COMPETITION LOAD DESCRIBED BY OBJECTIVE

AND SUBJECTIVE METHODS DURING A SURFING

CHAMPIONSHIP
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCyw

IOSU FERNANDEZ-GAMBOA,1 JAVIER YANCI,2 CRISTINA GRANADOS,2

CX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC4/OAVpDDa8K2+Ya6H515kE= on 11/14/2023

BRET FREEMYER,3 AND JESÚS CÁMARA2

1
High Performance Program Department, Gipuzkoa Surfing Association High Performance Program, Donostia-San Sebastia´n, Spain;
2
Department of Physical Education and Sport, Faculty of Education and Sport, University of the Basque Country, UPV/EHU,
Vitoria-Gasteiz, Spain; and 3Department of Kinesiology and Rehabilitation Science, University of Hawaii, Manoa Honolulu, Hawaii

ABSTRACT
KEY WORDS global positioning system, score, rating of
Fernández-Gamboa, I, Yanci, J, Granados, C, Freemyer, B, perceived exertion, heat load
and Cámara, J. Competition load described by objective and
subjective methods during a surfing championship. J INTRODUCTION

S
Strength Cond Res 32(5): 1329–1335, 2018—The aims of urfing has developed a multimillion-dollar world-
this study were to describe the competition load of surfers wide business (13), and it will be included in the
during a single heat through objective and subjective meth- 2020 Olympic Games. The World Surf League
ods and to analyze the relationship between objective and (WSL) holds 185 international competitions per
subjective methods with the judges’ score. Ten competitive year around the globe with more than 1,000 professional
surfers were fitted with a global positioning system (GPS) athletes inscribed (3,4,13,15,18–20,26), and surfing competitions
during a competitive heat. The GPS was synchronized with are organized in more than 98 countries (3,4,13,15,18–20,26).
a chronometer and a stationary video camera to identify the Previous research on surfing focused on the characteristics
surfer’s specific actions. After the end of each heat, partic- of surfing competition (3,4,15,18–20). On the one hand,
ipants were assessed for the rating of perceived respiratory a previous study to assess the physiological demands dur-
and muscular exertion (RPEres, RPEmus), and also, official ing a surfing heat, in the top 30 ranked surfers from the
scores from every participant were collected. A very large New Zealand surf association, has shown a mean heart rate
(HRmean) of 139 6 11 b$min21 (64% of their maximum
significant relationship between wave-riding distance and
HR [HRmax]) and a peak HR (HRpeak) of 190 6 12
respiratory perceived exertion heat load (RPEres HL, r =
b$min21 (87% of their HRmax) (3). On the other hand,
0.79; 60.26 confidence limit [CL], p , 0.01, 99.5/0.4/0.1,
the physical demands (external load) have been carried
very likely) was found. Active time was also very large and
out with global positioning system (GPS) units during
significantly related to both RPEres HL (r = 0.75; 60.29 CL, both, training sessions and competitive heats (18,23). Spe-
p , 0.05, 99.0/0.8/0.2, very likely) and muscular perceived cifically, it has been reported that during a 2-hour surfing
exertion heat load (RPEmus HL, r = 0.83; 60.22 CL, p , training session, participants covered a total distance of
0.01, 99.8/0.2/0.0, most likely). Very large significant corre- 6,293.2 6 1826.1 m (range = 4,491–9,527 m) with a consis-
lation was obtained between the RPEres and score (r = tent decline in HRpeak and HRmean (20). Nevertheless,
0.83; 60.22 CL, p , 0.01, 99.8/0.2/0.0, most likely). The during a 20-minute surfing competitive heat, the total
subjective method seems to be a good instrument to assess distance covered was 1,605 6 313.5 m (18).
the HL of a surf competition. Wave characteristics seem to Although objective methods have been used to quantify
be an important factor in perceived exertion during compet- the physical and physiological demands during surfing
itive surfing. (18,23), an HR monitor transmitter belt fastened around
the sternum and a wrist GPS unit during surfing have a major
drawback: surfers complain about their comfort during pad-
Address correspondence to Iosu Fernández-Gamboa, iosugamboa@ dling with those devices. Besides, considering that during
gmail.com. a surfing heat, total paddling time represents approximately
32(5)/1329–1335 the 51–58% of a surfing heat (3,19) and, secondly, that sprint
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research paddling is a key action leading to wave riding (24); the use
Ó 2017 National Strength and Conditioning Association of these devices could hamper the efficiency of the paddling

