Picks&Fix
ELIZAVETA SLUZHAEVA · PRODUCT DESIGN
The review screen with the full drawing toolbox — pen, line, arrow, angle and ruler tools — a live joint-angle readout on the freeze-frame and a flagged-mistakes panel
Review the exact moment
The same review on mobile: a paused training frame with joint markers above the flagged mistakes list
Structured video feedback

Coaching,
marked
frame by frame.

SportsTech Mobile-First Two-sided product MVP
Feature validation complete · Product alpha next
Why it matters

A coaching loop is three steps.
It shouldn’t take five apps.

The coaching loop is simple: show what happened → explain what to fix → try again. Across the workflows we heard, one review could still stretch across up to five separate tools.

Before · the workflow around that loop
Receive the clip a messenger
Watch it back a video player
Capture the moment a screenshot
Mark it an image editor
Explain the fix a chat
↯The frame, annotation and explanation lose their connection across tools.
Frame, mark and explanation stay connected.
Picks&Fix One workspace
Late catch on entry
Explanation stays attached to this frame.
Frame 214 0:14 / 0:41
A coach at poolside reviewing his phone while an athlete swims — the whole review holds around one movement

The coaching wasn’t fragmented. The feedback workflow was.

What research revealed

Both sides described
the same broken workflow.

Exploratory interviews · 5 coaches + 3 athletes

Coach
One broken review workflow
Athlete
Repeats the same explanations.
Explaining the fix
Feedback buried in chat threads.
Rebuilds the review across disconnected tools.
Marking the movement
Comments lose the movement context.
Repeated explanations don’t become reusable knowledge.
Keeping the record
Past feedback is hard to revisit.

Feedback lost its context — and repeated fixes never became reusable.

Who we designed for

Two roles. One shared review.

The athlete
  • JobSubmit a training clip quickly
  • NeedsUnderstand exactly what to fix
  • ContextAround training · mobile-first
Illustration of an athlete walking with a gym bag
Two roles
One shared review
Illustration of a coach thinking, arms crossed
The coach
  • JobReview multiple clips efficiently
  • NeedsMark the exact moment and give consistent feedback
  • ContextBetween sessions · mobile-first

Different jobs. One shared review. Mobile-first for both sides.

Mobile-first for current workflows, with responsive layouts designed to scale to larger screens.

My role — Product Designer · small founding team

Product design from discovery to delivery.

I owned discovery, product framing, interaction and UI design, the design system, feature validation and design QA.

1
Discovery
Mapped the existing feedback workflow and key friction
2
Product framing & scope
Defined the core hypothesis, IA and MVP boundaries
3
Interaction design
User flows, prototypes and interaction behaviour
4
Feature validation
Tested the core review interaction with 10 coaches
5
UI & design system
Responsive patterns, states and reusable components
6
Delivery & alpha prep
Implementation alignment, design QA and preparation for product alpha
Technical awareness throughout
Constraints Feasibility Component logic Implementation alignment

My frontend background helped me evaluate constraints early, shape feasible component logic and keep implementation aligned with design.

Product decision · grounded in research

Why reviews start with mistakes — not comments.

Research insight

Coaches recognised recurring technique problems, but rewrote the explanation each time.

Product decision

Start from a reusable mistake — then personalise the fix.

Option A · Free-form
Write from scratch
→
Send
→
Repeat next time
Flexible, but repetitive and hard to reuse.
Option B · Mistake-first Chosen model
1 Select reusable mistake
→
2 Personalise
→
Attach to frame
Trade-off — requires maintaining a shared taxonomy
→
EXPECTED BENEFITS
For coaches
Less repetitive writing
Supports more consistent reviews
For the product
Shared terminology
Reusable knowledge base

Reusable structure. Personalised feedback.

VALIDATION STRATEGY

Validate the interaction first. Then test the product.

01 Discovery

Is this a real recurring problem?

Exploratory interviews · 5 coaches + 3 athletes

Key findings
Feedback loses context
Repeated fixes don’t become reusable
02 Feature validation

Can coaches use the core review interaction?

10 coaches

8/10completed the core review interaction successfully
9/10found relevant entries in the reusable mistake library
FEATURE-LEVEL EVIDENCE
Core interaction usability + mistake-library relevance
Not validated yet
Repeated real-world value of the full feedback loop
03 Product alpha · next

Will the complete feedback loop work in real use?

Need to learn
Can coaches review without falling back to chat?
Do athletes understand the fix without clarification?
Do both sides return for another review?
Where does the real workflow break?
Still deferred until alpha
Broader coach discovery & matching
Subscriptions & payments
Longitudinal progress
Scale & collaboration
MVP journey

From training clip to structured feedback.

Two roles, one asynchronous journey — from athlete submission to coach review and back.

Supporting setup
·Athlete profile·Connect with coach·Coach verification
Athlete submits
01 · Athlete
Send the clip
→
Coach builds review
02 · Coach
Accept review request
→
03 · Coach
Open submitted clip
→
04 · Coach
Review & annotate
→
05 · Coach
Select mistake + personalise
→
06 · Coach
Send review
→
Athlete receives review
07 · Athlete
Review feed
→
08 · Athlete
Detailed review
Early exploration

The risky moments came first. The UI detail followed.

Three mobile-first explorations shaped the MVP journey: send the clip, build the review, receive the feedback.

