An exploration into sprint-paddling technique in surfing: Perspectives from elite athletes,coaches and performance support practitioners

Abstract

This study aimed to explore the perspectives of elite surfing athletes, coaches, and performance support practitioners regarding sprint paddling technique, a critical aspect of high-performance surfing. Thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews revealed four major themes: (a) the paddle stroke, (b) the kick, (c) strength and mobility, and (d) body position on the surfboard. Concerning the paddle stroke, participants advocated for longer strokes to enhance forward propulsion, emphasising the importance of reach, hand entry, catch, pull and push phases, and hand exit, aligning with established front crawl swimming principles. The benefits of a forward-weighted body position and minimal trunk movement to optimise paddling efficiency were also highlighted. Moreover, participants unanimously stressed the significance of an explosive kick for generating speed, improving pitch, and enhancing confidence in challenging conditions. Perspectives also underscored the pivotal role of shoulder and core strength, back mobility, and their impact on stroke efficiency. These findings provide novel insights into paddling technique conceptualization within the high-performance surfing community and offer a valuable framework for enhancing surfing performance, advancing knowledge, and providing future applied research endeavours.

Keywords

Front crawl swimming mobility strength stroke efficiency

Introduction

Paddling is a fundamental skill utilised by surfers to position themselves within the ocean to catch waves. Although being highly dependent on environmental conditions, it has been reported that paddling accounts for 42–54% of time during a surfing session.^1–5 Therefore, it is unsurprising that paddling performance - although not directly scored in competition⁶ - has been correlated to competitive surfing level.^7–9 While recreational and lower-level competitive surfers may benefit from improving their endurance paddling capacity,^7,8 evidence suggests that sprint paddling performance is more critical for elite surfers.⁹ Recent findings further reinforce the central role of paddling,¹⁰ highlighting how it enables positive performance outcomes in highly variable conditions. These insights provide a strong rationale for prioritising future research on sprint paddling to support performance progression in elite surfing.

Previous research has investigated potential determinants of sprint paddling performance focused on a strength and conditioning perspective.^7,11,12 A positive association between sprint paddling velocity and normalised upper body strength has previously been reported in male surfers;^7,12 however, this association was found to plateau with a normalised 1RM pull-up exceeding 1.2×bodyweight.⁷ Although it is currently unknown if the findings above can be applied to women surfers, they indicate that alternate interventions, such as those targeting paddling technique, may be required for further improvements in sprint paddling performance amongst elite surfers.

Research pertaining to sprint paddling technique in surfing is currently limited, despite its likely contribution to both velocity and paddling efficiency during sprint efforts. Sheppard et al.¹³ investigated the effect of varying chest position, arm recovery and stroke length on sprint paddling velocity. It was reported that a low chest position and low arm recovery resulted in greater paddling speed than a high chest position and high arm recovery. Moreover, no difference in velocity was observed between short and long stroke lengths. However, Sheppard et al.¹³ employed a within-participant study design and did not deliver a training interview or provide familiarisation with technique alterations. Sheppard et al.¹³ reported that the fastest sprint-paddling velocities were observed when surfers used their natural technique. While this outcome may appear unsurprising given the lack of familiarisation with the alternative techniques, it nonetheless highlights the challenge of evaluating technique modifications without sufficient adaptation time. The finding reinforces that meaningful performance comparisons between natural and altered paddling styles require familiarity with, and motor competence in, the new movement pattern to ensure valid interpretation of outcomes. It also highlights the complexity of evaluating sprint paddling technique and underscore the need for further research that incorporates both performance outcomes and stakeholder perspectives to better inform coaching and athlete development.

Given the positivist orientation of sport science,¹⁴ most previous research in paddling has understandably been performed from a quantitative perspective^1,3,5,^7–9^,11–13 Accordingly, the current body of literature is heavily weighted toward discipline-specific research in which paddling has been conducted within a controlled environment.^7,8,^11–13 Whilst offering valuable insight, this approach is limited in its ability to provide contextual understanding to a particular phenomenon and findings may be limited to specific population groups and/or situations.^15,16 Although practitioner-led frameworks, such as those proposed by Case,¹⁷ offer additional technical guidance, there remains limited empirical understanding of how elite surfers and their support teams conceptualise technique in applied environments.

Coaches, athletes and performance support practitioners (i.e., strength and conditioning coaches, physiotherapists etc.) may hold experiential knowledge that is difficult to quantify through a positivist lens.¹⁸ A qualitative exploration of expert perspectives of technique may produce rich data to complement or contrast the quantitative findings.^15,16 This approach moves beyond the boundaries of discipline-specific research and may be more reflective of the nature of high-performance sport – where multi-disciplinary teams work together to achieve a desired outcome.¹⁹

Although growing, the research and practice of sports science in surfing is still in its infancy. Hence, understanding the current views of key stakeholders in the sport, such as coaches, athletes and practitioners, and how they conceptualise technique is of high value. Therefore, this study will examine the perspectives of sprint paddling technique held by elite athletes, coaches and performance support practitioners. These findings may contribute to improvements in surfing performance by i) providing an understanding of the current views of the high-performance surfing community, ii) sharing knowledge within high-performance surfing and iii) providing direction for future applied research.

Methods

Participants

Ten elite Australian athletes (5 men and 5 women), ten Australian surfing coaches (9 men and 1 woman), and eight performance support practitioners (6 strength and conditioning coaches, 1 physiotherapist and 1 psychologist) voluntarily participated in the study. Purposeful (criterion-based) sampling was employed to ensure key informants from high-performance surfing were recruited to address the research question most appropriately.^20,21 To be eligible, athletes had to be currently or have had experience competing on the World Surf League World Championship Tour (WCT) and/or Challenger Series (CS) within 12 months of the study, while coaches and practitioners had to have experience working with athletes at this competition level. The age range, mean age and competition experience of the athletes, coaches and practitioners is explained in Table 1. Athletes have been classified as ‘elite/international level’ as per the guidelines outlined by McKay et al.²² and amongst the group were former WCT and CS event winners, WCT finalists, and former world junior champions. Signed informed consent was obtained from all participants prior to data collection and the study was approved by the Griffith University Human Research Ethics Committee.

