Rethinking performance measurement in esports: How games shape coaching priorities for amateur player development

Abstract

With the rising popularity of esports, the demand for effective performance assessment methods has become critical for coaching practices. Esports performance evaluation remains a complex task due to the unique demands of different games and the dynamic nature of the esports ecosystem. Additionally, the effectiveness of performance indicators in evaluating amateur players in the early stages of their careers remains unclear. To investigate this, we conduct expert interviews with head coaches of three distinct team games, Valorant, PUBG Mobile, and League of Legends, to uncover critical factors that coaches consider in evaluating amateur player performance. Our findings reveal fundamental challenges that question the validity of standardized indicators for performance measurement. Coaches highlighted that while quantitative metrics, such as in-game statistics, are commonly used in tracking player progress, they must be carefully contextualized within the unique demands of each game and the team dynamics. Moreover, coaches underscore that soft skills are as determinant as individual technical skills for fostering future career success in esports, particularly in team-based games where communication and stress management play a crucial role. These findings highlight the need for a more nuanced, coach-driven approach to performance assessment for amateur players. This exploratory study suggests that performance measurement frameworks need to account for context-dependent competencies and player career development in esports.

Keywords

Mental resilience situational awareness soft skills strategic cognition team dynamics

Overview of esports, amateur player performance, and coaching role

The esports industry is increasingly gaining popularity in terms of global interest and audience. The global esports market is forecast to reach a value of $16.7 billion in 2033.¹ The growth of the esports industry parallels the increased institutional recognition of esports as a legitimate competitive activity. The International Olympic Committee's decision to establish the Olympic Esports Games showcases the global recognition of electronic sports. Esports refers to the structured and competitive playing of video games, often organized through official leagues and ranking systems. It encompasses both amateur and professional-level participation, offering players opportunities for skill development, community engagement, and mastery in perceptual-cognitive and fine-motor abilities.² While some scholars have conceptualized esports as a competitive sport highlighting structural similarities with traditional sports, such as institutionalization, professional teams, coaches, and physical-mental demands (e.g., focus, reflexes, dexterity),^3,4 the virtual aspect of esports creates distinct differentiations.^5,6

The virtual environment of esports introduces unique challenges in performance analysis, training, and team interaction that may differ from traditional sports and necessitate nuanced understandings. Unlike traditional sports, where well-established performance evaluation systems guide talent evaluation, esports, particularly at the amateur level, still lack unified frameworks for performance measurement, leading to inconsistent evaluation practices. The rapid patches and evolving metas in esports make tracking relevant performance indicators a complex task requiring continuous and rapid follow-ups.⁷ In terms of training, players rarely engage in guided skill development and instead focus on intensive ranked play, which can lead to inefficient habits and overtraining without meaningful progression.⁸ As time spent on practice alone does not necessarily lead to improved outcomes, the quality of training becomes a critical factor in achieving high performance.⁹ Regarding team interactions, players often compete under stress and time pressure, relying on in-game voice communication. While effective declarative communication can enhance team performance,¹⁰ achieving it remains even more challenging for amateur players due to their lack of expertise. Only a few studies have examined the dynamics of skill development required for amateur esports players to reach professionalism.^11,12 In this study, we define amateur players as those who play to climb ranks and actively compete in tournaments, with the intention of transitioning to the professional scene, but who do not yet earn a living through esports; they are primarily focused on the pursuit of game expertise and excellence.^13–15

Understanding esports career development is essential to help players, coaches, and all relevant stakeholders enable career progression, maintain long-lasting careers, and ultimately ensure a sustainable and healthy esports journey for players. In this context, previous research proposed an esports career framework grounded in sports psychology, identifying four stages: initiation, development, mastery, and discontinuation.¹⁶ In the initiation phase, young players at an early age explore different games with support from friends, family, or media exposure. At the development stage, which often occurs during adolescence, players intensify their practice and dedication to a specific esports game and may receive coaching until they reach their best competence at the mastery stage, marking the transition to professional competition. Elite esports players at the mastery level often benefit from robust support structures tailored to optimize their performance.¹² However, amateur players lack structured support systems to foster their career development.¹⁶ The development stage is extremely important since it serves as a transition period from amateur to professional gaming.¹⁷

While recent literature on esports provides valuable insights into player performance and training, there is limited attention to how amateur players develop expertise and strive for excellence.^18–20 In the context of amateur esports, where much of the developmental process is self-regulated and lacks formal structures, coaches play a vital role by providing guidance that helps players focus their efforts and progress toward long-term improvement and skill acquisition. Their function includes identifying players’ potential, analyzing their gameplay, assisting them in setting personalized learning goals, and enhancing their performance.^21,22 Beyond technical inputs, coaches can also foster players’ motivation and provide well-being, social, and emotional support that are essential for players who often engage in individual unstructured practice.^8,23 The role of coaching is increasingly recognized as a critical factor in enhancing esports performance.²¹ Given the self-regulated nature of amateur esports development, performance measurement becomes crucial for goal setting, tracking progress, and tailoring coaching practices to players’ needs. Yet, despite growing research into the factors influencing player performance, there is a limited understanding of how training and coaching methods support skills development to enhance performance.²⁴

