How sports became tech - part 2: What does it take to be a stand out sports tech innovator?

“Sport is becoming a more advanced example of digital change.” There are few sectors more actively innovative at the moment than sports technology. In this two part series we’ll explore how sports businesses became technology businesses and where the opportunities will lead in the next decade. In part one we explored the beginnings of sports tech and the disruption that created for the sector .

In Chicago, in game four of the 1919 baseball World Series, manager Kid Gleason was watching the best team in baseball fall apart in front of his eyes.

Gleason’s Chicago White Sox were losing the series 2-1 to the Cincinnati Reds, making game four pivotal; lose and you face a deficit of two, in what was at that time a best-of-nine game series. Win and you have evened the series, heading into game five.

The White Sox, featuring a star roster of the game’s best players, had won the World Series in 1917 and were considered to have a good chance of winning again two years later.

Gleason’s star roster featured, amongst others, ‘Shoeless’ Joe Jackson, a veteran in his eleventh season, a World Series winner in 1917 and likely destined for the Hall of Fame.

Pitching was Eddie Cicotte, no slouch himself. Cicotte had lost the first game of the series, but today he seemed more composed. Through four innings he’d given up one hit and no runs. The score was tied at 0-0.

But in the fifth Gleason watched as Cicotte committed two terrible fielding errors, giving the Reds a 2-0 lead they would never relinquish.

The best team in baseball had been beaten and would be beaten again, going on to lose the World Series in eight games, 5-3.

How did it happen that a team of superstars lost, when they seemed destined to create a turn-of-the-century dynasty?

The reasons for the White Sox’ loss presents a lesson in fundamentals for the sports tech sector. Cincinnati had a 96 win and 44 loss record for the regular season, versus Chicago’s 88-52, so though the White Sox team of 1919 have survived in popular culture, their actual versus perceived superiority is very much in question.

The reason the team has survived in sports lore is of course because of the Black Sox scandal , probably the most famous example of a sport being successfully rigged in order to make money from betting.?

Cicotte, Shoeless Joe and six other members of the team were convicted for their role in the fix and banned from baseball. Shoeless Joe never did make the Hall of Fame. The story lives on in Eliot Asinof's non-fiction book Eight Men Out and the film of the same name.

For the sports tech sector the cautionary tale is one that more mature tech sectors may have already learned; just because you offer the best product it does not mean you are pre-ordained to win.

Successful innovation is innovation people want, like and use

Following a number of high profile incidents of pitchers being struck on the head by a ball hit by the batter they pitched to, Boombang created the ‘Half Cap’ .

The Half Cap was designed to feel like a normal baseball cap but provide the head with protection from batted balls. But there was a problem.?

Testing the cap in 2016 pitcher Mark Melancon praised the cap’s function but then declared “Just because the looks, I mean, being frank, it might not be something that I wear during the season. "

Seven years later and despite a licensing deal with New Era, the Half Cap is yet to see live game action.

The Half Cap is doubtlessly technologically sound (it does protect pitcher’s heads) and exists in an environment where money is spent (BoomBang’s website states the Sports Protective Equipment Market could be worth $11.3 billion by 2026). But Melancon’s feedback suggests that it is not on baseball fields because users do not love the design and therefore, even if they need it, will not use it.

The risk for innovative sports tech companies is that the fundamentals of innovation are forgotten in the romance and wide-ranging ‘need’ of the sports we all know and love. Sports tech CEOs need to consider the following during product development, even when, like the 1919 White Sox, they think they are on to a winner.

Experiment - Innovation is born from experimentation; from failing quickly, learning, failing again and ultimately developing a better product. A lack of experimentation before going to market makes it likely you do not have the best product you could have.

Test - You have something that you think people want, but do they really? How do they react when using it? How do they react when seeing it for the first time? Do people really want your innovative product? If they do not then you have an innovative product, but no audience, which means no sales. Testing must happen with the real life people you think will buy your product. You can’t know for sure until these people experience it and, if you fail to road test and get genuine reactions from real users before you launch, you could be headed for disaster.

Monetise - Do people want your product enough to pay for it? How much and can you make a profit? Is there room for business model innovation? Can you give something away to make money later, or take your product to market in a completely different and very disruptive way? This approach needs creativity and potentially behavioural change but the result can be something that’s never been done before. All of these questions are viewing innovation as a business, rather than innovation because most of us love sport and love a gadget. Having a good idea and the technological know-how to make it happen is not the same as having a credible business.

Sports tech, as we’ve already seen, is an incredibly busy sector. In the likelihood that you fail to engage with the above innovation fundamentals, it’s likely that someone else has. How will you stand out against that company? What do you have to offer, when they have been through the above process? Where are the best companies in sports tech going to come from over the next few years?

The next steps in sports tech

If you are a golf fan, what would you say the problems are with golf? What fixes could be applied to potentially make your experience as a fan or player ‘better’? Could you apply technology to those problems?

GolfShake asked their readers about the issues they felt impacted the sport . The responses were as follows;

1. Pace of play
2. Cost
3. Elitism
4. Course closures
5. Growing the game

If we were to put that into a narrative brief for sports tech companies we could say that golf needs to appeal to more people (5). It can do that by speeding up (1), costing less (2), reducing barriers to entry for golfers who are not affluent white males (3) and creating an environment which can be played anywhere on the globe, in any weather (4).

In 2024 a company called TMRW Sports will launch TGL, “an innovative golf league in partnership with the PGA TOUR fusing advanced tech and live action… The custom-built arena will combine a data-rich virtual course with a state-of-the-art short game complex. TGL will offer a high-tech, high-energy fan experience with fans sitting greenside. ”

TMRW Sports was founded by Tiger Woods, Rory McIlroy and former-NBC executive Mike McCarley. Woods and McIlroy will feature as players in TGL. The TMRW Sports website lists the company’s investors as a who’s-who of sports stars (Steph Curry, Lewis Hamilton, Alex Morgan, Andy Murray, Serena Williams, as well as “Sports Team Owners across NFL, NBA, MLB, NHL, Premier League, MLS, NWSL & Esports”).

TGL has found problems that hold golf fans and potential golf fans back from enjoying golf more. More than that, rather than trying to be a super-innovative product, TGL is combining multiple innovations to create a mega-innovation; a new sports league, built on the back of AR, wearables, biometrics, analytics, esports, smart venues, tech-based fan engagement, smart equipment and, in all likelihood, much more.

TGL ticks a huge number of boxes for what’s next in sports tech.

But there is risk. No-one has seen a TGL match. Nor has anyone (beyond the investors) been asked to pay to play or watch TGL’s brand of golf. There is still experimentation, testing and monetisation to go. There is still the chance the ‘best’ might turn out to be a flop.

Do you work in sports technology or run a sports technology business? What do you think it takes to stand out as a sports tech innovator? How do you think the sector will change in the coming years??

“We should be aware that it is no longer a matter of discussing the introduction of technology but of action and experiment. If we call this process into question, we will not be able to meet the challenges for football or the industry associated with it. Sport and the sports industry must continuous;y demonstrate its future readiness to ensure its viability.”

Dr. Peter Gorlich, 21st Century Sports: How Technologies Will Change Sports in the Digital Age