Table 1.

Athlete, coach, and practitioner characteristics.

Group	Age		Experience		Gender
Group	Range	Mean	Range	Mean	Gender
Athletes	21–45 y	27.7 ± 8.7 y	2–15 y	5.6 ± 4.2 y	5M, 5W
Coaches	36–61 y	43.7 ± 8.5 y	5–15 y	8.3 ± 3.6 y	9M, 1W
Practitioners	32–59 y	41 ± 8.7 y	2–8 y	6.9 ± 2.9 y	7M, 1W

Research design

Semi-structured, face-to-face interviews were used to explore the participant's perspectives on sprint-paddling technique and were conducted at a time and location convenient to each participant. The interview guide was divided into three sections starting with warm-up questions on the participant's demographics, surfing background and experiences. Section two comprised questions relating to sprint-paddling technique (e.g., In your opinion, what does good sprint-paddling technique look like?) and those aimed to elicit more specific information, relating to any experiences participants may have had that further highlighted their perceptions of sprint-paddling technique in surfing. For example, participants were asked, ‘Can you think of a surfer you’ve watched or know who you consider to be an amazing sprint-paddler, what is it about their technique that makes them so good?’ Section three of the interview comprised participants viewing six, 10-s videos of de-identified surfers sprint paddling. The surfers were 3 men and 3 women, where one of each sex was determined to be: 1. A recreational surfer with ‘novice’ sprint-paddling technique, 2. A highly trained surfing athlete with a ‘moderate’ sprint-paddling technique, and 3. An elite surfing athlete with a ‘strong’ sprint-paddling technique. The sprint-paddling technique of each surfer in the videos was pre-determined by two elite Australian surfing coaches and one of the authors who has been sports scientist for 8 years with experience in biomechanics. Each video contained the front view, side view and top view of the surfer sprint-paddling (Figure 1). Participants were asked to explain the aspects of the surfers’ technique that they liked and disliked, and the videos were replayed until participants were satisfied with their responses. Probing questions were used throughout the interviews to stimulate further elaboration and ensure participants’ responses were fully understood.^21,23 Therefore, the nature of the interviews allowed flexibility to pursue responses beyond the scope of the specific questions.^23,24

Figure 1.

A video screenshot of the top view (top left), side view (bottom left) and front view (right) video of a surfer sprint paddling.

The interview guide was developed by a team of experts comprising sport scientists and university lecturers in sports pedagogy. The guide was piloted with a development coach and a highly-trained athlete from Surfing Australia. The feedback from the pilot interviews was used to evaluate and improve the interview guide. All interviews were conducted by the lead author, who had prior experience as a sport scientist and conducted research in surfing which enabled them to establish rapport with the interviewees and assisted with the interpretation of the data. Interviews were audio-recorded and lasted between 15 and 56 min (M = 34.2 min).

Data analysis

Adopting a constructivist orientation, data were analysed to explore elite athletes’, coaches’ and practitioners’ perspectives on sprint-paddling technique in surfing. The interview data underwent an inductive analysis using reflexive thematic analysis.²⁵ The lead author transcribed the interviews verbatim and made brief notes of prompted ideas aligned with the research aims for familiarization. Following this, the data was organised in stages two and three to identify patterns in responses. Initial codes were generated and collected to form preliminary categories. These categories were then shared with two co-authors who acted as “critical friends” to challenge interpretations and encourage reflection.^26,27 This reflexive process confirmed coding for certain units and facilitated the condensation of codes into categories, ultimately refining themes. NVivo software (Version 12, QRS, Australia) was employed to manage and code the data iteratively and interpretatively, allowing movement between phases as needed. In stage four, categories were consolidated into themes. Stages five and six involved finalising the names and definitions of the themes and generating a narrative that described each theme in the context of the research aims.²⁸ Rigour was ensured by maintaining reflexivity throughout the data collection and analysis process, with an audit trail to document decisions.²⁹

Results

Four major inter-related themes emerged through the thematic analysis: (a) the paddle stroke, (b) the kick, (c) strength and mobility, and (d) body position on the surfboard. Within each theme are subthemes related to technical facets of the movement that participants perceived to be of importance when critiquing paddling technique. The supporting subthemes are discussed and illustrated using representative quotes, which are labelled as A1 to A10 (athletes), C1 to C10 (coaches), and P1 to P8 (practitioners) for participant identification purposes. (Figure 2).

Figure 2.

Top view images of an elite female surfer sprint-paddling illustrating: (a) The reach, (b) Hand entry, (c) The catch, (d) Pull phase, (e) Push phase, (f) Hand exit, and (g) Recovery phase during the right arm paddle stroke.

The paddle stroke

Within major theme (a), eight sub-themes emerged from the data that are in alignment with previous front crawl swimming research,^30–32 and are presented as follows.

Long strokes

Participants reported they preferred to see surfers focus on taking long strokes as it will provide greater forward propulsion: ‘it probably makes sense to be pulling more water, keeping it nice and long’ (C10). Whereas, taking shorter strokes was inefficient:

They’re not getting much out of it because they’re doing such short strokes as opposed to you can still paddle fast and do long strokes (A3).

The reach

Participants commonly talked about the surfer's ability to reach out with their arm to initiate the paddle stroke, and that a longer reach was advantageous for activating large muscle groups:

Yeah, it's great reach in arms. Uses his kind of whole, it's almost like he's using, he's getting so much reach, he's using his whole down here, his lats, his arm (P1).

The participants’ view that a longer reach is beneficial when sprint-paddling was further emphasised when they reported certain surfers’ reach to be ‘a little short’ and how ‘maybe a bit more reach’ could improve their technique.