VOLUME 32 | NUMBER 5 | MAY 2018 | 1329

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Competition Load in Surfing

action. The rating of perceived exertion (RPE), which was a national-level open division competition. The study was
designed to be practical (20), is a subjective method that conducted during the “Euskaltel Euskal Zirkuitua” champion-
combines the external and internal load into a single score ship in July 2015, hosted by the Basque Country Surfing Asso-
and does not require HR and GPS units. Besides, this score ciation, as part of the open category 3-stop tour. Participants
is also affected by ventilation rate, psychological states, and wore a GPS on the wrist during the heat. On completing the
environmental conditions (20), the latter having demon- heat, participants were assessed for the RPEres and RPEmus.
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCyw

strated its importance during surfing competitions

Subjects
(3,17,18,20,21,23). The RPE has been shown to be a valid
Ten surfers participated in this study (28.50 6 11.09 years,
and efficient method of measuring training load (17), even in
CX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC4/OAVpDDa8K2+Ya6H515kE= on 11/14/2023

177.10 6 5.54 cm, 70.20 6 5.49 kg, 22.37 6 1.25 kg$m22)

sports characterized for their multiple high-intensity bouts
and reported a minimum of 7 years of experience (16.40 6
(12), such as surfing. Therefore, considering the intensity
9.55 years). They currently were engaged in 2 to 4 surfing
profile of a surfing competition, where high-intensity actions
training sessions per week (3.20 6 0.28 d$wk21). Participants
follow, repeatedly, lower intensity actions (18,19), the RPE
were free of injuries at the time of the study. All participants
could be an inexpensive and easy-to-use method to assess
received a clear explanation of the study, including the risks and
the surfers external and internal loads. Furthermore, because
benefits of participation. Written informed consent was ob-
of the nature of surfing, where surfers are continuously sub-
tained from each of the participants and parents or guardians
jected to apneas of different duration, the assessment of dif-
(i.e., for underage players). Participants were then familiarized
ferentiated RPE (dRPE), such as the respiratory RPE
with the use of the 0–10 scale RPE assessment. The study and
(RPEres) and muscle leg RPE (RPEmus), as used in other
its procedures were approved by the Institutional Review Board
sports (14,16,25), could provide physical trainers and surfers
(Ethics Commission for Research and Teaching [CEID] 2015-
themselves a deeper understanding of the characteristics of
130) at the University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU) and
the training or competition load. Plus, this is the first study to
met the ethical standards in Sport and Exercise Science
tackle the association between dRPE and the objective
Research (10).
methods.
Because the judges are responsible for scoring the Procedures
performance of the surfers during wave riding, based on Objective Load. Objective loads were monitored with
key elements such as the characteristics of the maneuvers a GPS device (Polar Electro V800; Polar Inc., Kempele,
(26), we hypothesized that the longer the wave-riding dis- Finland) attached to the wrist of the participants and
tance and duration, the greater the chance of performing outside the wetsuit. In every trial, the conditions of the
a combination of major maneuvers and, thus, the better GPS were considered acceptable (wrist device connected
the score. Nevertheless, we are unaware of any study that to at least 8 satellites) and collected at a sample frequency
assessed the relationship between the activity profile of surf- of 2.4 Hz. The GPS was synchronized at least 5 minutes
ers and the judges’ score. Likewise, to understand the asso- before each heat with a chronometer and a stationary
ciation between competitive quantification objective and video camera (Canon EOS 5D; Canon Inc., Tokyo, Japan).
subjective methods with score, as it may be relevant to The camera was set in the judges’ area so that it could
acknowledge if the heat load (HL) could be an important capture the entire range of wave riding and to identify the
factor for surfing performance. surfer’s specific actions in each heat. The beginning of the
The purposes of this study were threefold: (a) to describe heat was marked in the chronometer with a lap enabling
the competition load of surfers during a surfing heat through the trimming of the video from the start to the end of the
objective (GPS) and subjective methods (dRPE), (b) to heat. Surfing activities during the heats were coded as
analyze the relationship between objective and subjective time spent in wave riding (s), paddling time (s), and the
methods, and (c) to analyze the association of the objective stationary time (s). The GPS parameters included the total
and subjective methods with the judges’ score. wave-riding time (s) and paddling distance (m). Subse-
quently, wave-riding time and paddling time parameters
METHODS were determined through video recordings. The record-
Experimental Approach to the Problem ings were paused each time a change in the coded activity
We use an observational design to examine the relationship occurred, and the duration time for the activity was re-
between objective and subjective competitive surfing loads. corded. The active distance and active time were calcu-
Data were collected during a surfing competition at lated as shown in equations 1 and 2, respectively.

