Can I bill students for AceSense reviews?

Yes — and most async coaches do. The standard model is a flat per-review fee (€25–€75 depending on your rate), which covers your time annotating the report and writing your notes. The report does the per-shot grunt work; you do the coaching judgement. Many coaches also bundle a monthly AceSense + 30-minute video call package.

What format do I get the video / report in?

Your student uploads to their phone, AceSense generates the report (PDF + per-shot timestamped video), and they share it with you via the app's share sheet — email, Drive link, or AirDrop. You don't need an AceSense account to receive a report; only to generate one. Coach roster accounts are on the 2026 roadmap.

How is this different from my current Loom-style review workflow?

The difference is the pre-annotation. Your student sends you a 60-minute match video; AceSense returns a per-shot timeline you can click through in 5 minutes instead of scrubbing for 30. You still do voice-over coaching, you still record your reaction — you just spend the time on the coaching itself, not on finding the moments worth coaching. For most async coaches the time-saving is 4x to 6x.

What about the [reputable online stroke analysis](https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/reputable-online-stroke-analysis.610095/) discussion — how does AceSense compare to those services?

Those services are a coach reviewing your video for $30–$100 a clip. They're great if you want a specific human's eye. AceSense is the *layer underneath* — it gives the coach the per-shot data so the human review is faster and more specific. Many of the coaches reviewing on those forums use AceSense as their pre-process tool. We're not competing with them; we're the substrate.

Will the report's stroke-quality score override my coaching?

No, and don't let it. The pose-based score is calibrated against a broad pro baseline. If you're working on a non-classical technique with a student, the model may flag it. Use the heatmap, shot-mix, and bounce-zone data as objective; treat the technique score as a prompt for you to either confirm or override on the call. The report is your tool, not your replacement.

AceSense for Coaches Doing Async / Remote Video Review

If you review tennis students remotely between lessons, AceSense pre-processes the video — per-shot annotations, heatmap, stroke quality — so you spend the hour on coaching, not clipping.

You're a coach who reviews tennis video remotely. Maybe it's your full business model — students worldwide, video in, voice-over feedback out, no court time. Maybe it's a side channel — your in-person students send you their tournament matches between lessons, you Loom over them on a Sunday. Either way, the bottleneck is the same: the finding phase. The student sends you a 60-minute match. You scrub, you clip, you find the three forehands worth talking about, you start recording your review. Two hours of your time disappear before you say a word about coaching.

AceSense exists to take that two hours and make it twenty minutes. This page is how.

The persona this page is for

You'll get value from AceSense as an async coach if:

You review video remotely for at least a handful of students per week.
You bill for review time (or the review time is a meaningful fraction of your overall coaching revenue).
Your students are NTRP 3.0–4.5 or junior tournament level — the technical baseline AceSense is calibrated to.
You don't have an in-house video team doing your clipping for you.

If you're a tour coach with a sports-science staff, this isn't your tool. If you only do in-person and never touch async, this is also not your tool — see /use-cases/junior-coaches for the in-person homework loop.

Why this gap exists

The Talk Tennis thread on reputable online stroke analysis shows the demand side of this market: amateur players actively seeking remote coaches, willing to pay €30–€100 per video review. The bottleneck has always been the coach's time per review, which is dominated not by coaching but by clipping. AceSense compresses the clipping.

The Talk Tennis "best stroke analysis app" thread is the other half of the same demand. Players want technique feedback, not stats. The combination of stroke-quality scoring and shot detection — the per-shot per-component breakdown — is exactly the prep work that makes async stroke review fast.

The async-coach review workflow

Here's the loop that high-throughput async coaches we work with use. Three steps, ~20 minutes per student match.

1. Receive the AceSense report from the student

Student records their match (the filming guide is here), uploads to AceSense, taps share, sends you the PDF and a link to the timestamped video. You have the report, the heatmap, the stroke-quality scores, and the per-shot timestamps before you've opened the video.

If you're coaching students who've never used AceSense, the first session of the relationship can include a 5-minute walkthrough — same complexity as showing them how to share a Loom.

2. Read the report's summary, not the video, first

This is the time saver. The summary page tells you:

Shot counts by type
Heatmap by shot type
Stroke-quality scores by component (preparation, contact, follow-through)
The two or three patterns the model picked out

In two minutes you know whether this match is "the backhand is the leak" or "the second serve is the leak" or "the placement is the leak." The video is now a tool you use to confirm what the report flagged, not to discover what's there.

3. Open the video at the timestamps the report provides

The report gives you per-shot timestamps. Click into the shots flagged by the stroke-quality breakdown. Watch three. Confirm or override. Record your voice-over response — this is where your value is, and it's now ten minutes long instead of ninety.

4. Send your annotated response

Most coaches do a Loom or a voice memo + the marked-up PDF. The student gets your read on the coach-judgement layer; the report does the per-shot data layer. You charge your normal review fee. The throughput goes up; the quality goes up; your hourly rate goes up.

The feature that earns its keep for async coaches: the shareable, time-coded report

For an async coach, the feature combination that does the work is the PDF coaching report + per-shot timestamps + shot detection. You need the PDF as the artefact you can mark up and send back. You need the time-codes so you can jump to a specific backhand in two clicks. You need the shot-detection accuracy to be high enough that you trust the flagged shots are actually the ones to look at.

