4.2 Review

Training Methods in the Sport of Surfing: A Scoping Review

Journal

STRENGTH AND CONDITIONING JOURNAL
Volume 44, Issue 3, Pages 21-32

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1519/SSC.0000000000000674

Keywords

surfing; surfing performance; strength and conditioning; surf training; surfboarding performance

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The growth of surfing has created a demand for training methods to improve performance, but there is a lack of research and evidence in peer-reviewed literature regarding the effectiveness of these methods.
Surfing has grown significantly in the past decade as highlighted by its inclusion in the 2020 Olympic Games. This growth substantiates a need for training methods that improve surfing performance. The purpose of this review is to (a) identify training methods available to competitive and recreational surfers in peer-reviewed literature, (b) evaluate the effectiveness of these methods, and (c) highlight any limitations and potential areas for future research. Five electronic databases were searched, and 8 papers were identified that met the eligibility criteria. Five of these studies used a quasiexperimental design, and 1 used a case study. The remaining 2 studies used field-based outcome measures specific to paddling; however, no study demonstrated improvement in wave-riding performance. The main training methods identified were (a) resistance training, (b) unstable surface training, and (c) cardiovascular training. Maximal strength training of the upper-body and high-intensity and sprint-interval paddling demonstrated effectiveness for improving paddling performance; however, unstable surface training was ineffective. Although all interventions improved laboratory-based outcomes, there were no objective measures of wave-riding performance. The findings of this scoping review demonstrate a paucity and low level of evidence in peer-reviewed literature relating training methods to surfing performance.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available