In sports science, performance measurement is a well-established concept to guide coaching and career development.²⁵ In esports, however, it remains challenging due to rapid game evolution and complex psychological demands that characterize virtual competition.^20,26,27 Several studies proposed performance measurement frameworks across game titles, most acknowledging the complexity of capturing performance in esports.^26,28 That is because performance in esports is multidimensional and encompasses not only action and outcome performance metrics (e.g., accuracy, win/loss) but also soft skills or contextual performance (e.g., adaptability, teamwork), making quantifying and standardizing performance difficult to achieve. Previous studies have proposed integrative frameworks of esports performance through different game genres, which include tactical-cognitive abilities (e.g., attention), coordination/skill (e.g., precision), psychic/mental abilities (e.g., emotional stability), social abilities (e.g., communication), and conditioning (e.g., speed).²⁷ Yet, research on skills development and performance improvement, integrating key stakeholders in esports, remains scarce.²⁹ Recent work advanced the discourse by exploring pedagogical strategies to optimize esports player performance through educational interventions, emphasizing motivational factors like autonomy support and enhanced expectancies.¹⁸ This perspective pioneers the discourse on applying motivational strategies to esports from an ecosystem perspective, emphasizing how instructors can enhance player performance via positive feedback and learner-centered environments. This study complements this educational focus by considering coaching practices, stressing the role of coaches as key actors in amateur player development.

Coaches play a critical role in evaluating amateur player performance, following up on progress, and training them for successful careers.^12,30 In traditional sports, coaches have long occupied a central role in performance assessment.³¹ Previous studies highlight the role of coaches in making decisions that guide players’ daily activities, such as training hours, training content, and factors affecting player performance.³² Although coaches are increasingly being recognized as key stakeholders in esports, their perspective on performance assessment and skills development remains under-researched.³³ This is arguably influenced by the dynamic nature of the esports world, which undergoes more frequent changes in the rule sets compared to traditional sports. Continuous game updates and shifting competitive meta force both players and coaches to stay up-to-date and adapt training approaches and game strategies.³⁴ Therefore, further research is needed to examine coaching practices, including identifying performance indicators, particularly since player performance evaluation often relies on subjective coach assessments.²² This subjectivity may be rooted in the naturalistic decision-making theory, as coaches leverage their extensive game knowledge and understanding of competitive environments to form intuitive assessments.³⁵ For this reason, understanding how coaches assess key skills and evaluate amateur player performance across different games would offer valuable insights contributing to the development of esports coaching practices. At the developmental stage, performance is often inconsistent due to varying levels of game understanding and skills. Such variability can undermine the reliability of composite game performance metrics and make them less valid for evaluating long-term potential or developmental progress. While composite performance scores could capture the multi-dimensional nature of game performance, this approach may not be appropriate for amateur players, as they lack consistency in performance compared to professional athletes. For this reason, coaches may take into account differentiated criteria for amateur players, particularly in team games where collective play is required. However, the literature on how coaches evaluate performance considering the unique demands of team games and skill development remains scarce.

In line with the above discussion, in this study, we focus on the following research questions:

RQ 1: How do coaches operationalize performance evaluation criteria for amateur players?

RQ 2: How do coaches integrate objective and subjective factors in their assessment practices?

RQ 3: What challenges do coaches encounter in measuring and fostering player amateur performance?

Method

This study adopts a qualitative exploratory research design to investigate how head coaches assess the performance of amateur players, shedding light on their coaching practices and the challenges they face. We focus on head coaches, given their central role in overseeing player development and overall team performance.²² We conducted semi-structured interviews with expert coaches in three team-based games from different genres. Although there are many different classifications of games by genre, the most popular games belong to the following categories: Multiplayer Online Battle Arenas (MOBA), First-Person Shooters (FPS), Battle Royale, Sport Simulation, and Real-Time Strategy.³⁶ We selected Valorant (FPS), PUBG Mobile (Battle Royale Shooter), and League of Legends (MOBA) because they reflect both shared challenges and game-specific nuances in performance assessment, while capturing genre diversity (strategic complexity and real-time execution), platform variation (PC and mobile), and skill differentiation (different technical and tactical demands). By engaging expert coaches from these three games, the study aims to provide preliminary insights into performance evaluation practices for amateur players, acknowledging the contextual nuances inherent to each game.

In this study, we adopt an interpretivist paradigm, which stipulates that reality is socially constructed and that meaning is interpreted within the context of interaction between researcher and participant.³⁷ This paradigm emphasizes understanding subjective meanings and context-specific experiences. Our overall analytical approach is primarily inductive, involving the data-driven identification of patterns and themes without imposing pre-existing coding frameworks.³⁸ Our aim is to explore coaches’ perspectives through open-ended, semi-structured interviews. Throughout the research process, we maintain a reflexive stance, recognizing that our positionality is dynamic and context-dependent. One author is a casual player of the selected games with familiarity with the esports culture and game metrics, while the other brings expertise in quantitative modeling and performance analytics. Our close engagement with clubs, amateur players, and coaches facilitated access to nuanced, contextually grounded insights (insider position). At the same time, our role as researchers investigating esports performance measurement and amateur coaching practices positions us as partial outsiders, providing analytical distance. We acknowledge that this interplay of positions informed how we designed the study, engaged with participants, and interpreted the data.

Participants

We employed a purposive expert sampling approach,³⁹ engaging head coaches of Valorant, PUBG Mobile, and League of Legends. Qualitative studies involving expert interviews can achieve robust insights with smaller samples when participants possess high information power, prioritizing the depth of game-specific expertise of participants.⁴⁰ In previous research, expert coaches were required to meet at least two criteria to ensure depth of expertise.³² The expert coaches recruited for the study are three male head coaches of amateur esports players, each actively coaching amateur teams competing in esports tournaments. In our study, the aim was narrow and clearly focused on how head coaches assess the performance of amateur players. The richness of dialogue was achieved through semi-structured interviews, during which coaches provided detailed, reflective accounts grounded in their practical coaching experiences. To ensure sample specificity, we selected coaches who exclusively work with amateur teams and who met at least four of six pre-defined expertise criteria, providing deep, context-specific knowledge. We adapted these criteria for the amateur player context:

C1: Membership in or affiliation with a professional or semi-professional esports organization.

