Whoop x [solidcore]: Smart Innovation or Marketing Hype?

Big news in the fitness tech world: Whoop and [solidcore] just announced a partnership that promises “biomechanics-based tracking” for members. The goal? To provide a more precise reading of muscular load, strain, and recovery needs for [solidcore] workouts.

It’s a compelling pitch—one that seemingly addresses a long-standing frustration among Pilates and low-impact training enthusiasts: Anyone who has glanced at their smartwatch post-class and seen an absurdly low calorie burn or minimal heart rate elevation knows the feeling. That's because most traditional fitness trackers fail to capture the full picture of a Pilates session.

Therefore, a Pilates-centered metric is a logical next step in fitness tracking.

But Does the Tech Back It Up?

The press release is light on details, and that raises some important questions. Whoop is known for its deep recovery insights, strain tracking, and sleep analytics, but its core metrics are built around heart rate variability (HRV), cardiovascular strain, and traditional strength training loads. That works well for running, weightlifting, and HIIT—but does it translate to Pilates or [solidcore]’s unique method?

For context, [solidcore] is a high-intensity, low-impact training method that takes inspiration from Pilates but incorporates heavy resistance and slow, controlled movements. It’s not exactly Pilates. It’s not exactly strength training, either. And that distinction matters when developing new tracking algorithms.

If Whoop’s new system is simply applying strength training metrics to a workout that doesn’t fully align with traditional resistance training, the data may be misleading. On the other hand, if Whoop has developed a truly novel way of quantifying muscular strain and endurance beyond HRV and calorie burn, that would be a meaningful step forward for Pilates tracking.

What’s Missing?

One thing the announcement doesn’t make clear: How is Whoop defining and measuring muscular load in this context? Whoop's Strength Trainer relies on more than just heart rate to generate a strain score. It uses weight lifted and reps performed too. But in Pilates and [solidcore], spring resistance is used differently. Sometimes, more weight is easier. It just depends on the exercise. How does Whoop’s algorithm account for that? (I'm skeptical they know which type of exercise is being performed when, and how to quantify that.)

And then there’s the recovery side. One of Pilates’ major benefits is its ability to train the body without the wear and tear typical cardio or strength entails, hence the name "low-impact." Unlike heavy weightlifting, Pilates can often be done daily without the same risk of overtraining. So how does Whoop’s new metric interpret recovery for Pilates-based workouts?

Of course, people who do Pilates think we aren't getting enough credit for our workouts with traditional metrics. However, it's unclear how much more credit we should be getting and where that credit gets applied.

A Step in the Right Direction—But We Need More

There’s no doubt that fitness tracking has been slow to evolve in the Pilates space. Wearables still struggle to quantify the true effort and benefits of mindful movement. Big players like Whoop and [solidcore] stepping into this space is a positive sign—it signals that there’s demand for better data and recognition of Pilates-based training as a serious modality.

However, for this partnership to be more than just marketing hype, Whoop needs to be transparent about what’s actually happening under the hood. If this is just a repackaged strength training score with a new name, it won’t truly capture the magic of Pilates. It won't trickle down effectively into contemporary and classical Pilates, and it will not contribute to advancing any research on the benefits and use cases of Pilates methods.

If, however, Whoop has developed something that genuinely accounts for the biomechanics of Pilates and [solidcore], this could be a game-changer for tracking low-impact, high-intensity training, and we may see it roll out beyond High-Intensity Pilates into more contemporary or classical settings.

Final Thoughts

Having worked in the Pilates industry for the last 12+ years, with the most recent 5 specifically at Flexia developing Pilates-specific metrics, I believe this leans more toward a marketing play than a true technological breakthrough. That said, even if it is largely a branding move, it still serves a valuable purpose.

Pilates has long been overlooked in the fitness tech space, and mainstream companies investing in it—whether perfectly executed or not—helps push the conversation forward. Large companies with millions of customers can drive awareness and legitimacy for Pilates in the broader fitness industry, and that alone is worth paying attention to.

So, while I remain skeptical of the tech itself, I’m optimistic about what this signals for the future of Pilates tracking. If nothing else, it’s a step toward greater recognition—and hopefully, better data down the line.