Figure 1: Percentile distributions of Recovery Score across athlete groups and genders. (Night-level data: N (pro male) = 989; N (pro female) = 1151; N (amateur male) = 1240; N (amateur female) = 733).
HRV presents clear distinction between professionals vs amateurs and male vs females
HRV, a proxy for parasympathetic nervous system tone and physiological recovery, emerged as one of the most distinguishing metrics between amateur and professional athletes. Pro males had a median HRV of 59 ms, whereas amateurs averaged 50 ms (Table 1). The distributional gap was particularly noticeable in the upper quartile: the 75th percentile of amateur males (60 ms) was only just reaching the median of professional males, and the 75th percentile of amateur females (52 ms) fell short of the professional female median (53 ms). Only the top 10% of amateur males and females, with HRV values of 68 ms and 63 ms respectively, came close to the upper professional range (Figure 2). These group-wise differences in HRV were statistically significant for both males and females (p < 0.001).
Figure 2: Percentile distributions of HRV across athlete groups and genders. (Night-level data: N (pro male) = 769; N (pro female) = 1006; N (amateur male) = 1051; N (amateur female) = 614).
RHR also distinguishes between professionals vs amateurs
RHR, a strong inverse marker of cardiovascular recovery, was one of the most sharply stratified metrics in this dataset. Pros recorded a median RHR of 52 bpm, while amateur males and females had higher medians of 55 bpm and 59 bpm, respectively (Figure 3, Table 1). Notably, even among the most aerobically fit amateurs, i.e. those in the lowest 10% for RHR (P90 = 48 bpm in males, 49 bpm in females), values only just began to overlap with the upper range of professional medians. The majority of amateur athletes exhibited resting heart rates that were markedly higher than their professional counterparts, highlighting a statistically significant physiological gap in cardiovascular adaptation across genders (p < 0.001).
Figure 3: Percentile distributions of RHR across athlete groups and genders. (Night-level data: N (pro male) = 769; N (pro female) = 1006; N (amateur male) = 1051; N (amateur female) = 614).
Professionals and amateurs employ different strategies for optimal sleep
Sleep Score is a composite score involving sleep volume/duration, time spent asleep (sleep efficiency), movements signifying restlessness, and other parameters including temperature, HR and HRV. The sleep patterns observed again echoed the disparate training systems and also gender. Pro females recorded the highest median (86), followed by amateur females (82), professional males (81), and amateur males (80) (Figure 4a, Table 1). The difference was significant in females (p < 0.001), but not in males (p ~ 0.25). Notably, amateur females at the 75th percentile had a Sleep Score of 88, higher than the professional female median of 86, while top amateur males matched the professional male 75th percentile with a score of 86.
Sleep duration was longer in professionals (8 h 40 min for both genders) compared to amateurs (about 7 h 58 min in males and 8 h in females) for both genders (Figure 4b; p < 0.001). Only amateurs in the top 25% (≥ 8h 50 min) exceeded the pro median. The pro IQR was narrower and shifted upward, indicating more consistent sleep.
Sleep efficiency, though statistically different (p < 0.001), within the same range for pro and amateurs, showing considerable overlap and limited value for distinguishing recovery patterns (Figure 4c). Sleep movements, which reflect physical restlessness or micro-arousals, were highest in professional males (20) and lowest in amateur females (15) (Figure 4d). Amateur males had significantly fewer movements than professional males (p < 0.001), with lower values across most percentiles. Among females, distributions were nearly identical, and the slight difference (15 vs 16) was not significant (p ~ 0.10). Overall, while professionals sleep longer, amateurs, especially the top performers, can match pros in sleep quality and restfulness.
In addition to differences in sleep quantity and quality, we observed that amateur athletes more frequently logged training sessions outside of typical circadian-aligned hours compared to professionals, although this was not directly quantified in this analysis.