C2: Demonstrable expertise in training and performance management in esports.

C3: Experience coaching at the amateur level.

C4: Prior engagement in esports team management.

C5: Familiarity with performance evaluation frameworks (quantitative or qualitative).

C6: Academic or practical training in fields relevant to skill development (e.g., psychology, health, sports science).

Table 1 provides the criteria and background of the participants:

Table 1.

Participant eligibility criteria and professional background.

Criteria	PUBGM coach	LOL coach	Valorant coach
C1: Team Affiliation	✔	✔	✔
C2: Training Expertise	✔	✔	✔
C3: Amateur Coaching Experience	✔	✔	✔
C4: Team Management	✔	❌	❌
C5: Performance Frameworks	✔	✔	✔
C6: Other Relevant Training	❌	❌	✔
Total Years as Head Coaches	4	6	4
Total Years Coaching Amateur Players	6	7.5	4

All participating coaches have extensive experience coaching amateur players. and met four core criteria: team affiliation (C1), training expertise (C2), coaching experience (C3), and proficiency in performance frameworks (C5) (see Table 1). The coaches had total amateur coaching experience ranging from 4 to 7.5 years. For team management (C4), the PUBGM coach held official responsibilities in team operations, including player recruitment. Regarding the performance frameworks (C5), all coaches systematically applied structured evaluation methods, including daily checks of quantitative in-game metrics, the use of dedicated performance-tracking apps to monitor player statistics, and qualitative tactical and decision-making analyses through replay reviews. Additionally, each coach develops individualized progress plans focused on both technical and strategic skill advancement. The Valorant coach has a 4-year tenure with formal training in health (C6). Collectively, these specific criteria strengthen the operational and evaluative expertise of the selected coaches, ensuring that their perspectives are deeply rooted in the context of amateur performance development, aligning with the focus of our study.

Research design

Figure 1 illustrates the research design. We prepared semi-structured interview questions and performance metric lists tailored to each game to explore coaching practices and how coaches assess both quantitative and qualitative performance. The initial performance metrics lists were developed through a synthesis of multiple academic sources,^29,41–47 official developer data portals, and esports analytics platforms. These preliminary lists were further refined through consultations with an esports club to enhance practical applicability. We conducted the interviews and applied thematic analysis to identify common themes. As part of exploring performance metrics across games, we provided the coaches with a common list of 10 metrics based on the selected games (e.g., accuracy, map awareness) (see the Supplemental Material) and asked them to rank the metrics based on their perceived importance in evaluating amateur player performance, and were encouraged to provide insights regarding the applicability of these metrics in their respective games. This approach allows a better understanding of how coaches operationalize and evaluate amateur player performance within diverse competitive contexts.

Figure 1.

Research design flowchart.

Procedure

The study employs semi-structured interviews to investigate how expert coaches assess amateur player performance. Semi-structured interviews offer a balance between structure and flexibility, allowing the use of a pre-defined guide with focused but open-ended questions while still enabling participants to elaborate on their own experiences and perspectives, which helps explore new insights as the conversation progresses.^48,49 This approach is particularly suitable for our study, as it ensures consistency across interviews while providing space for coaches to discuss nuanced practices and context-specific performance assessments. Following ethical approval from our university, the interviews were conducted online in October 2024 with sessions lasting 60–75 min. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim.³⁸ Informed consent was obtained from all participating head coaches prior to the interviews. Thematic analysis was used to analyze the collected data and identify common themes related to key performance measurements for amateur players.

The semi-structured interview questions are provided in the Supplemental Material. The main interview topics include general information about the coach (e.g., “Could you introduce yourself and share your experience in esports coaching?”), skill identification (“What do you consider the most critical skills for success in your game?”), performance measurement (“What specific factors or indicators do you use to assess player performance?”), game-specific performance measurement challenges (“What challenges have you encountered in assessing the performance of amateur players?”), metric integration (“How do you consolidate diverse performance evaluation criteria into a unified assessment?”). Finally, coaches were asked to rank a list of performance metrics for their respective games and provide insights into their relative importance. We conducted an inductive, semantic thematic analysis involving both authors collaboratively in the coding process. Coding was conducted independently by both authors on the same subset of transcripts to establish a shared initial set of codes. This collaborative step enabled calibration of interpretations and refinement of code definitions through discussion. The first author then applied this evolving code set to the remaining transcripts, generating and refining codes in an iterative manner. Throughout this process, both authors engaged in regular discussions to compare interpretations, resolve discrepancies, and group related ideas into potential themes and subthemes, documenting these decisions and insights through analytic memoing. This collaborative dialogue supported the refinement of codes, the grouping of related ideas, and the inductive development of themes and subthemes. This reflexive, dialogic process aligns with Braun and Clarke's conceptualization of researcher subjectivity as a resource and provides multiple interpretive lenses to enhance analytical rigor.⁵⁰ We therefore acknowledge that the analysis is inherently shaped by the authors’ subjective perspectives and experiences, which informed the interpretation of data. Themes were considered sufficiently developed when they were internally coherent, distinct from other themes, and supported by multiple data extracts.³⁸ The refinement process involved iterative clustering of related codes, discarding those with limited evidential support or weak relevance to the research focus, and merging overlapping themes.

Findings and discussion

Through our active, interpretive analysis of interviews with esports coaches of Valorant, PUBGM, and LoL, we derived key insights into how head coaches evaluate amateur player performance, the critical skills required, and the challenges of performance measurement. We organized these insights into three interconnected themes: (1) skills prioritization, (2) coaching practices, and (3) performance evaluation challenges. A summary of the thematic analysis is provided in the Supplemental Materials.