Hand entry

In combination with a long reach, several coaches reported they liked seeing the hand entry occur ‘out in front, like in front of the nose’ (C6) or ‘closer to the rail’ (C4) of the surfboard as a reference point. P2 also highlighted the angle of hand entry, and how a sharper angle may cause drag and be detrimental to sprint-paddling velocity:

She's creating negative drag as soon as she puts her arm, her right arm in, it's like it's actually decelerating, decelerating, decelerating, because she's got the force of the water actually hitting the back of her hand all the time.

The catch

Participants highlighted the importance of catching water with the hand by identifying technical aspects they disliked in the surfer's sprint-paddling, making comments such as ‘not gripping the water’ (C9), ‘not getting any traction’ (C3), and ‘doesn’t look like there's a huge amount of force applied into the water’ (P4). In stating potential coaching cues, A7 felt it was important to have the hands ‘cupped,’ whereas C7 describes the ‘feeling’ of catching water effectively:

I feel like you set your hand in and then you’ve got it right, you go ‘Okay, that's in a good spot’ and then by the time it's here, give it as good as you’ve got.

Pull phase

In front-crawl swimming, the pull phase refers to the action of moving the hand and forearm through the water from the front of the body past the shoulder. When thinking about sprint-paddling and watching the videos, participants reported that pulling the hand ‘under’ (P2) or ‘through’ (C9) the board, catching as much water as possible while getting as much depth as possible with the arm was the preferred technique:

Reaching out further, closer to the board, keeping the arm closer to the board the whole way through, keeping it as deep and then pulling the arm out behind you and trying to keep hold, and feel like you’re gripping the water the whole way through the stroke (C9).

Push phase

The action of ‘pushing’ the hand and forearm through the water from the shoulder towards the hip was commonly highlighted by the participants. Coaches and athletes agreed that a strong push phase was important and that lengthening the push phase (extending the forearm towards the hip) can help the surfer generate ‘more power’ in their paddling. C7 describes what they believe is missing in one surfer's sprint-paddling technique:

There's no emphasis from when your shoulder gets straight down to push out next to your body as hard as you can just to be able to paddle harder, longer.

Hand exit

After lengthening the push phase, Coaches highlighted they preferred for a surfer's hand to exit the water close to the surfboard. A wide hand exit was seen as unfavourable, and often occurred when a surfer had a shorter push phase or paddle stroke overall:

I’d definitely lengthen them and try to get that, not wide, like out in front, like in front of the nose, like ‘Okay, let's reach forward in front of the nose, come down through the board’. Yeah, I feel like the entry and the exit when she's doing it, it's more like this, like away from the board rather than when the other model was doing it, it was like out in front, coming down, the exit was right close to the board, rather than being out wide. It feels like, that kind of doesn’t feel like a great technique to me. Yeah, it's chopping those paddles short (C6).

Recovery phase

Once the surfer's hand exited the water, the action of bringing the hand and forearm past their body out in front to enter the water as fast as possible was commonly described by participants. Of those that highlighted this, all believed that having a bent elbow or keeping the arm ‘tight’ (i.e., proximal) to the body during the recovery phase was preferred as compared to an extended elbow or ‘swinging the arm wide’. C7 described this in more detail, adding that a ‘high elbow’ position would enable the surfer to bend their elbow to bring their hand through closer to the body in a faster motion:

You can see the arm gets straight, which in my eyes is creating a bigger circle than you need to. I think it's faster if your elbow comes up and your hand gets through, and you’re back down the side of your board.

P2 and P3 believed that adopting a wide arm recovery action may be inefficient, causing both lateral trunk flexion and the board to move side to side (i.e., yaw) unfavourably through the water:

His right arm is winging out more and he, if you were to look at some of the, he's sliding way off here where he's actually under the board. I think there's a little bit too much lateral movement through his trunk, so he's actually leaking, leaking quite substantially through the middle (P2).

If I’m just looking at the way that board moves, it hooks off to the right, the nose of the board, look, boom, boom, so we won’t be travelling in a linear motion (P3).

The kick

Within major theme (b), three distinct subthemes were identified in the analysis. Across all participants, the kick was consistently described as a critical action in sprint paddling, valued for its ability to generate speed, influence board position, and contribute to an athlete's psychological readiness. (Figure 3)

Figure 3.

Side view (a) and top view (b) images of an elite male surfing athlete sprint paddling. Image A depicts the athlete's body position on the surfboard with their head and chest down as low as possible. While this is favourable, Image B shows that the athlete is laterally flexing through their trunk may be inefficient. This may be an over-compensation caused by limited shoulder range as the athlete is attempting a maximum reach position.

Maximising kicking intensity

All participants agreed that a powerful or explosive kick is imperative to generate speed, as exemplified through statements such as ‘Good kicks, really good power with the legs’ (P1), ‘She's kicking nice and hard’ (C9), and ‘I like that he's kicking a lot’ (A5). Participants also highlighted the depth of the kick, explaining that having a deeper kick will provide greater forward propulsion:

I love the way she's kicking, little bit submerged which is not just surface kicking, so she's going to get a lot of power from it (A2).

Enhances board lift and pitch

Two coaches and two athletes reported the kick plays a critical role in improving the pitch angle of the surfboard when sprint paddling. C7 explains how a powerful kick can create surfboard lift similar to boat planing:

Proper kicking, getting the board from the tail up and on top of the water. Getting the board up and on top of the water is the first major objective and once you feel like it's there, keep it there as long as you can.

Confidence

Kicking hard when sprint paddling was also thought to provide confidence by some participants. P4 stated it could provide a ‘psychological benefit’ while A1 stated, ‘I feel more confident if my legs are kicking.’ C6 describes how kicking hard is fundamental in sprint paddling; providing maximal, whole-body effort, which they believe is critical for catching dangerous waves such as Teahupo’o in Tahiti:

It's like ‘Okay, I’m kicking, I’m going as hard as I can’, rather than just, you know. If life and death's depending on it, if Teahupo’o coming behind me, I’m f@#king getting in there any way I can.

