3 Reasons Why Measuring Form Is NOT the Logical Next Step in Pilates Innovation

When I tell people I run a smart Pilates company, the first question I almost always get is:  “Oh cool—does it track my form?”

It makes sense. On the surface, measuring form seems like the most obvious way to bring technology into Pilates. After all, form is crucial in Pilates—why wouldn’t that be the first thing we’d want to measure, analyze, and optimize with AI or sensors?

But here’s the thing: it’s not the logical first step. In fact, it’s one of the least useful places to start if we want to make meaningful improvements in the Pilates experience using technology.

Here are three reasons why.

1. The Technology Just Isn’t That Good Yet

Let’s talk about what’s actually possible with current form-tracking technology.

Most camera-based motion tracking systems rely on either markers (little dots placed on your joints) or markerless AI-driven models (like those used in consumer apps or fitness mirrors). Markerless systems are more convenient, but even in ideal conditions—perfect lighting, ideal camera angles, tight clothing—they can only reliably track movement within a 30mm margin of error. That might be enough for general movement recognition, but Pilates is all about precision. Thirty millimeters is a lot when you’re trying to cue subtle spinal articulation or pelvic alignment.

Even high-end marker-based systems in labs struggle to get accuracy tighter than 5mm, and that’s under strictly controlled conditions with expensive gear and expert setup.

And that’s just one problem.

Most real-life Pilates classes involve people wearing loose or layered clothing, moving dynamically in 3D space, often at angles that are hard to capture with a single camera. Add in the diversity of human bodies—shapes, sizes, proportions—and it becomes nearly impossible to deliver accurate, consistent, real-time form analysis.

There are startups experimenting with smart clothing—outfits laced with sensors to track joint angles—but these run into the same issues. If the garment doesn’t fit perfectly, if the sensors shift, or if the user's body type isn’t in the “standard” range, the data is flawed.

2. Form Isn’t the Most Coached Element in a Pilates Class

Let’s bust a myth: form isn’t the thing instructors are correcting in a group Pilates class.

Sure, it’s important. Yes, we cue it. But more often than not, the feedback I give as an instructor isn’t about form—it’s about setup, spring selection, big picture action, breath, and tempo. Those are the elements that drive performance and progress in a Pilates class, especially for beginners and intermediates.

For example, before we ever begin moving, I help my students adjust their reformer settings (including spring settings) to fit their ability and the intention of the exercise we’re about to do.  Once we start moving, I cue breath patterns and tempo to help someone stay controlled and connected throughout a particularly challenging sequence.

Correcting form is often last on my list of corrections, not because it’s unimportant, but because if the other variables aren’t right then form cues don’t matter.

So why are we obsessed with form-tracking tech when most of the actionable coaching happens elsewhere?

3. Even If You Could Measure Form Perfectly… Then What?

Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that you’ve solved all the software problem and have a way to coach people through an exercise so they’re ready for minute form feedback. In other words: You have a computer that can tell you your right hip is one centimeter higher than your left and are ready to put it into the studio.

Now what?

A good Pilates instructor doesn’t just point out what’s off—they understand why it’s happening, and intuitively know what cue, prop, or modification will help the person adjust. Maybe the hips are uneven because of tight hip flexors, poor foot placement, or asymmetrical spring tension. It could be a strength imbalance, an old injury, or simply fatigue.

Technology can’t yet diagnose that chain of cause and effect accurately enough for it to make a movement session feel seamless. It can’t coach nuance. It can’t sense how a person is feeling, how hard they’re trying, or how their body responded to yesterday’s workout.

Even if AI could say “your right shoulder is slightly elevated,” it can’t yet decide whether that matters in the context of your movement pattern, today, on that piece of equipment, during this sequence.

So Where Should Technology Focus Instead?

This isn’t a rant against optical form tracking technology. In fact, I’m bullish on it!  Just not for the reasons most people think.I believe The impact isn’t going to come from trying to replicate the instructor’s eye for form—it’s going to come from augmenting the rest of the ecosystem.

We should be using technology to help students:

• Choose the right class for their level and goals
  

• Set up their equipment correctly
  

• Understand how spring settings affect that exercise
  

• Get feedback on consistency, tempo, and control
  

• Track progress in ways that are motivating and actionable
  

• Help instructors plan and deliver the best class design for the students in attendance

These are problems that technology can solve right now, and in doing so, actually improve the experience for students and instructors alike.

Final Thoughts

Yes, form matters. But in the grand scheme of Pilates coaching, form-tracking technology is a flashy solution to a lower-priority problem. It’s not where the biggest breakthroughs are going to come from.

If we want to use technology to elevate the Pilates experience, we need to start by understanding what’s actually happening in the studio—not just what looks important from the outside.

And from inside the studio, I can tell you: form isn’t first.

Let’s build smarter tools by focusing on what truly moves the needle.