Skills prioritization

In the theme of skills prioritization, we introduce coaches’ perspectives on the key skills they expect and prioritize for amateur players. Coaches highlighted that mental resilience, strategic thinking, and situational awareness are critical skills required for amateur players. Although all coaches emphasized non-technical skills, they operationalized them differently based on game mechanics, as summarized in Table 2.

Table 2.

Game-Specific skill prioritization identified by coaches.

Game	Primary skill	Operational definition
Valorant	Mental resilience	Adaptability under round-based pressure
LoL	Strategic cognition	Macro-level objective control and prediction
PUBGM	Situational awareness and strategic thinking	Anticipating multi-team tactics in survival contexts

In Valorant, where players must execute tactical maneuvers in real-time, the Valorant coach cited mental resilience on multiple occasions as the defining factor of amateur player success:

“Players with strong mental resilience are usually able to find the best and most positive way out of tough situations (…) Players with strong mental resilience can turn around a match they are losing 2-0 and come back to win 3-2.” (Valorant Coach)

The emphasis on anticipation and long-term strategy was emphasized by the LoL coach, giving the example of strategic decision-making being a cognitive skill more valuable than reaction speed. Additionally, the coach hinted that mental stability might be the most important skill of amateur players. However, he acknowledged that achieving and maintaining mental stability is particularly challenging in the esports environment.

“Yes, reaction skills do make a difference, but fundamentally, it's more about thinking in advance and predicting situations (…) Maybe the real skill lies there (mental stability). But I think mental stability is the hardest thing to achieve in this industry.” (LoL Coach)

In PUBGM, situational awareness is essential due to the large-scale Battle Royale. The coach emphasized the importance of anticipation and strategic thinking:

“They (players) must anticipate what each team might do, how they might position themselves, and what tactics they could use (…) PUBGM requires a lot of strategic thinking. Players need strong foresight and the ability to read the game well.” (PUBGM Coach)

Overall, the findings suggest that cognitive and strategic abilities are fundamental skills highly emphasized by esports coaches in evaluating amateur player performance. The subjective, non-mechanical factors, such as mental resilience, teamwork, and strategic thinking, were considered by coaches as critical skills required for amateur players, which can differentiate players and be developed through practice and assessed during evaluations. Our study suggests that some of the subjective factors are also shaped by the unique demands of each game. For instance, the Valorant coach prioritized mental resilience, the LoL coach emphasized strategic cognition, and the PUBGM coach focused on situational awareness. While all three skill domains were present across the titles, their relative emphasis varied according to the distinctive contextual and tactical demands of each game, which are likely to shape different performance requirements.

The emphasis placed by coaches on mental resilience, strategic cognition, and situational awareness provides insight into how skills are enacted and prioritized within competitive esports environments. Resilience is recognized in sport psychology as a critical factor enabling athletes to sustain performance under pressure and adapt constructively to setbacks.^51,52 In esports, resilience has been identified as a significant psychological factor influencing performance and competitive success and playing a protective role against burnout.^53,54 Strategic cognition, particularly prediction and objective control, reflects players’ ability to anticipate future game states and coordinate decisions across multiple strategic layers.⁵⁵ Effective coaching can foster cognitive skills through targeted training, helping players develop foresight and execute complex strategies effectively under pressure.⁵⁶ Situational awareness depends on the perception of key environmental cues, comprehension of their meaning, and projection of future states.⁵⁷ Along with strategic thinking, situational awareness can play a central role in player performance.⁵³ At the same time, elements of adaptive behavior, such as adjusting map positioning and quick responses to changing environments, resonate with ecological dynamics, which emphasizes the emergence of skill through perception–action couplings within dynamic constraints.^11,58 These perspectives suggest that the skills emphasized by coaches reflect a combination of cognitive processes and behavioral adaptations shaped by the specific environmental demands of different esports titles. However, understanding these skill demands requires situating them within the broader structures that enable their development. In this regard, the Esports High-Performance Model offers a useful framework, highlighting how training environments, interpersonal dynamics, and intrapersonal development collectively shape the conditions for skill development.²³

Coaching practices

This theme describes coaches’ day-to-day practices and the strategies they use to foster amateur players, including evaluation methods, training approaches, and player support. Coaches play a critical role in shaping a player's performance, especially for amateur players who require continuous monitoring for skill development. All head coaches highlighted that coaching practices involve structured evaluation methods, training programs, and psychological support.

Talent Identification and Selection: The selection process begins with observational assessments of young amateur players. Coaches emphasized that, beyond game-based skills, they evaluate raw talent, team dynamics, and social skills:

“There are many young talents (…) Our trials primarily focus on identifying the child's talent (…) Can they reach a certain level? What potential do they have? Do we see a spark in them?” (Valorant Coach)

“(Selection process) the preliminary test is to observe performance, especially dynamics with the team. (…) I also observe players during training sessions.” (LoL Coach)

“That's why, when selecting players, we first observe them outside the game. Their social skills, their ability to communicate with others…” (PUBGM Coach)

Training and Performance Monitoring: Following selection, players undergo training programs that focus on both technical and strategic development. Regular performance tracking is a common practice across all three games.