Strength and mobility

Within major theme (c), three subthemes emerged from the analysis of the interview data. When exploring a surfer's sprint paddling ability and technique, participants highlighted the role of various muscles and muscle groups of the shoulder, back and trunk (i.e., ‘core’) in producing force for speed generation. Furthermore, how mobility of the shoulder joint and areas of the back can either enable or inhibit a surfer's sprint paddling technique; an in-depth analysis of the interview transcriptions follows.

Shoulder strength and mobility

The shoulder plays a crucial role in generating power and facilitating efficient movement through the water during sprint paddling. In particular, the shoulder joint acts as a connection point between the arms, upper back and torso. With good range of motion and stability, performance support practitioners point out how the surfer can increase their reach and engage the appropriate muscles to maximise the paddle stroke:

I’d be looking at would be better range of motion; have a look at that shoulder stability just so he can probably get more length out of the propulsive phase, more distance; and then just probably look, yeah, as I said, looking at shoulder stability just to make sure you’re getting equal contribution from force (P4).

P4 further emphasised how limited shoulder range can cause over-compensation in lateral trunk movement to get the desired overhead reach position:

He's actually trying to reach sort of inline sort of with the nose, because like he's stuck in that adducted position, he can’t come over here. He's stuck there so then he's laterally flexing to position his arm like where it should be.

Back strength and mobility

Participants emphasised the importance of back strength to produce force during the paddle stroke. P1 stated how increasing back strength would enable a surfer to ‘draw on those muscles when she's getting that connection.’ In addition, C4 described the importance of engaging the right muscles to alleviate muscle tightness in other areas:

Maybe activate the lats a little bit more so he's not so bunched up through those upper traps, like he's obviously going to be pretty tight.

Two coaches also highlighted how thoracic mobility enables the surfer to rotate their thoracic spine and extend their arms forward and reach farther during each paddle stroke. While watching the sprint paddling videos, C2 described one surfer as ‘getting a lot of torque in his thoracic area,’ while C3 reported ‘he's using, moves his thoracic mobility to get huge reach.’

Core strength

Participants reported that a strong core is critical when sprint paddling as it provides stability and power transfer, enabling surfers to generate efficient and powerful strokes while maintaining balance on the surfboard. A2 describes one surfer's torso as being ‘tense and locked in,’ whereas P2 explains the connection between the upper and lower body:

Hips anchor down on the board and then the kick's good, so you can actually nearly see a connection with her lat, like left side/the right side, like diagonally, you can nearly see like a slinging connection, which is good.

Body position on the surfboard

Participants talked about the surfer's position on the surfboard and how this can either enhance or diminish sprint paddling ability. Participants described the desired body position as ‘streamline’ (C8); to be ‘balanced’ (P1) and to be ‘as flat on the board as possible so you can have the most stability’ (A8). Participants particularly focussed on the surfer's head and chest position while sprint paddling, as well as sharing their viewpoints on trunk movement and its effects on the surfboard. The subthemes that have emerged are presented below.

Head and chest down

Participants highlighted the need for the surfer to have their weight forward with their head and chest down on the surfboard when sprint paddling. Coaches wanted the surfer's chin to ‘come down,’ (C6) and gave cues such as ‘chuck his chin under,’ (C4) as they believed ‘it's going to give you more momentum’ (C7). Athletes described the feeling of having their chest ‘super close’ to or ‘pushing down’ (A8) on the surfboard. A3 echoes this when comparing two surfer's sprint paddling techniques:

If you probably compared his head position and probably his chest position compared to the previous paddler's head and chest position and I feel like that's probably a lot more pushed down into his board more, his head's a bit more further down and he's just gazing out the top of his eyes.

Athletes also reported how adopting a lower head and chest position enables a longer reach position and deeper paddle strokes that is advantageous for faster sprint paddling. A7 explains that this allows the surfer to be ‘closer to the water and he can get a lot more reach,’ and ‘if you’ve got your chest down, you kind of dig in a little bit more.’

While keeping the head down, all participants were in strong agreement that the surfer's head must be kept still when sprint paddling as any head movement was deemed inefficient. When participants noticed head movement, they stated ‘Her head's really inefficient,’ (P1) and ‘Stop moving your head around so much’ (P3).

Minimal trunk movement

Participants highlighted any movement they noticed occurring at the surfers’ trunk or torso when sprint paddling. To reach their hand and forearm out in front of their body as much as possible, certain surfers were flexing laterally in their trunk which participants described as ‘doing a side crunch,’ (C4), ‘body wiggle,’ (C7), and ‘a lot of movement like a snake’ (C6). C3 reported they liked seeing this action, stating, ‘He's got a massive twist in his thoracic which is awesome.’ This view conflicted with all other participants, who believed it to be inefficient and detrimental to the trajectory of the surfboard and generating speed. P3 explains how greater core strength can minimise this and contribute to increasing sprint paddling speed:

So, this guy could exert a lot of power, but again there's a lot of lateral flexion going. There just doesn’t seem to be that trunk stability and that linear movement that I would probably consider to be associated with going fast.

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to gain insights into the current perceptions of sprint paddling technique held by key stakeholders in the high-performance surfing community. Thematic analysis revealed four interrelated themes of sprint paddling technique that may be viewed as beneficial or detrimental to paddling performance, inclusive of the paddle stroke, the kick, strength and mobility and body positioning. Whilst these insights are novel in paddling research, similarities can be drawn with front crawl swimming technique to position the findings amongst a broader body of literature. Importantly, the findings offer a practical foundation for coaches and sports scientists to explore the refinement of sprint paddling technique through targeted training interventions. By highlighting the technical and physical attributes considered advantageous for effective paddling, this research opens pathways for future empirical studies to validate and expand upon these perspectives through biomechanical, physiological and longitudinal investigations.

