the sports tech industry also raise questions about the narrative of technology and performance enhancement monopolizes the sports sector and impedes the adoption of technological innovations for Sport-for-All purposes.

The social roles of Virtual Sports #

At the grassroots level, technological innovation plays a dual role: it can democratize access to sports or exacerbate existing disparities in participation. From a Sport-for-All perspective, a central question is: how can sports technology be socially inclusive? Or rather, when is sports technology socially inclusive?

If voluntary sports clubs can secure funding (either publicly or through sponsorships) to buy necessary equipment and subscriptions, virtual sports such as Zwift could lower the threshold to try out new sports. In the case of cycling, for some, it might seem less intimidating to participate in a Zwift training session than risk lagging behind a group out on the road.

Taking Zwift - the multiplayer online cycling and running program that enables users to train and compete virtually - as an example, its setup can both be used in a socially inclusive manner and act to uphold social inequalities in sport participation. Looking at the equipment and subscription you need to use Zwift, this virtual form of cycling hardly seems more economically accessible than mainstream cycling. Even less so if you consider Zwift as a platform for virtual running. Therefore, at the individual level, it is logical to assume that Zwift does not lower barriers to sport participation as a form of virtual sports. The buy in - the material requirements (stable internet connection, large enough space in your home) are too high. However, at a collective level in sports clubs, the adoption of virtual sports such as Zwift could be implemented and managed in ways that make such technologies socially inclusive. What do we mean by that? If voluntary sports clubs can secure funding (either publicly or through sponsorships) to buy necessary equipment and subscriptions, virtual sports such as Zwift could lower the threshold to try out new sports. In the case of cycling, for some, it might seem less intimidating to participate in a Zwift training session than risk lagging behind a group out on the road. Virtual cycling might also represent a safer sports activity option for some, as there are no threats of injuries from traffic accidents or collisions.

Leveraging such social inclusion potential is of course dependent on the implementation strategies of the sports clubs themselves, as they need to ensure that the barriers marginalized groups experience for participation in organized sports are lowered (e.g. membership fees, transportation, training culture). Otherwise, only the format of sport participation changes, while the opportunities to participate remain a privilege reserved for some. Knowing this, a question that needs to be further investigated in sport management research is: how does the widespread adoption of sports technologies affect access and inclusivity in sports participation?

Recommended reading #

Balmer, N., Pleasence, P. & Nevill, A. (2012) Evolution and revolution: Gauging the impact of technological and technical innovation on Olympic performance, Journal of Sports Sciences, 30:11, 1075-1083, DOI: 10.1080/02640414.2011.587018

Fouché, R. (2017). Game Changer: The Technoscientific Revolution in Sports. Hopkins Press.

Lippi, G., Banfi, G., Favaloro, E. J., Rittweger, J., & Muffalli, N. (2008). Updates on improvement of human athletic performance: Focus on world records in athletics. British Medical Bulletin, 87, 7–15.