Active distanceðmÞ ¼ the overall wave-riding distanceðmÞ þ the overall paddling distanceðmÞ: (1)

the TM

1330 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

innovative and progressive ma-

neuvers, combination of major
TABLE 1. Objective and subjective method heat load (HL) variables measured
during one heat of a surfing competition.* maneuvers, variety of maneu-
vers, and speed, power, and
Mean 6 SD Min. Max. flow (8). The judging scale
was 0.0–1.9 Poor, 2.0–3.9 Fair,
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCyw

Objective method HL
Total distance (m) 447.51 6 126.31 243.90 609.70 4.0–5.9 Average, 6.0–7.9 Good,
Paddling distance (m) 353.66 6 149.28 111.40 550.10 and 8.0–10.0 Excellent (26).
WR distance (m) 93.85 6 84.26 12.90 278.90
CX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC4/OAVpDDa8K2+Ya6H515kE= on 11/14/2023

WR duration (%) 3.13 6 2.35 0.95 8.24 Statistical Analyses

Stationary time (%) 59.62 6 13.09 38.64 78.00 The results are presented as
Active time (%) 40.17 6 13.37 20.20 61.32 mean 6 SD. All variables were
WR peak velocity (m$s21) 0.61 6 0.25 0.25 1.38 normal distributed and satis-
WR mean velocity (m$s21) 0.50 6 0.26 0.16 1.31
fied the equality of variances
Subjective method HL
RPEres 4.35 6 1.54 2.50 7.00 according to Kolmogorov-
RPEmus 3.25 6 0.79 3.00 5.50 Smirnov test and Levene’s
RPEres HL (AU) 36.60 6 21.90 20.00 90.00 tests, respectively. Pearson
RPEmus HL (AU) 28.25 6 15.23 12.00 60.50 product-moment correlation
*WR = wave riding; RPEres = respiratory perceived exertion; RPEmus = muscular per-
coefficient (r) with 90% confi-
ceived exertion; RPEres HL = respiratory perceived exertion heat load; AU = arbitrary units; dence limits (CLs) was calcu-
RPEmus HL = muscular perceived exertion heat load. lated to determine the
relationships among the pa-
rameters obtained from the
objective and subjective meth-
Active timeðsÞ ¼ the overall wave-riding timeðsÞ ods, as well as judges’ scores. The magnitude of correlation
between analyzed variables was assessed with the follow-
þ the overall paddling timeðsÞ: (2)
ing thresholds: ,0.1, trivial; = 0.1–0.3, small; ,0.3–0.5,
Besides, each wave-riding distance, time, maximum, and moderate; ,0.5–0.7, large; ,0.7–0.9, very large; and
mean velocities were also obtained. ,0.9–1.0, almost perfect (11). Data analyses were per-
formed using the Statistical Package for Social Sciences
(version 23.0 for Windows, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL,
Perceived Exertion Subjective Load. Ten minutes after the end
USA). Statistical significance was set at p , 0.05.
of each heat, perceived exertion (PE) was obtained from
each participant using the 0–10-point Foster scale (7,9). The RESULTS
surfers responded to 2 sequential questions: (a) How intense
The descriptive characteristics of all surfers during individual
was your session on your chest? and (b) How intense was
heats are presented in Table 1. The PE and perceived HL
your session on your legs? (1). A 10-minute delay was cho-
sen so that particularly difficult or easy segments near the
end of heats would not influence the participant’s cumulative
heat rating (7). The participants had to differentiate between
2 types of RPE: local (leg, muscular), which assess strain in
the working muscles (RPEmus) and central (chest, respira-
tory), assessing strain on perceived tachycardia, tachypnea,
and even dyspnea (RPEres) (1,2,22). An exercise score,
referred to as HL, was calculated by multiplying the duration
of the heat’s active time (paddling time + wave-riding time 2
stationary time), by the RPEres or RPEmus, as previously
described (1,8,9). The corresponding HLs were named
RPEres HL or RPEmus HL and measured in arbitrary units.