According to the participants in the present study, stroke length may be of significant importance to a surfer's sprint paddling technique. Comparable to other cyclic activities like swimming,³¹ the interplay between stroke length, stroke rate, and velocity is well established. Research on front crawl stroke shows a non-linear relationship between stroke length and velocity, where extreme increases in stroke length detrimentally affect stroke rate.³² While manipulating stroke length seems energetically favourable compared to stroke rate for enhancing swimming velocity,³⁰ it is suggested that optimising the relationship between these variables rather than singularly maximising stroke length will yield the greatest front crawl swimming performance benefit.^30–32 In this study, comments on increasing stroke length pertained to surfers with perceived shorter paddle strokes, possibly aligning them closer to optimal stroke lengths. Notably, the unexplored relationships between stroke length and stroke rate in surfers necessitate future research to optimise these variables for enhanced sprint paddling velocity.

Participants reported that surfers may increase their stroke length by extending their reach position and having the hand enter the water in front of the nose of the surfboard and close to the rail. A longer reach may increase a surfer's paddling velocity by providing a greater distance over which force can be exerted. Participants perceived a long reach to promote activation of larger muscle groups. This notion, however, conflicts with EMG data collected during paddling in a swim-flume that demonstrates larger propulsive musculature, such as latissimus dorsi, to display minimal activity at hand entry and peak around 50% of the stroke cycle.^33,34 However, it is important to consider that these findings may have been influenced by methodological constraints, such as freshwater testing, water flow dynamics, and environmental differences within the flume setup—factors acknowledged by the authors themselves. Similar to treadmill vs. overground running comparisons,³⁵ flume-based paddling may not perfectly replicate real-world surfing conditions. Nonetheless, by lengthening the reach position, surfers may increase the total duration over which propulsive musculature is active.

At the point of hand entry, participants viewed a sharp angle of attack as being detrimental to sprint paddling performance. Internal rotation at the beginning of the stroke, characterised by a ‘thumb first’ hand entry, appears to be a common technical error during the front crawl stroke,³⁶ and some participants suggested that similar patterns may occur in surfers exhibiting less effective paddling technique. This hand entry technique has been described as inefficient as it may generate drag forces against the back of the hand and expose athletes to injury as a result of increased stress on the biceps attachment to the anterior labrum during swimming.³⁷ Although further research is required to determine the optimal angle of hand entry during surfboard paddling, it appears that surfers may benefit from a flatter angle of entry.

Participants generally perceived that a flatter angle of hand entry was beneficial for reducing drag and maintaining forward momentum; however, several also emphasised the importance of adopting a high elbow catch position to enhance propulsive force. While these two technical elements may appear mechanically difficult to combine, this likely reflects the nuanced and varied experiential interpretations among participants rather than direct contradiction. It is possible that surfers transition through these positions sequentially, entering the water with a relatively flat hand before adopting a higher elbow orientation during the catch phase to optimise both efficiency and propulsion. This interpretation aligns with the complex coordination patterns observed in aquatic locomotion and highlights an area for future biomechanical investigation.

After hand entry, participants suggested it is important for surfers to obtain an appropriate catch position before exerting force. Although not previously explored in paddling, the optimal catch position during front crawl swimming is characterised by a high elbow position that orients the hand, forearm and upper arm to face backward ready for force production.³⁸ The current findings build upon this in the context of paddling by reporting tactile properties, such as traction and ‘feeling’ the water, that can be difficult to quantify. Participants described an effective catch as involving a cupped hand position, which contrasts with drag coefficient studies in front crawl swimming that suggest a flat hand is more efficient.³⁹ Force application applied prior to the catch might generate lift instead of thrust which is deemed inefficient in swimming due to upper limb orientation.³⁸ Given the surfer's non-submerged chest, they could potentially adopt the high elbow catch position earlier in their stroke cycle than swimmers.

Paddling propulsion occurs during the pull and push phase of the stroke. Participants emphasised a preference for the hand to travel underneath the board as deeply as possible during the pull phase. While unexplored previously, coaches have advocated for the surfer to adopt a hand path that enables them to grip the water throughout the whole stroke. Front crawl literature notes the importance of a non-linear hand path and finding ‘still water’ pockets to sustain a grip.^38,40 The biomechanical principle relies on water velocity trailing the hand, diminishing the propulsive reaction force as water velocity approaches hand velocity.⁴⁰ Surfers sweeping their hand underneath the board during the pull phase may effectively locate new pockets of water, optimising a more efficient curved hand path.

Moreover, participants positively viewed surfers placing an emphasis on the push phase of the stroke. Intra-cyclic propulsive force has been reported to peak during the push phase of front crawl swimming, at approximately 75% of the stroke cycle.⁴¹ Therefore, it can be speculated that surfers with a shortened push phase may not be maximising their force production. Cueing surfers to exit their hand closer to the rail of the surfboard may promote a longer push phase, enhancing a surfer's impulse and enabling them to travel through the water at greater velocities.

Participants favoured a high arm recovery during the paddle stroke. While front crawl literature supports this,^36,42 surfers achieving faster velocities opt for a low arm recovery.¹³ It is argued that, unlike swimmers, surfers may not fully benefit from a high arm recovery due to limited roll imposed by the surfboard.^13,36,42 Yet, this overlooks recovery time's impact and the potential increase in surfboard yaw caused by a wide arm recovery. Participants suggested a high arm recovery would reduce recovery time, allowing propulsion to dominate stroke duration and minimising surfboard yaw. Excessive yaw has been associated with increased oxygen consumption during paddling, signalling an inefficient stroking pattern.⁴³ Investigating recovery duration and board trajectory concerning different recovery styles could enhance insights into optimising surfing paddle stroke efficiency.

