Goofy vs. Regular: Laterality effects in surfing

Ankle Proprioception in Male and Female Surfers and the Implications of Motor Experience and Lower-Body Strength

ABSTRACT

Dowse, RA, Secomb, JL, Bruton, M, Parsonage, J, Ferrier, B, Waddington, G, and Nimphius, S. Ankle proprioception in male and female surfers and the implications of motor experience and lower-body strength. J Strength Cond Res 36(12): 3497-3504, 2022-The primary objectives were to evaluate if the active movement extent discrimination apparatus (AMEDA) condition (i.e., front foot and back foot plantarflexion, dorsiflexion, inversion, and eversion) and the level of competition explained ankle movement discrimination scores and, thereafter, examined the contribution of surf experience, physical capacity, and ability to proprioception. It was also considered important to re-evaluate the surf experience, anthropometric characteristics, physical capacities, and abilities of male and female surfers. Twenty-six male ( n = 12, surf experience = 18 ± 8 years) and female surfers ( n = 14, surf experience = 9 ± 6 years) completed a pre-exercise medical questionnaire, anthropometric assessment, 8 AMEDA assessments, countermovement jump, squat jump, and isometric midthigh pull assessment. The AMEDA condition and level of competition did not have a statistically significant main effect on ankle movement discrimination scores; however, the effect of the gender/sex was significant ( p = 0.044). Surf experience ( p = 0.029) and lower-body isometric strength ( p = 0.029) had a statistically significant but small main effect on ankle movement discrimination scores. The results also confirmed that there were significant differences in surf experience, anthropometric characteristics, physical capacity, and jumping ability between male and female surfers. As surf experience and physical capacity were only able to explain a small magnitude of ankle movement discrimination scores, it is suggested that ankle proprioception in surfers may be related to both the volume and quality of the motor experience attained, which may be augmented by environmental and sociocultural factors.

Injury Epidemiology of 626 Athletes in Surfing, Wind Surfing and Kite Surfing

Introduction/Background

Surfing, wind surfing and kite surfing enjoy a growing popularity with a large number of athletes worldwide. The aim of this study was to identify and compare the injury profiles and compare the injury profiles of these three extreme water sports.

Materials and Methods

These data for this retrospective cohort study were collected through an online standardised questionnaire during the 2017–18 season. The questionnaire included questions about anthropometry, skill level, injury diagnosis, injury mechanism, environmental conditions and training regimes.

Results

The 626 athletes included reported 2584 injuries. On average, each athlete sustained 4.12 injuries during the season. The most frequent injury location was in the lower extremity, in particular the foot, with 49 (16.4%) injuries in surfing, 344 (18.3%) in wind surfing and 79 (19.7%) in kite surfing. Surfing demonstrated a particularly high rate of head injuries (n = 37; 12.4%). Other frequent injury types were skin lesions (up to 42.1%) and contusions (up to 40.5%). The most common injury across all surfing sports was skin lesions of the foot (wind surfing: 11.7%; kite surfing: 13.2%; surfing: 12.7%). In surfing, skin lesions of the head were frequently observed (n = 24; 8.0%). In surfing, a ‘too large wave’ (n = 18; 24.7%) was main cause of the injury, while in wind surfing (n = 189; 34.5%) and kite surfing (n = 65; 36.7%) ‘own incompetence’ led to the most injuries.

Conclusion

This unique study compares injury epidemiology and mechanism in the three most popular surfing sports: wind surfing, kite surfing and surfing. Overall, injuries were sustained mainly in the lower extremity, while surfing also demonstrated a high rate of head injuries.

Development of evidence-based classification for para surfers with physical impairments: A narrative review

The sport of competitive para surfing is growing internationally without established classification procedures. A classification structure is essential for equitable sport competition and worldwide sport progression. This narrative review summarizes the existing knowledge on Paralympic classification and surfing biomechanics. Its primary purpose is to describe the development of an evidence-based para surfing classification structure that follows the International Paralympic Committee (IPC) Classification Code. Two databases-PubMed and Google Scholar-were searched for three themes: "Paralympic classification", "performance determining factors in surfing", and "impact of impairments on surf performance". The IPC Classification Code and IPC regulations were obtained from the IPC website and official publications. Seventy-six relevant articles were utilized to guide the design of this preliminary para surfing classification structure. A conceptual framework on athlete characteristics, adaptive sport characteristics, and use of equipment is presented to build the essential knowledge base for continual growth of para surfing. This classification structure and conceptual framework will support para surfing sport expansion and help pave the way for its inclusion in the Paralympic Games.

Rate of loading, but not lower limb kinematics or muscle activity, is moderated by limb and aerial variation when surfers land aerials

We aimed to determine whether there were any differences in how surfers used their lead and trail limbs when landing two variations of a simulated aerial manoeuvre, and whether technique affected the forces generated at landing. Fifteen competitive surfers (age 20.3 ± 5.6 years, height 178.2 ± 9.16 cm, mass 71.0 ± 10.5 kg) performed a Frontside Air (FA) and Frontside Air Reverse (FAR), while we collected the impact forces, ankle and knee muscle activity, and kinematic data. A principal component analysis (PCA) was used to reduce 41 dependent variables into 10 components. A two-way MANOVA revealed that although there were no limb x aerial variation interactions, surfers generated significantly higher relative loading rates at landing for the trail limb compared to the lead limb (+28.8 BW/s; F_(1,303) = 20.660, p < 0.0001, η² = 0.064). This was likely due to the surfers "slapping" the trail limb down when landing, rather than controlling placement of the limb. Similarly, higher relative loading rates were generated when landing the FA compared to the FAR (+23.6 BW/s; F_(1,303) = 31.655, p < 0.0001, η² = 0.095), due to less time over which the forces could be dissipated. No relationships between aerial variation or limb were found for any of the kinematic or muscle activity data. Practitioners should consider the higher relative loading rates generated by a surfer's trail limb and when surfers perform a FA when designing dry-land training to improve the aerial performance of surfing athletes.

Differences between stance and foot preference evident in Osprey (Pandion haliaetus) fish holding during movement

BACKGROUND

Skateboarders, snowboarders, and surfers all show stance preferences for which foot is forward while moving. We are unaware of other animals than humans with a stance preference, perhaps excepting Osprey, who fly their caught fish beneath them in a foot-forward stance. We hypothesize there should be no difference between left foot forward, right foot back (conventional) versus right foot forward left foot back (goofy) stances or for fish holding with unilateral left or right foot. Online, publicly available, convenience images of Osprey catching fish were accessed and assessed by five independent reviewers using different Internet search engines or online photo series. Stance preference and footedness were tested using chi-square analysis.

RESULTS

Stance preferences were evident with the left foot forward (conventional stance) on average 64-78% of the time (all p < 0.02). No difference in foot preference for either one-foot grabs of fish during flight or for non-flight nest/perch fish holding was evident.

CONCLUSION

Flight stance of Osprey holding fish shows a lateralized preference in a proportion similar to skateboarders of surfers. We discuss stance preferences in the setting of complex movements and potential flight and survival advantages for Osprey.