In Valorant, the coach emphasized regular performance analyses and monitoring:

“We conduct weekly and monthly analyses based on the roles they play (…), They (players) have individual training sessions, team training, and a cooldown period at the end of the day where they play more casually (…) for example, we check their average number of entry kills and how often they win 1v1 duels.” (Valorant Coach)

In LoL, the coach highlighted the combination of both data-driven evaluation and subjective assessment:

“Beyond statistics, the player's character in the game is important, and how they feel while playing, which inevitably affects their self-confidence and performance.” (LoL Coach)

The PUBGM coach stated that due to the large-scale format of the game, training focuses more on strategic thinking rather than technical skills:

“PUBGM requires a lot of strategic thinking (…) (about technical skills) We evaluate each aspect of the game separately. Because the data we receive contains too many different metrics.” (PUBGM Coach)

Well-being Support: Coaches acknowledged the potential psychological and physical challenges young amateur players face. They mentioned players’ mental well-being (e.g., stress management, mental stability) and physical well-being (e.g., sleep and nutrition) as part of coaching responsibilities:

“Some teams have psychologists to ensure both team chemistry and overall mental well-being. We try to do our best in this regard (…) Poor performance can also stem from factors such as sleep patterns, nutrition, and the amount of time dedicated to the game.” (Valorant Coach)

“the mental and character traits of players tend to be more unstable (tilt) (…) Since every player is different, the way you approach them varies and needs have to be addressed individually (…) Even their eating habits affect their behavior.” (LoL Coach)

“When a player has a mental breakdown, working with them becomes mentally and psychologically exhausting for everyone (…) but these skills can be learned over time, with practice and training.” (PUBGM Coach)

The findings show that coaches of amateur teams track the performance of players on a regular basis through in-game statistics and metric analysis. Their approach considers the needs of each player individually, including monitoring their mental state, physical well-being, and how they operate in team dynamics. Recent studies have highlighted the importance of this comprehensive approach. Players often experience high levels of anxiety, burnout, and gaming addiction, yet many lack access to mental health support.⁵⁹ This underscores the need for coaches to monitor and support players’ mental well-being alongside their technical performance. Moreover, the consideration of team dynamics in coaching practices is crucial since team cohesion significantly impacts performance outcomes in esports.⁶⁰ Collectively, these practices suggest that while esports coaching dynamics are unique, they also mirror patterns observed in traditional sports, particularly the importance of integrating team processes such as communication and cohesion alongside considerations of individual and social dimensions.⁶¹

Challenges in performance measurement

This theme outlines the difficulties coaches encounter when assessing amateur players’ performance and potential. The coaches highlighted a common challenge, which is quantifying player performance using consolidated metrics. They emphasized that in-game statistics such as kill counts and win rates can provide some insight into player skills. Although coaches track game-based metrics to monitor performance and progression, they remain skeptical about their ability to capture players’ potential for growth and contribution to team success.

In Valorant, the coach emphasized a strategic approach to performance evaluation, focused on adaptation to different scenarios over numerical indicators:

“Each player's role is analyzed individually, how they perform in various scenarios, what they contribute when defending or attacking. Rather than just focusing on in-game statistics, we take a broader strategic approach.” (Valorant Coach)

LoL coach highlighted the interrelationship between quantitative metrics and the mental state of players, and a holistic approach in performance assessment:

“There are many parameters (for performance measurement) like scores, win rates, which affect self-confidence (…) We bring all of this data together, we observe the player's performance by examining everything.” (LoL Coach)

Similarly, in PUBGM, the coach mentioned that some game metrics for performance measurement can even be misleading, highlighting that performance should rather be evaluated holistically:

“Sometimes, those stats can be misleading (…) Some players focus on supporting their team and covering weaknesses. We could make comparisons based on these attributes.” (PUBGM Coach)

These findings reveal a fundamental tension in amateur esports coaching: the reliance on quantitative metrics provides concrete feedback but risks oversimplifying complex, context-dependent player contributions. The coaches caution against over-reliance on statistical indicators for talent identification and performance forecasting. They underscore the need for more holistic and dynamic approaches to evaluating amateur talent, integrating mental, social, and strategic dimensions that are not easily captured in standard metrics. This finding aligns with traditional sports literature, stating that while objective measures are valuable, they must be complemented by subjective assessments to capture psychological, social, and strategic qualities that influence player performance and growth.^62,63 Similarly, esports coaches in our study emphasize the need for holistic evaluation, integrating mental resilience, adaptability, and teamwork, highlighting these factors as critical yet difficult to quantify. This also suggests that current frameworks for performance measurement may need adaptation when applied to early-stage player development, where individual growth trajectories and contextual factors play a larger role than in later professional stages. Research in esports supports the necessity of adapting traditional talent frameworks to account for the dynamic, cognitively demanding nature of competitive gaming.⁶⁴ Despite these concerns, coaches agree that tracking quantitative performance indicators remains indispensable for coaching amateur players. However, combining different indicators requires an expert judgment of coaches, as many factors (e.g., character, mental resilience, covering weaknesses, team communication, adaptability) observed within the team games remain dependent on the subjective assessment of coaches, as they are difficult to quantify. In practice, coaches’ experience-based judgments draw on intuition and accumulated situational knowledge, enabling them to evaluate and guide players’ decision-making in complex and uncertain game contexts.⁶⁵ Thus, while tracking quantitative performance remains indispensable in amateur esports coaching, these findings underscore the importance of a multidimensional approach to talent identification and development, reinforcing the broader call for multidimensional approaches in player assessment.²³

The lack of a universal performance measurement system makes it challenging to standardize coaching practices. The coaches’ feedback on the consolidated metrics list revealed some shared priorities and differences. In Valorant, Map control is team-dependent, affecting tactical positioning and engagements. The LoL coach prioritizes Map control and Engagement time, followed by Kill count, Damage dealt, and Reaction time. He emphasized that Accuracy, however, is not significant in MOBA games as it is in FPS games. The coach commented that LoL can be compared to a chess game: “Controlling the center and developing pieces is crucial, in League, where you are on the map and how much space you control is fundamental.” For PUBGM, the coach ranked first Reaction time and Accuracy, followed by Damage dealt and Survival time. However, the Kill/Death count does not apply as players can only die once, and the Win rate is not relevant. Overall, coaches of the three games prioritize Reaction time and Damage dealt, although they are operationalized differently across games. The other metrics varied in importance based on the game characteristics. Although coaches emphasize some common performance principles (e.g., communication) for team games and some common metrics (e.g., reaction time), coaches do not use any standardized or consolidated performance formula. A fully standardized evaluation system for amateur players, even for a single game, seems not applicable. This is because assessing performance relies on the perspective of each coach, which in turn depends on the individual skills of players and the overall team dynamics.