In addition to a strong and efficient upper body stroke, an explosive and powerful kick during sprint paddling was perceived to provide both a physical and psychological benefit to surfers by all participants. The kick has previously been reported to increase a surfer's peak sprint paddling velocity by 0.16 ± 0.11 m.s⁻¹ in a pool-based 15-m time trial.⁴⁴ Although in front crawl swimming the lower body may only contribute 10–15% of overall speed,^45,46 the downward pressure exerted by kicking during sprint paddling may generate hydrodynamic lift and promote velocity increases by encouraging the surfboard to plane across the surface of the water.⁴⁷ Consequently, when this phenomenon occurs drag force may be reduced, resulting in faster paddling velocities. In addition to the kick providing a biomechanical advantage, coaches and athletes reported feeling more confident in their ability to navigate a challenging take-off when kicking. Sports psychology literature indicates confidence to encourage positive performance outcomes by reducing anxiety when experiencing pressure and promoting better decision-making.⁴⁸ The psychological benefits of how a surfer perceives the kick to influence their paddling velocity may further complement increases in velocity to promote superior surfing performance. Future research could explore how targeted psychological interventions or training strategies enhance this perceptual influence to optimize paddling performance and overall surfing outcomes.

The present study underscores the impact of the shoulder, back, and core strength on sprint-paddling velocity. Shoulder strength and stability were highlighted as key areas of focus for practitioners. Surfers apply force through a range of shoulder internal rotation, abduction and extension during the propulsive phase of the paddle stroke.⁴⁹ Previous research links normalised 1RM pull-up to sprint paddling velocity in weaker surfers,^7,50 showing a plateau at 1.2×body weight, implying a limit to strength training benefits.⁷ Strong shoulder and back muscles may aid injury prevention, reducing upper trapezius tension linked to shoulder impingement syndrome, common among surfers.^51–55

Additionally, both shoulder and thoracic spine range of motion appears to influence a surfer's reach position. Previous studies imply surfers may encounter anterior shoulder muscle tightness, potentially restricting internal rotation range of motion.⁵² However, evidence directly supporting this deficit in surfers’ internal rotation range of motion is lacking. Our findings suggest that limited shoulder internal rotation range may hinder paddling performance by constraining reach or prompting compensatory lateral trunk movement for an optimal position. Swimming research establishes 30 degrees of internal rotation range of motion as sufficient for optimal technique,⁵⁶ yet the stability of a surfboard might alter this requirement due to limited body roll capacity. While prior research in swimming emphasises thoracic mobility for improved reach,^38,57 the present study highlights its relevance in surfing, indicating its potential to enhance reach efficiency. This marks the first study to spotlight thoracic mobility in sprint paddling, suggesting a need for further research into mobility interventions that could refine and optimise a surfer's reach positioning and efficiency.

A strong core (i.e., the muscles of the underlying torso) may support effective transfer of power generated by the upper and lower body and is perceived to promote a powerful and efficient paddle stroke. Core strength is reported to be of particular importance for force generation in water-based sports as the core becomes the reference point for movement in the absence of ground contact.⁵⁸ Therefore, it is not surprising that an association between sprint times and core strength has been documented in swimming literature.⁵⁹ While it has previously been documented that surfers require superior core strength for stability during wave riding and to perform powerful manoeuvres,⁶⁰ this is the first study to highlight the role of core strength as it relates to paddling. Although further research is required in this area, core strength training interventions may reduce energy leakage improve the efficiency of power generation during sprint paddling.⁵⁹

Surfers are perceived to be able to enhance their sprint paddling ability by adopting a forward-weighted body positioning. The belief that a low head and chest position is beneficial to sprint paddling velocity is supported by previous paddling research.¹³ Although hyperextension throughout the trunk has previously been described as a common feature of paddling posture.^44,61 and may indicate a high chest position, faster velocities have been reported to occur when surfers adopt a low chest position. It is plausible that surfers may utilise a hyperextended position during extended periods of low velocity paddling when the primary task demand to perceive their environment as a high chest position may provide the surfer with a more expansive view of their environment.⁶¹ However, by lowering the chest, it is suggested that surfers are able to increase their reach and depth of the stroke and in turn increase their velocity.¹³

Participants identified unnecessary movements executed by some surfers during paddling that may be counterproductive to velocity. Although one participant displayed a conflicting view, there was an overarching belief from the majority of the participants was that lateral flexion of the spine was inefficient. This action may cause perturbations and increase the roll and yaw of the surfboard. This finding can be likened to existing research in rowing and canoeing that supports minimising unwanted movements to enhance the stability of the vessel and reduce drag.^62,63 Therefore, for fast and efficient sprint paddling, it is recommended that surfers aim to limit head movement and lateral flexion.

There are several limitations to consider when interpreting the findings of the present. As a qualitative investigation, the findings represent the subjective perspectives of a small sample of Australian-based elite surfing stakeholders and may not be generalisable to the broader international surfing community. While the participants were purposefully selected for their experience in high-performance surfing, their views may not reflect those of stakeholders in different cultural or developmental contexts. A further limitation is that the paddling video footage critiqued by participants featured surfers paddling in flat water, rather than while paddling to catch waves. This may have influenced how participants assessed technique, given the absence of dynamic, wave-related demands. Nonetheless, this approach was warranted due to the practical difficulty of capturing clear, consistent footage of paddling technique during wave-catching. Additionally, while the study provides valuable insights into stakeholder perspectives, the recommendations drawn from these findings require further investigation to enhance their generalisability and application. Finally, as with all qualitative research, the analysis and interpretation were influenced by the researchers’ positionality, which may have shaped the construction of themes.

When considered collectively, the findings of this study suggest that optimal sprint paddling technique in surfing reflects a dynamic interaction between technical execution, physical ability and body positioning. Efficient upper-body stroke mechanics, an explosive lower-body kick, and the stabilising influence of trunk and shoulder strength are suggested to operate synergistically to enhance board velocity and stability. These elements are underpinned by mobility in the shoulder and thoracic spine, enabling greater reach and stroke depth, while a forward-weighted, low chest position optimises the mechanical efficiency of both stroke and kick by reducing drag and facilitating board lift. Figure 4 presents a conceptual model illustrating how these interrelated components integrate to produce efficient and powerful sprint paddling. This synthesis provides a practical framework for coaches, practitioners and researchers to refine training interventions and evaluate technique holistically.

