Eur J Appl Physiol (2011) 111:1619–1623
DOI 10.1007/s00421-010-1782-2
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Postural ability reflects the athletic skill level of surfers
Thierry Paillard • Eric Margnes • Mathieu Portet •
Arnaud Breucq
Received: 3 May 2010 / Accepted: 10 December 2010 / Published online: 31 December 2010
Ó Springer-Verlag 2010
Abstract This work analyses surfers’ postural control
and their use of visual information in static (stable) and
dynamic (unstable) postures according to their level of
competition. Two groups of healthy surfers were investi-
gated: a group of local level surfers (LOC) (n = 8) and a
group of national/international level surfers (NIN) (n = 9).
Posture was assessed by measuring the centre of foot
pressure with a force platform for 50 s with stable support
and for 25 s with unstable support (sagittal or frontal
plane). The tests were completed with the eyes open (the
subjects looked at a fixed level target at a distance of 2 m)
and closed (they kept their gaze in a straight-ahead direc-
tion). Results showed that the contribution of vision in
postural maintenance, with unstable support was less
important in the NIN surfers than in the LOC surfers and
that the NIN surfers had better postural control than the
LOC surfers. Firstly, the results suggest that expert surfers
could shift the sensorimotor dominance from vision to
proprioception for postural maintenance. Secondly, there is
a relationship between the postural ability and the com-
petition level of surfers. These observations are likely to
induce new prospects of training for surfers.
Keywords Postural control
Surfing
Proprioception