Outcome and composite performance scores have been discussed as valuable approaches for capturing esports performance and potentially distinguishing expertise levels.²⁶ Our study highlights that for amateur players, coaches emphasize holistic, experiential, and context-specific judgments, suggesting that quantitative metrics alone may not fully capture the nuances of amateur performance assessment. For professional players, performance metrics may serve for prediction and strategy development, for example, analyzing opponent play style and comparisons.^9,41 In contrast, coaches of amateur players often use performance metrics for talent identification and following up on their progress. The head coaches interviewed in this study highlighted the specific performance metrics they prioritize for each game to track progression while emphasizing that subjective factors are more important for players to reach excellence. Overall, our findings highlight the importance of context-sensitive assessment in evaluating player performance, reflecting how coaches adapt evaluations to game-specific demands. Therefore, performance evaluation should integrate both quantitative metrics and qualitative, context-sensitive assessments to capture the richness of player development. This integrated approach can inform the design of more representative training methods and support amateur players’ progression toward higher levels of expertise.

Strengths and limitations

This study provides valuable practice-based insights into the understudied area of coaching practices in esports. Understanding how performance is assessed at the player's development stage is critical for nurturing future esports elite players. A key strength of this study lies in its focus on amateur players, an important yet underexplored group who are forming foundational skills to reach excellence. Through semi-structured interviews with coaches, this study sheds light on the criteria they emphasize when evaluating amateur player performance, providing a rich, contextually grounded perspective on coaching practices. However, the study has some limitations. This exploratory qualitative study prioritizes depth and contextual understanding by engaging three expert coaches selected through rigorous criteria for their specialized knowledge of amateur esports coaching. Given that these coaches are individuals working within specific game contexts, their assessments may reflect subjective experiences and situational factors unique to their respective games. However, these game-specific perspectives provide rich, nuanced insights into coaching practices that are highly relevant to each esports context. Another limitation is the absence of other ecosystem actors (e.g., team managers, educators, and players themselves), which narrows the scope of the perspectives represented and constrains the comprehensiveness of the study's insights.

Recommendations for future research

Based on the study's findings, limitations, and current literature gaps, we propose several future research areas. First, developing and validating frameworks for assessing subjective factors, including social and mental abilities (e.g., communication, emotional resilience, stress management), and how they are operationalized across games. These aspects are particularly relevant in team-based games. Second, considering holistic ecosystem approaches that integrate the expertise of key stakeholders (e.g., coaches, educators, analysts, psychologists) to collaboratively support amateur players in their career development to reach excellence. Third, conducting longitudinal studies by tracking amateur players’ career progression over time using qualitative methods to observe how evaluation criteria and developmental needs evolve. Finally, investigating how coaching practices adapt to the evolving requirements of games and the dynamic competitive landscape in esports represents another important area to explore. By pursuing these research avenues, researchers can build on the present study's findings to advance sustainable talent development where coaching plays a central role.

Conclusion

Coaches play a pivotal role in the esports ecosystem since they fundamentally shape esports players’ careers. They identify promising players, assess their skills, follow their progress, monitor their mental and physical well-being, and develop them through targeted and structured training and evaluation processes. This study reveals that head coaches across different games (Valorant, PUBGM, and LoL) emphasize the importance of individual skills and team dynamics, in addition to the mental abilities of players. Coaches incorporate both quantitative metrics (e.g., outcome performance indicators) and subjective assessments of mental abilities (e.g., mental resilience) in evaluating amateur player performance. By examining coaching perspectives, this study contributes to the growing discourse on esports coaching practices and talent development, providing a foundation for future research on developing adaptive coaching frameworks to optimize performance, taking into account the unique needs of amateur esports players.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-spo-10.1177_17479541251378643 - Supplemental material for Rethinking performance measurement in esports: How games shape coaching priorities for amateur player development

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-spo-10.1177_17479541251378643 for Rethinking performance measurement in esports: How games shape coaching priorities for amateur player development by Maryam El Oraiby and Meltem Kiygi-Calli in International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-2-spo-10.1177_17479541251378643 - Supplemental material for Rethinking performance measurement in esports: How games shape coaching priorities for amateur player development

Supplemental material, sj-docx-2-spo-10.1177_17479541251378643 for Rethinking performance measurement in esports: How games shape coaching priorities for amateur player development by Maryam El Oraiby and Meltem Kiygi-Calli in International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-3-spo-10.1177_17479541251378643 - Supplemental material for Rethinking performance measurement in esports: How games shape coaching priorities for amateur player development

Supplemental material, sj-docx-3-spo-10.1177_17479541251378643 for Rethinking performance measurement in esports: How games shape coaching priorities for amateur player development by Maryam El Oraiby and Meltem Kiygi-Calli in International Journal of Sports Science & Coaching

Footnotes

Authors’ contributions

All authors helped to design and conceive the project. All authors were involved in data collection and analysis and contributed to the writing and revision of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Data availability statement

The participants of this study did not give written consent for their data to be shared publicly; therefore, due to the sensitive nature and identifiable features of the research, and for ethical obligations, supporting data is not available.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Ethical declarations

The research was conducted with ethical clearance from Kadir Has University Human Research Ethics Committee, under approval number E-17446481-600-105889.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Participant consent

All participants provided informed consent to be involved in the study.

