Anthropometric and Performance Perspectives of Female Competitive Surfing

Open access


Purpose. To evaluate the anthropometric profiles of female surfers and to identify whether any anthropometrical factors might predict competitive ranking. Secondly, to evaluate the activity profile of female competitive surfing with respect to environmental conditions using Global Positioning System (GPS) derived measures.

Methods. Following institutional ethical approval, 31 female competitive surfers underwent anthropometric assessment (mean age: 20.49, s = 5.32 years; stature: 165.2, s = 4.8 cm; body mass: 63.0, s = 6.8 kg). A subsample (n = 22) wore GPS units during competition at four different locations with varied surfing conditions.

Results. The mean somatotype values of the surfers were (Endo-Meso-Ecto) 4.06, 4.15, 2.01. Significant correlations (p < 0.05) were found between the national ranking and triceps, medial calf skinfolds, sum of six skinfolds, body fat percentage, and sum of eight skinfolds. Percentage time sitting, paddling, and riding equalled 62.58 ± 10.18%, 30.70 ± 9.44%, and 6.73 ± 2.91%, respectively. The mean ride time, maximum ride time, total time spent riding, and total distance surfing were significantly correlated with the round of the competition. Furthermore, the number of rides, time spent riding, percentage of total distance surfing, and percentage time riding were correlated with heat placement (p < 0.05). Time spent sitting was associated with poorer heat placements (p < 0.01).

Conclusions. Body fat levels are associated with the national ranking in competitive female surfers. The number of waves ridden in a heat, the length of the rides, and activity levels were significantly related to heat placement and competition progression.

1. Lowdon B.J., Fitness requirements for surfing. Sports Coach, 1983, 6 (4), 35–38.

2. Barlow M.J., Gresty K., Findlay M., Cooke C.B., Davidson M.A., The effect of wave conditions and surfer ability on performance and the physiological response of recreational surfers. J Strength Cond Res, 2014, 28 (10), 2946–2953, doi: 10.1519/JSC.0000000000000491.

3. Farley O.R., Harris N.K., Kilding A.E., Physiological demands of competitive surfing. J Strength Cond Res, 2012, 26(7), 1887–1896, doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3182392c4b.

4. Mendez-Villanueva A., Bishop D., Hamer P., Activity profile of world-class professional surfers during competition: a case study. J Strength Cond Res, 2006, 20 (3), 477–482, doi: 10.1519/16574.1.

5. WSL Rule Book 2016. World Surf League, Santa Monica, CA 2016.

6. Meir R.A., Lowdon B.J., Davie A.J., Heart rates and estimated energy expenditure during recreational surfing. Aust J Sci Med Sport, 1991, 23 (3), 70–74.

7. Lowdon B.J., The somatotype of international male and female surfboard riders. Aust J Sports Med, 1980, 12, 34–39.

8. Lowdon B.J., Bedi J.F., Horvath S.M., Specificity of aerobic fitness testing of surfers. Aust J Sci Med Sport, 1989, 21 (4), 7–10.

9. Lowdon B.J., Pateman N., Physiological parameters of international surfers. Aust J Sports Med, 1980, 12, 30–33.

10. Mendez-Villanueva A., Perez-Landaluce J., Bishop D., Fernandez-García B., Ortolano R., Leibar X., et al., Upper body aerobic fitness comparison between two groups of competitive surfboard riders. J Sci Med Sport, 2005, 8 (1), p. 43–51, doi: 10.1016/S1440-2440(05)80023-4.

11. Barlow M.J., Gresty K., Findlay M., Cooke C., Associations of power at VO2peak and anaerobic threshold with rank in British high performance junior surfers. Hum Mov, 2015, 16 (1), 28–32, doi: 10.1515/humo-2015-0023.

12. Lundgren L.E., Tran T.T., Nimphius S., Raymond E., Secomb J.L., Farley O.R., et al., Development and evaluation of a simple, multifactorial model based on landing performance to indicate injury risk among surfing athletes. Int J Sports Physiol Perform, 2015, 10 (8), 1029–1035, doi: 10.1123/ijspp.2014-0591.

13. Lundgren L.E., Butel M., Brown T., Nimphius S., Sheppard J.M., High ankle sprain: the new elite surfing injury? Int Sportmed J, 2014, 15 (4), 321–327.

14. Farley O., Coyne J.O., Secomb J., Lundgren L., Tran T.T., Sheppard J., et al., Comparison of the 400 metre time endurance surf paddle between elite competitive surfers, competitive surfers and recreational surfers. J Aust Strength Cond, 2013, 21 (Suppl. 2), 125–127.