Expertise
Communicated by Fausto Baldissera.
T. Paillard (&)
E. Margnes
M. Portet
A. Breucq
Département STAPS, Université de Pau et des Pays de l’Adour,
Laboratoire d’Analyse de la Performance Sportive,
EA 4445, ZA Bastillac Sud, 65000 Tarbes, France
e-mail: thierry.paillard@univ-pau.fr
Introduction
Sports training enhances the use of proprioceptive and
somesthesic information, resulting in an improvement of
athletes’ postural capabilities (Perrin et al. 2002). Training
in motor skills requiring a fine postural control can improve
adaptive postural control (Vuillerme et al. 2001; Calavalle
et al. 2008; Lamoth et al. 2009). Training of each of the
levels of the sensory-motor chain (i.e., somatosensoric,
vestibular and visual) improves balance control in complex
conditions (i.e., with sensory deprivation) indicating a
positive effect of training on sensorimotor adaptability
(Perrin et al. 2002). For example, judo, fencing and
mountain bike training lead to privileged somatosensory
afferences whereas dance, pistol shooting and cycling give
greater importance to visual information (Perrin et al.
2002; Lion et al. 2009; Herpin et al. 2010).
In a given sport, the repetition of specific movements
induces specific postural adaptations. Judokas who prefer-
entially perform technical movements either on one-leg
support or on two-leg support positively influence their
postural control, respectively, in unipedal or bipedal stance
(Paillard et al. 2007a). Moreover, there is a relationship
between the competition level and the postural control
level in athletes e.g., gymnasts, rifle shooters, soccer
players (Era et al. 1996; Paillard et al. 2006; Paillard and
Noé 2006; Paillard et al. 2007b; Asseman et al. 2008). In
specific sports, different postural skills are important, and
balance tasks requiring these skills are performed better,
than other ones (Asseman et al. 2004; Paillard et al. 2006;
Asseman et al. 2008). In fact, the more that the postural
condition is specific for a certain sport and difficult, the
greater is the difference in postural ability between expert
sportsmen and non-expert sportsmen (Asseman et al.
2008). However, the sports such as gymnastics, rifle
123
1620
shooting and soccer are practiced with stable support. An
unstable support augments the difficulty of the postural
task as compared to a stable support. Hence, the relation-
ship between the postural ability level and the competition
level should be stronger for the sport activities that involve
maintaining balance with unstable support. The aim of the
present work was to study this relationship when the sup-
port is stable or unstable with a sport such as surfing where
the support is very unstable and variable. Postural ability
was compared between surfers at different levels of com-
petition with stable and unstable support.
Methods
Subjects
Seventeen healthy male competition surfers voluntarily
participated in the experiment. They were divided into two
groups, the first of which comprises eight local level surfers
(LOC) and the second group of which comprises nine
national/international level surfers (NIN). The subjects’
morphological characteristics showed no difference
between the two groups (Table 1). LOC surfers had train-
ing experience of 11.5 ± 1.6 years and NIN surfers had
training experience of 14.8 ± 2.3 years. Participant
exclusion criteria included a documented balance disorder,
a medical condition that might affect postural control, or a
neurological or musculoskeletal impairment in the past
2 years.
Postural tests
A force platform (PostureWinÓ, Techno Concept, France;
sampling frequency: 40 Hz; 12 bits A/D conversion) which
comprised three strain gauges was used to calculate the
centre of foot pressure (COP) positions. Three different
postures were analyzed with eyes opened (EO) and closed
(EC): a stable posture on a rigid floor (STA posture), an
unstable posture on a seesaw device (StabilomètreÓ,
Techno Concept, France) generating instability in the an-
tero/posterior direction (AP posture) and an unstable pos-
ture where the seesaw device engendered instability in the
Table 1 Comparison of the subjects’ characteristics between the 2
groups (one-factor ANOVA)
Group LOC (n = 8) Group NIN (n = 9)
Age (years) 22.2 ± 3.3 22.1 ± 3.1
Height (cm) 175.6 ± 4.9 173.8 ± 3.8
Weight (kg) 69.6 ± 6.3 71.7 ± 4.7
Foot length (cm) 27.3 ± 1.8 27.3 ± 0.8
None of the inter-group differences were significant
123
Eur J Appl Physiol (2011) 111:1619–1623
medio/lateral direction (ML Posture) (Noe and Paillard
2005). The seesaw device was relatively stable (lying on a
segment of cylinder, radius 55 cm and height 6 cm).
Subjects stood barefoot, feet together, their hands loosely
hanging at the sides and their legs were straight. In the STA
posture, subjects were asked to remain as still as possible
for 50 s. When the posture was unstable (ML or AP), the
subjects were instructed to maintain the platform as
horizontal as possible for 25 s. It was envisaged that if
the seesaw touched the ground, the trial would be
excluded. In the EO condition, subjects looked at a fixed
level target at a distance of 2 m. In the EC condition,
they were asked to keep their gaze in a straight-ahead
direction. The order of completion of each posture and
visual condition was randomized. Each test was carried
out only once to avoid the phenomenon of learning. COP
signals were smoothed using a second-order Butteworth
filter with a 10 Hz low-pass cut off frequency. The COP
surface (the projection of the COP displacement, mm2)
and the mean COP velocity (sum of the cumulated COP
displacement divided by the total time, mm s-1) char-
acterized the postural abilities of the subjects (Carrera
et al. 1996).
Statistic analysis
The data analysis were performed with a two-factor
ANOVA [one unrepeated inter-factor: the group factor
with two-levels (LOC and NIN groups) and one repeated
intra-factor: the vision factor with two-levels (EO and
EC)]. The three postural conditions (STA, AP, ML pos-
tures) were analysed separately. Newman–Keuls post hoc
was used to test differences among means. The F value
corresponds to Fisher’s F and the level of significance
chosen was p \ 0.05.
Results
In STA posture, the statistic analysis only revealed a vision
effect for the COP surface and the mean COP velocity,
indicating that the suppression of vision disturbed the
postural abilities for both groups (Fig. 1).
In AP posture, the COP surface presented a group effect
(19.18; p \ 0.0002) a vision effect (F = 25.44; p \ 10-4).
In addition, the interaction group 9 vision was significant
(F = 7.03; p \ 0.01). The mean COP velocity showed a
group effect (F = 12.2; p \ 0.001) and a vision effect
(F = 38.2; p \ 10-6). In addition, the interaction
group 9 vision was significant (F = 5.9; p \ 0.02)
(Fig. 2). The COP surface and the COP velocity were
smaller for the NIN group than for the LOC group. The
suppression of vision increased the COP surface and the
Eur J Appl Physiol (2011) 111:1619–1623 1621

COP Surface in STA Posture (mm²)

** LOC group
300 LOC group
NAT group

COP surface in AP posture (mm²)

NAT group
250 1200 *** ***

200 1000

150 800

100 600

50
400

200
0
EO EC 0
EO EC
COP Velocity in STA Posture (mm.s-1)

14 LOC group *

COP Velocity in AP posture (mm.s-1)