ORCID iDs

Maryam El Oraiby

Meltem Kiygi-Calli

Supplemental material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Market.us . eSports market size worldwide from 2023 to 2033 (in billion U.S. dollars). Statista, https://www.statista.com/statistics/1256162/global-esports-market-size/ (2024, accessed 7 March 2025).

Pedraza-Ramirez

Musculus

Raab

, et al. Setting the scientific stage for esports psychology: a systematic review. Int Rev Sport Exerc Psychol 2020; 13: 319–352.

Funk

Pizzo

Baker

. Esport management: embracing eSport education and research opportunities. Sport Manage Rev 2018; 21: 7–13.

Hamari

Sjöblom

. What is eSports and why do people watch it? Internet Res 2017; 27: 211–232.

Parry

Giesbrecht

. Esports, real sports and the Olympic virtual series. J Philos Sport 2023; 50: 208–228.

Hallmann

Giel

. Esports–competitive sports or recreational activity? Sport Manage Rev 2018; 21: 14–20.

Chitayat

Block

Walker

, et al. Beyond the meta: leveraging game design parameters for patch-agnostic esport analytics. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment 2023; 19: 116–125.

Abbott

Watson

Birch

. Perceptions of effective training practices in league of legends: a qualitative exploration. Journal of Electronic Gaming and Esports 2022; 1: 1–11.

Pluss

Novak

Bennett

, et al. The relationship between the quantity of practice and in-game performance during practice with tournament performance in esports: an eight-week study. J Sport Exerc Sci 2021; 5: 69–76.

10.

Maier

. Talking to win: the impact of communication on performance in esports. Journal of Electronic Gaming and Esports 2024; 2: –8.

11.

Bubna

Trotter

Watson

, et al. Coaching and talent development in esports: a theoretical framework and suggestions for future research. Front Psychol 2023; 14: 1191801.

12.

Hong

. Esports: the need for a structured support system for players. Eur Sport Manage Q 2023; 23: 1430–1453.

13.

Montag

Schivinski

Kannen

, et al. Investigating gaming disorder and individual differences in gaming motives among professional and non-professional gamers: An empirical study. Addict Behav 2022; 134: 107416.

14.

Wechsle

Bickmann

Rudolf

, et al. Comparison of multiple object tracking performance between professional and amateur eSport players as well as traditional sportsmen. Int J ESports Res 2021; 1: 1–17.

15.

Poulus

Sharpe

Jackman

, et al. Defining elite esports athletes: a scoping review. Int Rev Sport Exerc Psychol 2024: 1–36. doi:10.1080/1750984X.2024.2386531

16.

Salo

. Career transitions of eSports athletes: a proposal for a research framework. In: Research anthology on business strategies, health factors, and ethical implications in sports and eSports. Pennsylvania: IGI Global, 2021, pp.478–490.

17.

Meng-Lewis

Wong

Zhao

, et al. Understanding complexity and dynamics in the career development of eSports athletes. Sport Manage Rev 2022; 25: 106–133.

18.

Iwatsuki

Hagiwara

Dugan

. Effectively optimizing esports performance through movement science principles. Int J Sports Sci Coach 2022; 17: 202–207.

19.

Sharpe

Leis

Moore

, et al. Reappraisal and mindset interventions on pressurised esport performance. Appl Psychol 2024; 73: 2178–2199.

20.

Poulus

Coulter

Trotter

, et al. A qualitative analysis of the perceived determinants of success in elite esports athletes. J Sports Sci 2022; 40: 742–753.

21.

Watson

Trotter

Laborde

, et al. I don’t believe any qualifications are required: exploring global Stakeholders’ perspectives towards the developmental experiences of esports coaches. Education Sciences 2025; 15: 858.

22.

Sabtan

Cao

Paul

. Current practice and challenges in coaching esports players: an interview study with league of legends professional team coaches. Entertain Comput 2022; 42: 100481.

23.

Poulus

Jackman

Fransen

, et al. An exploration of high-performance environments in esports: a preliminary model. J Sports Sci 2025: 1–26. doi:10.1080/02640414.2025.2533538

24.

Trotter

Coulter

Davis

, et al. Social support, self-regulation, and psychological skill use in e-athletes. Front Psychol 2021; 12: 722030.

25.

Atkinson

Nevill

. Selected issues in the design and analysis of sport performance research. J Sports Sci 2001; 19: 811–827.

26.

Sharpe

Besombes

Welsh

, et al. Indexing esport performance. Journal of Electronic Gaming and Esports 2022; 1: 1–13.

27.

Manikandan

Madduri

Irby

, et al. Predicting the onset of acute performance decline in esports. Comput Hum Behav 2025; 168: 108648

28.

Nagorsky

Wiemeyer

. The structure of performance and training in esports. PLoS ONE 2020; 15: e0237584.

29.

Novak

Bennett

Pluss

, et al. Performance analysis in esports: modelling performance at the 2018 league of legends world championship. Int J Sports Sci Coach 2020; 15: 809–817.

30.

Vickery

Bhardwaj

Feros

, et al. A case study of behaviour: differences between a head coach and player-coach. Int J Sports Sci Coach 2023; 18: 1295–1306.

31.

McCormack

Jones

Elliott

, et al. Coaches’ assessment of players physical performance: subjective and objective measures are needed when profiling players. Eur J Sport Sci 2022; 22: 1177–1187.

32.