Surfing Official Scores. The official scores of each participant

were obtained from the competition’s Internet broadcasting
service. All the judges involved in the competition were as-
Figure 1. Correlation between wave-riding distance (m) and respiratory
signed by the Basque Country Surfing Association and used perceived exertion heat load (RPEres HL), AU = arbitrary units; CL =
the score criteria of the WSL. Therefore, judges analyzed the confidence limit.
following elements: commitment and degree of difficulty,

VOLUME 32 | NUMBER 5 | MAY 2018 | 1331

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Competition Load in Surfing
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCyw
CX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC4/OAVpDDa8K2+Ya6H515kE= on 11/14/2023

Figure 2. Correlation between active time (minutes) and respiratory perceived exertion heat load (RPEres HL) (A) and muscular perceived exertion heat load
(RPEmus HL) (B), AU = arbitrary units; CL = confidence limit.

according to the muscular and respiratory systems are also likely). No other objective variables (i.e., total distance, pad-
presented in the same table. dling distance, stationary, active time, wave-riding peak veloc-
It was observed that a very large and significant correla- ity, wave-riding mean velocity) were significantly correlated
tion was found between wave-riding distance and RPEres with judges’ scores. Conversely, very large and significant
HL (r = 0.79; 60.26 CL, p , 0.01, 99.5/0.4/0.1, very likely) correlations were found between the RPEres and judges’
(Figure 1). Also, a very large and positive correlation was scores (r = 0.83; 60.22 CL, p , 0.01, 99.8/0.2/0.0, most
found between active time and both RPEres HL (r = 0.75; likely) (Figure 3). Neither the RPEres HL nor the muscular
60.29 CL, p , 0.05, 99.0/0.8/0.2, very likely) (Figure 2A) perceived exertion (i.e., RPEmus and RPEmus HL) signifi-
and RPEmus HL (r = 0.83; 60.22 CL, p , 0.01, 99.8/0.2/ cantly correlated with the judges’ scores.
0.0, most likely) (Figure 2B). Lastly, RPEmus HL was signif-
icantly correlated with stationary time (r = 0.79; 60.26 CL, DISCUSSION
p , 0.01, 99.5/0.4/0.1, very likely). No other significant cor-
relations were found between the remaining objective and The purpose of this study was to describe the physical
subjective variables (p . 0.05). demands of a surfing heat during a competitive event, as
Moderate and significant correlations were found between determined by both objective and subjective methods. We
the judges’ score and total wave-riding distance (r = 0.37; analyzed the association among these variables and deter-
60.50 CL, p , 0.01, 77.7/12.5/9.8, likely), and large correla- mined how these measures correlated with the judges’
tions were found between the judges’ score and wave-riding scores. To our knowledge, this is the first study to assess
duration (r = 0.68; 60.34 CL, p , 0.001, 97.6/1.8/0.6, very dRPE (i.e., respiratory and muscular) workload in a surfing
competition, and it is also the first to analyze the association
between the objective and subjective methods to quantify
the physical demands in surfing. This is important because
it provides coaches and athletes a practical and inexpensive
tool to quantify the physical activity during a surfing. The
main finding of this study was that significant correlations
exist between wave-riding distance and respiratory workload
and between active time spent surfing and to both respira-
tory (RPEres HL) and muscular exertions (RPEmus HL).
Previously, the relationship between the maneuvers and
the judges’ scores in competitive surfing has been studied
(15); however, this is the first study to examine the associa-
tion between quantified workloads in a surfing competition
with the judges’ score. Our results demonstrated the judges’
score were correlated with the total wave-riding distance,
wave-riding duration, and RPEres.
Surfing performance has been characterized in previous
Figure 3. Correlations between judges’ scores and respiratory studies by analyzing the paddling distance, wave-riding
perceived exertion (RPEres). CL = confidence limit. distance, wave-riding duration, stationary time, and active
time (3,20,23). However, one of the novelties of this study is
the TM