Figure 4.

Conceptual model illustrating the interrelationship between technical, physical, and positional elements perceived to underpin optimal sprint paddling technique in elite surfing. Efficient paddle stroke mechanics, an explosive kick, and forward-weighted body positioning are supported by strength and mobility capacities, which collectively contribute to enhanced paddling efficiency and performance.

Conclusion

These findings outline current perspectives within the high-performance surfing community and provide an overview of how paddling technique is currently viewed by expert surf coaches, elite athletes, and performance support staff. Collectively, the four interrelated themes described in this study represent a proposed conceptual model of optimal sprint paddling technique, which integrates stroke mechanics, kick dynamics, physical conditioning, and body positioning. This model offers a coherent framework to inform applied coaching practice and provides a foundation for future empirical work examining the biomechanical and physiological mechanisms underpinning sprint-paddling performance. This exploratory research offers an important step toward a more evidence-informed understanding of paddling technique in elite surfing.

Footnotes

ORCID iDs

LA MacDonald

D Chalkley

CL Minahan

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Queensland Academy of Sport (QAS), the Australian Institute of Sport, and Surfing Australia under QAS Grant #152.

Declaration of conflicting interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Barlow

Gresty

Findlay

, et al. The effect of wave conditions and surfer ability on performance and the physiological response of recreational surfers. J Strength Cond Res 2014; 28: 2946–2953.

Farley

Harris

Kilding

. Physiological demands of competitive surfing. J Strength Cond Res 2012; 26: 1887–1896.

Meir

Lowdon

Davie

, et al. Heart rates and estimated energy expenditure during recreational surfing. Aust J Sci Med Sport 1991; 23: 70–74.

Mendez-Villanueva

Bishop

. Physiological aspects of surfboard riding performance. Sports Med 2005; 35: 55–70.

Secomb

Sheppard

Dascombe

. Time-motion analysis of a 2-h surfing training session. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2015; 10: 17–22.

WSL. WSL rule book. www.worldsurfleague.com/asset/36622/2023+WSL+Rule+Book+-+May+1%2C+2023+%284%29.pdf (2023, accessed 26 June 2023).

Coyne

Tran

Secomb

, et al. Association between anthroprometry, upper extremity strength and sprint and endurance paddling performance in competitive and recreational surfers. Int J Sports Sci Coach 2016; 11: 728–735.

Farley

Coyne

Secomb

, 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: 125–127.

Tran

Lundgren

Secomb

, 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: 178–182.

10.

MacDonald

Chalkley

Parsonage

, et al. The importance of paddling to surfing performance: insights from elite athletes, coaches, and performance support practitioners. Int J Sports Sci Coach 2024; 19: 2334–2344.

11.

Coyne

Tran

Secomb

, et al. Maximal strength training improves surfboard sprint and endurance paddling performance in competitive and recreational surfers. J Strength Cond Res 2017; 31: 244–253.

12.

Sheppard

McNamara

Osborne

, et al. Association between anthropometry and upper-body strength qualities with sprint paddling performance in competitive wave surfers. J Strength Cond Res 2012; 26: 3345–3348.

13.

Sheppard

Osborne

Chapman

, et al. Technique adjustments influence the performance of sprint paddling in competitive male surfers. Int J Sports Sci Coach 2013; 8: 43–51.

14.

Petrovic

Koprivica

Bokan

. Quantitative, qualitative and mixed research in sport science: a methodological report. S Afr J Res Sport Phys Educ Recreation 2017; 39: 181–197.

15.

Berg

. Qualitative research methods for the social sciences. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 2001.

16.

Masue

Swai

Anasel

. The qualitative-quantitative “disparities” in social science research: what does qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) bring to bridge the gap? Asian Soc Sci 2013; 9: 211–221.

17.

Case

. Surf paddle techniques: A guide to efficient paddling for surfers. San Diego: Surfing Paddling Academy Press, 2023.

18.

Greenwood

Davids

Renshaw

. Experiential knowledge of expert coaches can help identify informational constraints on performance of dynamic interceptive actions. J Sports Sci 2014; 32: 328–335.

19.

Martindale

Nash

. Sport science relevance and application: perceptions of UK coaches. J Sports Sci 2013; 31: 807–819.

20.

Brackley

Barris

Tor

, et al.

Coaches’ perspective towards skill acquisition in swimming: what practice approaches are typically applied in training?

J Sports Sci 2020; 38: 2532–2542.

21.

Patton

. Qualitative research & evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 2002.

22.

McKay

AKA

Stellingwerff

Smith

, et al. Defining training and performance caliber: a participant classification framework. Int J Sports Physiol Perform 2022; 17: 317–331.

23.

Barriball

While

. Collecting data using a semi-structured interview: a discussion paper. J Adv Nurs 1994; 19: 328–335.

24.

Fontana

Frey

. The interview: from neutral stance to political involvement. In: Denzin

Lincoln

(eds) The SAGE handbook of qualitative research. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 2005, pp.695–727.

25.

Braun

Clarke

. Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qual Res Sport Exerc Health 2019; 11: 589–597.

26.

Smith

McGannon

. Developing rigor in qualitative research: problems and opportunities within sport and exercise psychology. Int Rev Sport Exerc Psychol 2018; 11: 101–121.

27.

Sparkes

Smith

. Qualitative research methods in sport, exercise and health: From process to product. London, England: Routledge, 2013, doi:10.4324/9780203852187.

28.

Braun

Clarke

. Thematic analysis: A practical guide. London: Sage Publications Ltd, 2022.

29.

Nowell

Norris

White

, et al. Thematic analysis: striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. Int J Qual Methods 2017; 16: 160940691773384.