Sanz-Matesanz

García

GMG

Aranda

LMM

. Health and performance questionnaire in esports from the coaches’ point of view: design and validation using the delphi method. Retos 2024; 56: 408–418.

33.

Watson

Smith

Fenton

, et al. Introducing esports coaching to sport coaching (not as sport coaching). Sports Coach Rev 2022; 14: 1–20.

34.

Thaicharoen

Gow

Drachen

. An ecosystem framework for the meta in esport games. Journal of Electronic Gaming and Esports 2023; 1: 1–14.

35.

Klein

. Naturalistic decision making. Hum Factors 2008; 50: 456–460.

36.

Jang

Byon

. Antecedents and consequences associated with esports gameplay. Int J Sports Mark Sponsorship 2020; 21: 1–22.

37.

Schwandt

. Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry. In: Handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1994, pp.118–137.

38.

Braun

Clarke

. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual Res Psychol 2006; 3: 77–101.

39.

Campbell

Greenwood

Prior

, et al. Purposive sampling: complex or simple? Research case examples. J Res Nurs 2020; 25: 652–661.

40.

Malterud

Siersma

Guassora

. Sample size in qualitative interview studies: guided by information power. Qual Health Res 2016; 26: 1753–1760.

41.

Bahrololloomi

Klonowski

Sauer

, et al. E-sports player performance metrics for predicting the outcome of league of legends matches considering player roles. SN Comput Sci 2023; 4: 238.

42.

Lee

Nallapati

, et al. Characterizing and quantifying expert input behavior in League of Legends. In: Proceedings of the CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems; 2024: pp.1–21.

43.

Maymin

. Smart kills and worthless deaths: eSports analytics for league of legends. J Quant Anal Sports 2021; 17: 11–27.

44.

Roldan

Prasetyo

. Evaluating the effects of aim lab training on Filipino Valorant players’ shooting accuracy. In: 2021 IEEE 8th International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Applications (ICIEA); 2021: pp.465–470.

45.

Wang

Dormann

Wallner

. A Feature Comparison Study of Live Companion Tools for Esports Games. In: Proceedings of the 19th International Conference on the Foundations of Digital Games; 2024: pp.1–11.

46.

Rokad

Karumudi

Acharya

, et al. Survival of the Fittest in PlayerUnknown BattleGround. arXiv preprint 2019: arXiv:1905.06052.

47.

Aggarwal

Gautam

Malik

, et al. Rank prediction in PUBG: a multiplayer online battle royale game. In: Emerging technologies in data mining and information security: proceedings of IEMIS 2020, volume 2. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, 2021, pp.859–867.

48.

Smith

Sparkes

. Interviews: qualitative interviewing in the sport and exercise sciences. In: Routledge handbook of qualitative research in sport and exercise. London, UK: Routledge, 2016, pp.125–145.

49.

Magaldi

Berler

. Semi-structured interviews. In: Encyclopedia of personality and individual differences. Cham: Springer, 2018, pp.1–6.

50.

Braun

Clarke

. Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qual Res Sport Exerc Health 2019; 11: 589–597.

51.

Sarkar

Fletcher

. Psychological resilience in sport performers: a review of stressors and protective factors. J Sports Sci 2014; 32: 1419–1434.

52.

Sarkar

Page

. Developing individual and team resilience in elite sport: research to practice. J Sport Psychol Action 2022; 13: 40–53.

53.

Papp

Burján

Csukonyi

. Exploratory study of qualitative psychological factors influencing performance in esports. Front Sports Act Living 2025; 7: 1505409.

54.

Poulus

Sargeant

Zarate

, et al. Burnout profiles among esports players: associations with mental toughness and resilience. J Sports Sci 2024; 42: 1685–1694.

55.

Maier

Alzahabi

Sharpe

, et al. The React-Predict-Manipulate Model: A Proposed Theoretical Hierarchy of Decision Making in Competitive Environments. Journal of Electronic Gaming and Esports 2024; 2: –7.

56.

Sharpe

Birch

. Psychology of esports special issue: a catalyst for change. Journal of Electronic Gaming and Esports 2025; 2: 1–8.

57.

Endsley

. Final reflections: situation awareness models and measures. J Cogn Eng Decis Mak 2015; 9: 101–111.

58.

Seifert

Davids

. Ecological dynamics: a theoretical framework for understanding sport performance, physical education and physical activity. In: First complex systems digital campus world e-conference 2015. Cham: Springer, 2016, pp.29–40.

59.

Poulus

Nicholson

Obine

, et al. The State of Mental Health Research in Esports: A Scoping Review. ResearchGate; 2024. Available from: https://shorturl.at/1h7Tb.

60.

Tang

. Understanding esports from the perspective of team dynamics. Sport J 2018; 21: 1–14.

61.

Gisbert-Pérez

García-Naveira

Martí-Vilar

, et al. Key structure and processes in esports teams: a systematic review. Curr Psychol 2024; 43: 20355–20374.

62.

Abbott

Collins

. Eliminating the dichotomy between theory and practice in talent identification and development: considering the role of psychology. J Sports Sci 2004; 22: 395–408.

63.

Till

Baker

. Challenges and [possible] solutions to optimizing talent identification and development in sport. Front Psychol 2020; 11: 664.

64.

Poulus

Bennett

Swann

, et al. The influence of an esports-adapted coping effectiveness training (E-CET) on resilience, mental health, and subjective performance among elite league of legends players: a pilot study. Psychol Sport Exerc 2023; 69: 102510.

65.

Pedraza-Ramirez

Musculus

Raab

, et al. Zooming in on decision making in esports: exploring the perceptions of expert players and coaches. Sport Exerc Perform Psychol 2025; 14: 335–351.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.01 MB

0.02 MB