4.4 Article

Salivary cortisol, testosterone, and T/C ratio responses during a 36-hole golf competition

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SPORTS MEDICINE
Volume 28, Issue 6, Pages 470-479

Publisher

GEORG THIEME VERLAG KG
DOI: 10.1055/s-2006-924557

Keywords

cortisol; testosterone; golf; CSAI-2; testosterone-to-cortisol ratio

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The purpose of this investigation was to study the effects of 36 continuous holes of competitive golf on salivary testosterone, cortisol, and testosterone-to-cortisol ratio and their relation to performance in eight elite male collegiate golfers (age 20.3 [ +/- 1.5] years). Thirty-six holes of a 54-hole NCAA golf tournament were played on the first day of the competition. A saliva sample was taken 45 minutes prior to the round and immediately following each hole for a total of 37 samples per subject. Time matched baseline samples were collected on a different day to account for circadian variation. Six-hole areas under the curve (AUC values were calculated for endocrine measures. Significant (p < 0.05) increases were noted for cortisol during competition, however, testosterone did not change during competition compared to baseline. Testosterone-to-cortisol (T/C) ratio was significantly lower throughout the competition compared to baseline measures. Thirty-six-hole AUC testosterone-to-cortisol ratio response was correlated (r = 0.82) to 36-hole score. There was a high correlation between pre-round testosterone (r = 0.71), T/C ratio response (r = 0.82), and 36-hole score. CSAI-2 somatic anxiety was correlated to pre-round cortisol (r = 0.81) and testosterone (r = - 0.80) response. These results indicate a significant hormonal response during 10 hours of competitive golf Good golf performance (low golf scores) in this competition was related to low T/C ratio (r = .82). Additionally, results from this investigation validated CSAI-2 somatic anxiety with physiological measures of anxiety.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available