15. Tran T.T., Lundgren L., Secomb J., Farley O.R.L., Haff G.G., Seitz L.B., et al., Comparison of physical capacities between nonselected and selected elite male competitive surfers for the national junior team. Int J Sports Physiol Perform, 2015, 10 (2), p. 178–182, doi: 10.1123/ijspp.2014-0222.

16. Mendez-Villanueva A., Mujika I., Bishop D., Variability of competitive performance assessment of elite surfboard riders. J Strength Cond Res, 2010, 24 (1), 135–139, doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181a61a3a.

17. Barlow M.J., Findlay M., Gresty K., Cooke C., Anthropometric variables and their relationship to performance and ability in male surfers. Eur J Sport Sci, 2014, 14 (Suppl.1), S171–S177, doi:10.1080/17461391.2012.666268.

18. Felder J.M., Burke L.M., Lowdon B.J., Cameron-Smith D., Collier G.R., Nutritional practices of elite female surfers during training and competition. Int J Sport Nutr, 1998, 8 (1), 36–48.

19. Eurich A.D., Brown L.E., Coburn J.W., Noffal G.J., Nguyen D., Khamoui A.V., et al., Performance differences between sexes in the pop-up phase of surfing. J Strength Cond Res, 2010, 24 (10), 2821–2825, doi: 10.1519/JSC.0b013e3181f0a77f.

20. Secomb J.L., Farley O.R., Lundgren L., Tran T.T., Nimphius S., Sheppard J.M., Comparison of the sprint paddling performance between competitive male and female surfers. J Aus Strength Cond, 2013, 21 (Suppl. 2), 118–120.

21. Bale P., The relationship of physique and body composition to strength in a group of physical education students. Br J Sports Med, 1980, 14 (4), 193–198.

22. Lowdon B.J., Patrick J., Ross K., Manoeuvres used and judges scores in an international surfing contest. Summary report. Australian Sports Commission, Belconnen, ACT 1996.

23. Marfell-Jones M., Olds T., Stewart A., Carter L., International standards for anthropometric assessment. International Society for the Advancement of Kinanthropometry, Potchefstroom 2006.

24. Withers R.T., et al., The relative body fat and anthropometric prediction of body density of South Australian females aged 17–35 years. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol, 1987, 56 (2), 181–190.

25. Norton K., Olds T., Anthropometrica. University of New South Wales Press, Sydney 2004.

26. Yuhasz M.S., Physical fitness manual. University of Western Ontario, London Ontario 1974.

27. Davidson M., A baseline study of surfing conditions in the Boscombe region and an investigation of potential improvements due to the installation of an artificial surfing reef. University of Plymouth, Plymouth 2009.

28. Caldwell P.C., Validity of North Shore, Oahu, Hawaiian Islands surf observations. J Coast Res, 2005, 21 (6), 1127–1138.

29. Jennings D., Cormack S., Coutts A.J., Boyd L.J., Aughey R.J., Variability of GPS units for measuring distance in team sport movements. Int J Sports Physio! Perform, 2010, 5 (4), 565–569.

30. Witte T.H., Wilson A.M., Accuracy of WAAS-enabled GPS for the determination of position and speed over ground. J Biomech, 2005, 38 (8), 1717–1722, doi: 10.1016/j.jbio-mech.2004.07.028.

31. Dally W.R., The maximum speed of surfers. J Coast Res, 2001, 29, 33–40.

32. Mendez-Villanueva A., Bishop D., Physiological aspects of surfboard riding performance. Sports Med, 2005, 35 (1), 55–70, doi: 10.2165/00007256-200535010-00005.

33. ASP, 87-88 Rule Book. Association of Surfing Professionals, Huntingdon Beach 1987.

34. ASP, 2013 ASP Rule Book. Association of Surfing Professionals, Coolangatta 2013.

35. Knijnik J.D., Horton P., Cruz L.O., Rhizomatic bodies, gendered waves: transitional femininities in Brazilian surf. Sport Soc, 2010, 13 (7–8), 1170–1185, doi: 10.1080/17430431003780138.

36. Hutt J.A., Black K.P., Shaw T.M., Classification of surf breaks in relation to surfing skill. J Coast Res, 2001, 29, 66–81.

Human Movement

The Journal of University School of Physical Education, Wroclaw

Journal Information

CiteScore 2016: 0.41

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.208
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.230


All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 84 84 27
PDF Downloads 22 22 11