1332 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

that we analyzed the peak and mean wave-riding velocities. knowledge, no previous research has reported the dRPE of
These parameters are relevant to performance and are essen- surfers after a competitive heat. In this study, the RPEres and
tial to understanding the intensity output while surfing. The RPEmus of competitive surfers were 4.35 6 1.54 and 3.25 6
results of our study demonstrated that the average wave- 0.79, respectively, after a 20-minute heat. The RPEres HL was
riding peak velocity during a 20-minute heat in a national 36.60 6 21.90, and RPEmus HL was 28.25 6 15.23.
surfing contest was 0.61 6 0.25 m$s21 and the wave-riding Aerobic conditioning seems to be an important compo-
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCyw

mean velocity was 0.50 6 0.26 m$s21. nent of fitness for surf athletes, as is directly linked to the
Surfers in our study covered a total distance of 447.51 6 physical capacity to catch as many waves as possible during
126.31 m in a heat, which was a noticeably lower distance a heat and could be the difference between winning and
CX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC4/OAVpDDa8K2+Ya6H515kE= on 11/14/2023

than the 1,605 6 313.5 m reported by Farley et al. (2012) losing (3). It has been observed that during a 20-minute
during a competitive heat of the same duration. Because the surfing heat, surfers performed at an intensity ranging from
ocean is not a static environment, the different surfing con- 55% to 90% of their HRmax, suggesting that not only the
ditions might explain the differences between studies. In aerobic system is solicited, but also it is intercalated with
addition, surfers in our study were active 40.1% of the time bouts of high-intensity exercise (3). In our study, the rela-
(i.e., paddling and wave riding), 59.9% of the time stationary tively low RPEres and RPEres HL highlight the physiolog-
(sitting or lying on their boards), and 3% riding on waves. ical demands imposed on each surfer. These are beholden to
The surfers in Farley’s study spent 62% of the heat time as activity durations that are subject to the surf conditions,
active and a 8% of that time riding waves (3). The reason for beach break typology, and surfer’s tactical decisions
higher percentage of active time is due to paddling between (3,17,18,20,21,23). In addition to the aerobic demands, the
the sets of waves, waiting or resting for waves, then having to intermittent nature of surfing activity requires different types
paddle to reposition in the take-off area (3). A previous study of muscular work (i.e., upper- vs. lower-body, isometric vs.
analyzing the time motion analysis of professional surfers dynamic contractions) (18). Surfers are required to have
during a competitive heat revealed that their active time highly developed upper-body and lower-body strength and
was 58.6%, whereas their stationary time was 41.4% (19). power (5,24). Surfing requires upper-body paddling strength
The wave-riding time was similar to the results found in to overcome a higher resistance initially and then to
our study (3.8% vs. 3.1% of the total time), although pro- accerlate on the surfboard to top speed (24), also maximal
fessional surfers spent 18.5% more of their heat time pad- power force production for greater propulsion in water and,
dling, and consequently, less time as stationary as in our anaerobic endurance to withstand long durations of constant
study. paddling (3). Lower-body strength and power is related to
Farley et al. (2012) additionally reported a paddled distance perform maneuvers and wave riding (5). However, in our
of 947.4 6 185.6 m and a wave-riding distance of 128.4 6 study, RPEmus and RPEmus HL values were relatively
25 m for a 20-minute heat. In our study, the distance paddled low. The short duration of the time spent in wave riding
