99 interval throwing programs analyzed: 42% no completion timeline, 63% no setback guidance, 32% no warm-up protocol, only 20% cite evidence (most over 10 years old). Progression parameters varied wildly with no rationale. Generic programs can't account for individual response.

Athletes throwing at 50% perceived effort still generate 86% of max elbow torque and 78% of max velocity. Self-assessment is unreliable. Without objective monitoring, athletes think they're being conservative while loading tissues near maximum. Throwing programs need objective checkpoints.