The heatmap and the stroke-quality score are bonus signal — they often surface a pattern you wouldn't have caught from scrubbing alone. The honest stat: in our internal benchmarks against coaches doing manual review, the AceSense-augmented coach catches more technique issues per match, not fewer, because the per-shot breakdown surfaces patterns the human eye loses across 60 minutes of footage.

A worked example: one match, end-to-end

A student — call him R., NTRP 3.5, lives in another country, reviews monthly with you — sends you his Saturday match. Without AceSense, this is your evening. With AceSense:

Minute 0: R. sends you the PDF + timestamped video link.
Minute 2: You've read the summary. Forehand is consistent; backhand depth has dropped 22% versus last month's report; second-serve placement clusters short and middle (heatmap). The model flagged "early shoulder rotation on backhand prep" on 14 of 22 backhands.
Minute 5: You've watched three of the flagged backhands. Confirmed — he's opening up too early, same issue as last month, hasn't stuck.
Minute 12: You've watched the second-serve cluster. He's not going to the body anymore — that's a target-selection issue, not a technique one.
Minute 18: You've recorded a 6-minute voice-over response. Two pieces of homework: backhand prep drill, second-serve target chart. You marked up the PDF.
Minute 20: Sent.

Twenty minutes for a review you'd normally allot ninety to. You can charge the same fee. You're now profitable enough that async review is a real channel.

What changes for your business in 4 weeks

Adopting AceSense as your async pre-process tool tends to look like this for working coaches:

Week 1: First reviews feel weird. You're used to scrubbing. Trusting the report's flagged shots takes a session or two.
Week 2: Time-per-review drops by half, conservatively. Quality is the same; you're catching the same things.
Week 3: You start catching things you weren't catching before — shot-mix imbalance across the whole match, heatmap drift versus the previous report. Things that need the report's longitudinal view.
Week 4: You can take more students at the same time-budget. Or you keep the same roster and free up court hours. Either way, your hourly rate moves.

We have coaches who run their entire async business through this loop. We also have coaches who tried it and went back to manual scrubbing because they didn't trust pre-processed reports. Both responses are legitimate. The first group is bigger.

When AceSense isn't the right tool for you

Honest list. Don't bother with AceSense for async review if:

You're a tour coach. You need data we don't pretend to provide. Your students are above our calibration band.
Your business model is on-court only. AceSense's value compounds with async; if you don't do async, the time-saving doesn't apply.
Your students don't have phones, or play in environments where filming is restricted. No video, no AceSense.
You explicitly market the human-only artisan approach. Some excellent coaches' value proposition is "I watch every minute by hand." Don't undercut that — your customers picked you for it.

On stroke-quality and your authority

A note that matters more for async coaches than any other persona: the stroke-quality score is calibrated against a broad pro-level baseline, not against your specific teaching philosophy. If you teach a deliberately non-classical style, the model may flag it. You're the coach. Override the model, write your reasoning in the response, and move on. We make the model auditable in /accuracy precisely so coaches can see the limits and decide how much weight to give each metric. The heatmap, shot counts, and bounce-zone data are outcome measurements — those don't have a teaching philosophy. The technique score is a prompt for your judgement, not a replacement for it.

Pricing

Free tier covers 2 reports a month — fine for trying the workflow. The paid tier pays for itself the first week if you do real async review at any volume. Full breakdown at /pricing. Coach-roster pricing is on the 2026 roadmap; in the meantime, students or parents pay directly, which works fine for the share-with-coach loop.

Ready to try? Have your next async student film their match, generate a report free, and run one review through the loop. Or read how AceSense actually works before you trust the per-shot flags. Either way — the time-per-review only drops when you start.

Frequently asked questions

Can I bill students for AceSense reviews?: Yes — and most async coaches do. The standard model is a flat per-review fee (€25–€75 depending on your rate), which covers your time annotating the report and writing your notes. The report does the per-shot grunt work; you do the coaching judgement. Many coaches also bundle a monthly AceSense + 30-minute video call package.
What format do I get the video / report in?: Your student uploads to their phone, AceSense generates the report (PDF + per-shot timestamped video), and they share it with you via the app's share sheet — email, Drive link, or AirDrop. You don't need an AceSense account to receive a report; only to generate one. Coach roster accounts are on the 2026 roadmap.
How is this different from my current Loom-style review workflow?: The difference is the pre-annotation. Your student sends you a 60-minute match video; AceSense returns a per-shot timeline you can click through in 5 minutes instead of scrubbing for 30. You still do voice-over coaching, you still record your reaction — you just spend the time on the coaching itself, not on finding the moments worth coaching. For most async coaches the time-saving is 4x to 6x.
What about the [reputable online stroke analysis](https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php?threads/reputable-online-stroke-analysis.610095/) discussion — how does AceSense compare to those services?: Those services are a coach reviewing your video for $30–$100 a clip. They're great if you want a specific human's eye. AceSense is the *layer underneath* — it gives the coach the per-shot data so the human review is faster and more specific. Many of the coaches reviewing on those forums use AceSense as their pre-process tool. We're not competing with them; we're the substrate.
Will the report's stroke-quality score override my coaching?: No, and don't let it. The pose-based score is calibrated against a broad pro baseline. If you're working on a non-classical technique with a student, the model may flag it. Use the heatmap, shot-mix, and bounce-zone data as objective; treat the technique score as a prompt for you to either confirm or override on the call. The report is your tool, not your replacement.