and the wave-riding distance were 74 and 27% less, respec- and the long paddling time back to the break may have
tively. There are also considerable differences regarding the had a low impact on respiratory and muscular exertion.
wave-riding duration among studies; while in our study, the Nevertheless, we need to point out that the subjective pa-
total wave-riding duration during a 20-minute heat was 0.24 rameters, as well as the objective parameters, are highly
seconds, Mendez-Villanueva (19) reported 57 seconds, and influenced by the surf conditions and other factors, such as
Farley et al. (2012) 1.6 minutes. Because competitive level strategic decisions, equipment (3,18,19), level of motivation
may influence the surfers’ activity pattern (19), the differences of the surfers (3,17,19), judging criteria, or season of the year,
among studies in the time motion analysis might be partially and therefore, different results would be expected in a same
due to the differences in the expertise of the participants. duration competitive heat but with different surfing condi-
Nevertheless, differences in the surf conditions (3) (i.e., swell tions. We do consider therefore, that surfing conditions
size, wave length, and wave frequency among many others) should be reported in any surfing study performed, to care-
and beach break typology have been reported to influence the fully compare the results. Because this study is the first one
activity performed by surfers (3,17,18,20,21,23). The physical to quantify dRPE in surf, further research is needed to obtain
demands during surfing are dependent on many factors. more accurate conclusions regarding surfing workloads in
These partially include wave and equipment selection a variety of weather conditions.
(3,18,19), intrinsic motivation of the participants (3,17,19), One of the more used objective methods for quantifying
and the season of the year (i.e., preseason, competition season, load during training or competition sessions is HR moni-
and off-season). Although the results of objective methods to toring (1). However, this method in real-time surfing com-
measure the surfing performance have been previously re- petition is limited because of technical problems, as the HR
ported (3,5,6,18,21,23,24,26), an understanding of the surfers’ monitors do not perform well in water conditions or under
physical demands, as quantified by subjective methods in this the athlete wetsuit, the expertise knowledge involved and
study, may confer a deeper understanding of the mechanisms the time-consuming process of collecting the data from surf-
underpinning surfers’ physical demands. To the best of our ers in every session (1), and the uncomfortable feeling of

VOLUME 32 | NUMBER 5 | MAY 2018 | 1333

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 Competition Load in Surfing

wearing the device while paddling. In this regard, the and knowledge in respect to modifying the conditioning and
assessment of the physiological RPEres HL could result training regimes of the athletes. This is the first study to
in a better understanding of the required competition load address the use of the dRPE for quantifying the surfers’
needed to optimize the sport session process (1), especially workload; future researchers may use the findings of the
for surfers or coaches who do not have the equipment to current study to collect similar data in official competitions
measure the HL variables trough objective methods. How- and heats. Future research should include different cohorts
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCyw

ever, although in other sports, the validity of the subjective of competition spots and locations to describe the variability
methods has been verified to quantify the competition load of the surfers’ workload between various competitions or
(14,25), to the date, we did not find any study that has surfing locations.
CX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC4/OAVpDDa8K2+Ya6H515kE= on 11/14/2023