30.

Barbosa

Fernandes

Keskinen

, et al. The influence of stroke mechanics into energy cost of elite swimmers. Eur J Appl Physiol 2008; 103: 139–149.

31.

Craig

AB Jr

Pendergast

. Relationships of stroke rate, distance per stroke, and velocity in competitive swimming. Med Sci Sports 1979; 11: 278–283.

32.

Morais

Barbosa

Nevill

, et al. Understanding the role of propulsion in the prediction of front-crawl swimming velocity and in the relationship between stroke frequency and stroke length. Front Physiol 2022; 13: 876838. Published 2022 Apr 27.

33.

Nessler

Silvas

Carpenter

, et al. Wearing a wetsuit alters upper extremity motion during simulated surfboard paddling. PLOS ONE 2015; 10: e0142325.

34.

Nessler

Ponce-Gonzalez

Robles-Rodriguez

, et al. Electromyographic analysis of the surf paddling stroke across multiple intensities. J Strength Cond Res 2019; 33: 1102–1110.

35.

Mileti

Serra

Wolf

, et al. Muscle activation patterns are more constrained and regular in treadmill than in overground human locomotion. Front Bioeng Biotechnol 2020; 8: 581619. Published 2020 Oct 23.

36.

Virag

Hibberd

Oyama

, et al. Prevalence of freestyle biomechanical errors in elite competitive swimmers. Sports Health 2014; 6: 218–224.

37.

Johnson

Gauvin

Fredericson

. Swimming biomechanics and injury prevention: new stroke techniques and medical considerations. Phys Sportsmed 2003; 31: 41–46.

38.

Maglischo

. Swimming fastest. The essential reference on technique, training, and program design. Hum Kinet 2003: 6; 593–688.

39.

Berg

Bazuin

Jux

, et al. The effect of hand posture on swimming efficiency. Exp Fluids 2021; 62: 1–9.

40.

Soh

Sanders

. The clues are in the flow: how swim propulsion should be interpreted. Sports Biomech 2021; 20: 798–814.

41.

Formosa

Mason

Burkett

. The force-time profile of elite front crawl swimmers. J Sports Sci 2011; 29: 811–819.

42.

Yanai

Hay

. Shoulder impingement in front-crawl swimming: iI. Analysis of stroking technique. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2000; 32: 30–40.

43.

Nessler

Frazee

Newcomer

. The effect of foil on paddling efficiency in a short surfboard. Sports Eng 2018; 21: 11–19.

44.

Loveless

Minahan

. Two reliable protocols for assessing maximal-paddling performance in surfboard riders. J Sports Sci 2010; 28: 797–803.

45.

Deschodt

Arsac

Rouard

. Relative contribution of arms and legs in humans to propulsion in 25-m sprint front-crawl swimming. Eur J Appl Physiol Occup Physiol 1999; 80: 192–199.

46.

Gourgoulis

Boli

Aggeloussis

, et al. The effect of leg kick on sprint front crawl swimming. J Sports Sci 2014; 32: 278–289.

47.

Nakashima

. Mechanical study of standard six beat front crawl swimming by using swimming human simulation model. J Fluid Sci Technol 2007; 2: 290–301.

48.

Vealey

. Confidence in sport. In: Brewer

(eds) Sport psychology. New York: Wiley, 2009, pp.43–52.

49.

Furness

Schram

Cottman-Fields

, et al. Profiling shoulder strength in competitive surfers. Sports (Basel) 2018; 6: 52. Published 2018 May 30.

50.

Coyne

. Influence of anthropometric and upper body strength qualities on surfboard paddling kinematics. PhD Thesis. Australia: Edith Cowan University, 2015.

51.

Cools

Declercq

Cambier

, et al. Trapezius activity and intramuscular balance during isokinetic exercise in overhead athletes with impingement symptoms. Scand J Med Sci Sports 2007; 17: 25–33.

52.

Langenberg

Vieira Lima

Heitkamp

, et al. The surfer's shoulder: a systematic review of current literature and potential pathophysiological explanations of chronic shoulder complaints in wave surfers. Sports Med Open 2021; 7: 2. Published 2021 Jan 6.

53.

Page

. Shoulder muscle imbalance and subacromial impingement syndrome in overhead athletes. Int J Sports Phys Ther 2011; 6: 51–58.

54.

Remnant

Moran

Furness

, et al. Gradual-onset surfing-related injuries in New Zealand: a cross-sectional study. J Sci Med Sport 2020; 23: 1049–1054.

55.

Taylor

Zoltan

. Medical illnesses and injuries encountered during surfing. Curr Sports Med Rep 2006; 5: 262–267.

56.

Holt

Boettcher

Halaki

, et al. Humeral torsion and shoulder rotation range of motion parameters in elite swimmers. J Sci Med Sport 2017; 20: 469–474.

57.

Blanch

. Conservative management of shoulder pain in swimming. Phys Ther Sport 2004; 5: 109–124.

58.

Willardson

. Core stability training: applications to sports conditioning programs. J Strength Cond Res 2007; 21: 979–985.

59.

Patil

Salian

Yardi

. The effect of core strengthening on performance of young competitive swimmers. International Journal of Science and Research 2014; 3: 2470–2477.

60.

Axel

Crussemeyer

Dean

, et al. Field test performance of junior competitive surf athletes following a core strength training program. Int J Exerc Sci 2018; 11: 696–707.

61.

Furness

Hing

Abbott

, et al. Retrospective analysis of chronic injuries in recreational and competitive surfers: Injury location, type, and mechanism. Int J Aquat Res Educ 2014; 8: 6.

62.

Loschner

Smith

Galloway

. Intra-stroke boat orientation during single sculling. In: ISBS-Conference Proceedings Archive, 2000.

63.

Michael

Rooney

Smith

. The metabolic demands of kayaking: a review. J Sports Sci Med 2008 Mar 1; 7: 1–7.