Are rolling averages a good way to assess training load for injury prevention?

I read the letter ‘Time to bin the term ‘overuse’ injury: is ‘training load error’ a more accurate term?’ with great interest.1 I agree with the authors that changes in training load (TL) could increase injury risk and I share their concern relating to periods of low/no loads. However, the terminology suggested by Drew and Purdam ‘errors in training load prescription’ may not be ideal. In fact, despite the potentially flawless TL prescription, some spikes in load may be due to variables that are out of control, such as variability in the demands of competitions,2 and cannot be avoided. Moreover, the term ‘error’ leads to …