analyzed the association between objective and subjective

methods in surf. In this study, a large and significant rela- ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
tionship between wave-riding distance and RPEres HL was The authors thank the Guipuzkoan Surfing Federation
found (r = 0.79; 60.26 CL) (Figure 1). On the other hand, (GSF) and the Basque Country Surfing Federation (EHSF)
the active time was also very/most likely largely related to for facilitating data collection and for the opportunity to
both RPEres HL (r = 0.75; 60.29 CL) (Figure 2A) and perform this investigation. No financial assistance was pro-
RPEmus HL (r = 0.83; 60.22 CL) (Figure 2B). The sub- vided for this study. Disclosure of funding received for this
jective method seems to be a good instrument, because of work from any of the following organizations: National
the positive relationships with objective method, to assess Institutes of Health (NIH), Welcome Trust, Howard Hughes
the HL of a surf competition. Medical Institute (HHMI), and other(s).
In competitive surfing, the athletes are judged on their
ability to perform radical maneuvers in the most critical
section while riding the wave (15). Previous research has REFERENCES
provided descriptive data of the maneuvers executed and 1. Arcos, AL, Yanci, J, Mendiguchia, J, and Gorostiaga, EM. Rating of
muscular and respiratory perceived exertion in professional soccer
scores received (15), but to the date, no research has been players. J Strength Cond Res 28: 3280–3288, 2014.
undertaken to explain the relation between wave-riding per- 2. Ekblom, B and Goldbarg, AN. The influence of physical training
formance and the received judges’ score. It seems crucial to and other factors on the subjective rating of perceived exertion. Acta
gain some insights in the relation between the physical de- Physiol Scand 83: 399–406, 1971.
mands of a surfing heat and the obtained scores. Our results 3. Farley, ORL, Harris, NK, and Kilding, AE. Physiological demands of
competitive surfing. J Strength Cond Res 26: 1887–1896, 2012.
demonstrated that judges’ scores were significantly and
moderately correlated with the total wave-riding distance 4. Farley, O, Raymond, E, and Secomb, JL. Scoring analysis of the
Men’s 2013 World Championship Tour of Surfing. Int J Aquat Res
(r = 0.37; 60.50 CL, p , 0.01), large and significant relation- Educ 9: 38–48, 2015.
ship with wave-riding duration (r = 0.68; 60.34 CL, p , 5. Fernandez-Gamboa, I, Yanci, J, Granados, C, and Camara, J.
0.001), and a very large significant correlation with RPEres Comparison of anthropometry and lower limb power qualities
(r = 0.83; 60.22 CL, p , 0.01, 99.8/0.2/0.0, most likely) according to different levels and ranking position of competitive
surfers. J Strength Cond Res, 2017. Epub ahead of print.
(Figure 3). Judges analyze different elements when scoring
6. Fernández-López, JR, Camara, J, Maldonado, S, and Rosique-
waves; some of these elements are directly related to the Gracia, J. The effect of morphological and functional variables on
wave characteristic, as speed, power, flow, and commitment ranking position of professional junior Basque surfers. Eur J Sport Sc
of the surfer (26). A longer wave will provide a surfer more 13: 461–467, 2013.
time and distance to perform more variety of innovative and 7. Foster, C. Monitoring training in athletes with reference to
overtraining syndrome. Med Sci Sports Exerc 30: 1164–1168, 1998.
progressive maneuvers, allowing a combination of major
maneuvers, with a direct impact in the received score, as 8. Foster, C, Florhaug, JA, Franklin, J, Gottschall, L, Hrovatin, LA,
Parker, S, Doleshal, P, and Dodge, C. A new approach to
part of the judging criteria. Therefore, wave selections is an monitoring exercise training. J Strength Cond Res 15: 109–115, 2001.
important factor in competitive surfing and should be note 9. Foster, C, Hector, LL, Welsh, R, Schrager, M, Green, MA, and
by the coaches, indicating that these must combine the Snyder, AC. Effects of specific versus cross-training on running
information of the choice of maneuver, technique, power performance. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 70: 367–372, 1995.
of execution (15), and wave selection in their feedback to 10. Harriss, DJ and Atkinson, G. Ethical standards in sport and exercise
science research: 2014 update. Int J Sports Med 34: 1025–1028, 2013.
the athlete.
11. Hopkins, WG, Marshall, SW, Batterham, AM, and Hanin, J.
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS Progressive statistics for studies in sports medicine and exercise
science. Med Sci Sports Exerc 41: 3–13, 2009.
The low cost and easy administration of the dRPE makes 12. Impellizzeri, FM, Rampinini, E, Coutts, AJ, Sassi, A, and Marcora,
them readily accessible to surfers and coaches. Implementa- SM. Use of RPE-based training load in soccer. Med Sci Sports Exerc
tion of the dRPE in training routines allows surfers and 36: 1042–1047, 2004.
coaches to quantify workloads during training sessions or 13. International Surfing Association. Member Directory. International
Surfing Association; 2013. Available at: http://www.isasurf.org/
competitions heats that are comparable with data derived membership/member-directory/#prettyPhoto. Accessed
from more expensive GPS devices. This may provide insight December 5, 2016.
the TM