01 · Send clip
Mobile low-fidelity sketch: upload area, an uploading clip with a progress bar and the send-to-trainer action

How frictionless can clip submission be?

04–06 · Build the review
Mobile low-fidelity sketch: searching a reusable mistake, annotating the frame, adding mistake info and a personal comment before sending the feedback

How do we keep feedback structured but personal?

08 · Receive the review
Mobile low-fidelity sketch: flagged markers on the timeline, the annotated frame, a How to fix list and the mistake details

How does feedback stay easy to revisit?

The athlete experience

Send a clip, get a structured review back.

The athlete sends a training clip, receives feedback in the feed, and opens the detailed review.

Athlete mobile screen: upload your training clip, file requirements, upload progress and the send action
01 Send the clip
→
Athlete mobile screen: the feedback feed with filters and reviewed clips from coaches
02 Receive feedback
→
Athlete mobile screen: the reviewed frame with flagged moments, a How to fix list and the mistake explanation
03 Open detailed review
The coach experience

From incoming request to structured review.

The coach reviews the clip, captures key moments, reuses shared mistakes, and sends one structured review.

Review requests
01 Incoming requests
→
Review the clip
02 Find & capture key moments
→
Build the review
03 Build the review
Core interaction

Precise feedback needs a focused workspace.

After capturing a key frame, the coach can open it in fullscreen to annotate the movement with more clarity and control.

Vertical view of the captured frame
Tap fullscreen to switch to a focused landscape workspace.
More space for precise marking
Better visibility of body position and angles
Less UI clutter while annotating
Horizontal view of the captured frame Horizontal view of the captured frame
The end-to-end experience · the coach

The same loop, from the coach's side.

The coach gets verified, accepts an athlete, and resolves the clip — mistakes pulled from the shared mistake library, the review sent in one place.

Coach documents screen: upload licences and certificates, then an evaluation panel showing verification in progress.
Picks And Fix
Mistakes Community Help
2
David Keller
david.keller@gmail.com
Get verified
Upload qualifications for review.
Coach requests screen: pending and confirmed athlete requests, each with the athlete's goals and a Confirm action.
Picks And Fix
Mistakes Community Help
2
David Keller
david.keller@gmail.com
Accept an athlete
Read the request, then confirm.
Coach current-requests screen: submitted clips filtered by student and sport, each ready to observe.
Picks And Fix
Mistakes Community Help
2
David Keller
david.keller@gmail.com
Open the session
Pick a submitted clip to observe.
The coaching payoff

One clip in, structured review out.

The coach marks the movement, pulls named mistakes from the shared mistake library, and sends it — the athlete receives a structured how-to-fix, not a loose note.

Coach review screen: the frozen frame with marked joints and angle, flagged mistakes pulled from the library, a comment field and Send feedback.
Picks And Fix
Mistakes Community Help
2
Anna Pavlova
annapavlova@gmail.com
Annotate & flag
Mark joints, pick mistakes, send.
Delivered feedback screen: the marked frame, How-to-fix videos and a structured correction the athlete can revisit.
Picks And Fix
Mistakes Community Help
2
Anna Pavlova
annapavlova@gmail.com
Delivered to the athlete
A structured, reusable how-to-fix.
How it evolved in build

Three problems changed the product.
None came from a brief.

We scoped a deliberately small MVP, reviewed the workflow internally with coach feedback, and let recurring problems reshape it.

Hypothesis·Prototype·Internal review·Reusable system
01
Observed

Freehand marks read differently every time.

Marks became a shared vocabulary
Reviews can stay reusable and consistent.
02
Observed

Play-and-pause overshot the frame that mattered.

Reviewing became frame-accurate
Coaches can land on the exact moment.
03
Observed

Reviewing the clip was only one part of the feedback loop.

The review gained the workflow around it
Requests, context and delivery stay connected.

The first idea wasn’t the finished product. Three problems reshaped it.

The system behind it

One system — from identity to implementation.

I designed a reusable product language rather than isolated screens — identity, components and interaction patterns as a single vocabulary.

01Identity

Designed inside the product — it set the language the interface speaks.

Picks And Fix whistle mark
Aa
Fixed
Action
Mistake
02Components

Built once, reused across every feature — a few parts carry the whole product.

Verified coach
Knee valgus on drive
Learn more
0:28
03Patterns

The product reuses interaction logic, not just visual elements — the same behaviour repeats across features.

Search mistake→Results open→Selected
Pick tool→Active state→Marker placed
Upload clip→Processing→Ready for review
Credentials→Verified badge→Shown in search
04One language across every touchpoint

The same system carries the coach workspace, the athlete experience, coach connection and verification.

Designed once. Carried consistently into implementation.

Figma component → Variants & states → Implementation spec → Production behaviour

What exists today — and what's still open.

The responsive web app, its component library and the landing page exist and work. Feature-level validation is complete. Product alpha is next.

In the MVP
Frame-level review Shared mistake library Coach workspace Athlete session feed Design system Coach verification
Status
✔Responsive web application
✔Component library in production
✔Marketing landing page
✔Feature validation complete
◐Product alpha · next
WHAT COMES NEXT

The core interaction works. Now the full loop has to prove its value.

Product alpha will test whether coaches and athletes keep using the feedback loop in real training — without falling back to fragmented tools.

Picks&Fix