1334 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca.com

14. Los Arcos, A, Mendez-Villanueva, A, Yanci, J, and Martı́nez-Santos, 21. Méndez-Villanueva, A, Perez-Landaluce, J, Bishop, D, Fernandez-
R. Respiratory and muscular perceived exertion during official Garcı́a, B, Ortolano, R, Leibar, X, and Terrados, N. Upper body
games in professional soccer players. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 11: aerobic fitness comparison between two groups of competitive
301–304, 2016. surfboard riders. J Sci Med Sport 8: 43–51, 2005.
15. Lundgren, L, Newton, RU, Tran, TT, Dunn, M, Nimphius, S, and 22. Pandolf, KB, Burse, RL, and Goldman, RF. Differentiated ratings of
Sheppard, J. Analysis of manoeuvres and scoring in competitive perceived exertion during physical conditioning of older individuals
surfing. Int J Sports Sci Coaching 9: 663–670, 2014. using leg-weight loading. Percept Mot Skills 40: 563–574, 1975.
Downloaded from http://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCyw

16. McLaren, SJ, Smith, A, Spears, IR, and Weston, M. A detailed 23. Secomb, JL, Sheppard, JM, and Dascombe, BJ. Time–motion anal-
quantification of differential ratings of perceived exertion during ysis of a 2-hour surfing training session. Int J Sports Physiol Perform
team-sport training. J Sci Med Sport 20: 290–295, 2017. 10: 17–22, 2015.
CX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3i3D0OdRyi7TvSFl4Cf3VC4/OAVpDDa8K2+Ya6H515kE= on 11/14/2023

17. Meir, R, Lowdon, B, and Davie, A. Heart rates and estimated energy 24. Sheppard, JM, McNamara, P, Osborne, M, Andrews, M, Oliveira
expenditure during recreational surfing. Aust J Sci Med Sport 23: 70– Borges, T, Walshe, P, and Chapman, DW. Association between
74, 1991. anthropometry and upper-body strength qualities with sprint
18. Mendez-Villanueva, A and Bishop, D. Physiological aspects of paddling performance in competitive wave surfers. J Strength Cond
surfboard riding performance. Sports Med 35: 55–70, 2005. Res 26: 3345–3348, 2012.
19. Mendez-Villanueva, A, Bishop, D, and Hamer, P. Activity profile of 25. Weston, M, Siegler, J, Bahnert, A, McBrien, J, and Lovell, R. The
world-class professional surfers during competition: A case study. J application of differential ratings of perceived exertion to Australian
Strength Cond Res 20: 477–482, 2006. Football League matches. J Sci Med Sport 18: 704–708, 2015.
20. Mendez-Villanueva, A, Mujika, I, and Bishop, D. Variability of 26. World Surf League. Rules and Regulations. World Surf League, 2015.
competitive performance assessment of elite surfboard riders. J Available at: http://www.worldsurfleague.com/pages/rules-and-
Strength Cond Res 24: 135–139, 2010. regulations. Accessed December 5, 2016.

VOLUME 32 | NUMBER 5 | MAY 2018 | 1335

Copyright © National Strength and Conditioning Association Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.