12 NAT group
*** ***
100 LOC group
10
90
8 80 NAT group
70
6
60
4 50
40
2 30
0 20
EO EC 10
0
EO EC

Fig. 1 Comparison of surface COP and mean COP velocity between

the LOC group (local level, n = 8) and the NIN group (national/
international level, n = 9) of surfers with eyes open and closed
(values are means and vertical bars represent the SD) in STA posture
COP velocity for both groups but in a more marked way for
the LOC group than for the NIN group.
In ML Posture, the COP surface only presented a vision
effect (F = 35.02; p \ 10-5). The mean COP velocity
presented a group effect (F = 6.8; p \ 0.01) and a vision
effect (F = 10.6; p \ 0.003). Furthermore, the interaction
group 9 vision was significant (F = 4.3; p \ 0.03)
(Fig. 3). The COP velocity was smaller for the NIN group
than for the LOC group. The suppression of vision
increased the COP velocity for both groups but in a more
marked way for the LOC group than for the NIN group.
Discussion
The NIN group had better postural control than the LOC
group in AP and ML postures but not in STA posture. This
means that in a close unstable stance to the condition of
surfing the NIN surfers are more stable than the LOC
surfers and that may be related to an ability to dual task
between visual and proprioceptive information feedback.
This ability may have been enhanced through the training
in a fluid unstable multi-factorial environment. With the
stable support, the difference between the two groups was
not significant probably because the postural task was too
simple and easy to discriminate their postural ability. As
Fig. 2 Comparison of surface COP and mean COP velocity between
the LOC group (local level, n = 8) and the NIN group (national/
international level, n = 9) of surfers with eyes open and closed
(values are means and vertical bars represent the SD) in AP posture
(antero/posterior direction)
has already been proven by previous studies for other
activities practiced on stable support, there is a relationship
between the postural ability and the athletic skill level (Era
et al. 1996; Asseman et al. 2004, 2008; Paillard et al. 2006,
2007b; Paillard and Noé 2006) for an activity practiced
with unstable support. Nevertheless, the characteristics of
the postural task must be specific (in this case the task was
carried out with unstable support) because there is not any
transfer of postural skill with an upright posture, as nor-
mally adopted in daily life. Moreover, the collection time
period was different between STA posture (25 s) and AP/
ML postures (50 s). Hence, the comparison between STA
posture and AP/ML postures is quite relative. In fact, the
collection time period was reduced for AP/ML postures
because the attentional demand is greater for the dynamic
condition than for the static condition and then the postural
performance is likely to decrease more quickly.
Moreover, as the suppression of vision disturbed the
postural control more for the LOC group than for the NIN
group, the LOC surfers were more dependent on vision for
postural control than the NIN surfers especially with
unstable support. Chapman et al. (2008) have previously
suggested expert surfers could shift the sensorimotor
dominance from vision to proprioception for postural

123
1622
COP surface in ML posture (mm²)
2000
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400
200
0 In perspectives, in surfing, a high level of competition is
COP velocity in ML posture (mm.s-1)
80
70
LOC group
60
NAT group
50
40
30
20
10
0 improves motor control in complex motor tasks (Shea et al.
Fig. 3 Comparison of surface COP and mean COP velocity between
the LOC group (local level, n = 8) and the NIN group (national/
international level, n = 9) of surfers with eyes open and closed
(values are means and vertical bars represent the SD) in ML posture
(medio/lateral direction)
maintenance. The lower dependence on vision for postural
control in expert surfers may be the illustration of a greater
competence to perform technical figures while maintaining
balance than other surfers. It may be that expert surfers
divert the visual function for maintaining balance to devote
it to collect essential information necessary to anticipate
the technical aspects of wave movement.
The better efficiency of proprioceptive inputs in high
level sportsmen than in lower level sportsmen could be due
either to a higher sensitivity of sensory receptors (Perrin
et al. 2002) and/or a better internal model of verticality—a
better knowledge of the orientation of body axis and ver-
ticality—(Paillard et al. 2007b). In fact, the better postural
abilities in the NIN surfers than in the LOC surfers could
be linked either to better sensorimotor adaptability to
training or better genetic disposition. However, although
the number of practice years of surfing was relatively
similar for both groups, the number of practice sessions and
the number of hours spent in deliberate surfing practice
were greater for the NIN surfers than for the LOC surfers,
this may have facilitated the improved postural adapta-
tions. Hence, there was a clear relationship between the
competition level and postural abilities but it may be that
the sport performance level (competition level) influenced
123
Eur J Appl Physiol (2011) 111:1619–1623
LOC group
the postural abilities as a result of intrinsic qualities (nat-
NAT group ural predispositions) or it could also be that the amount of
training influenced the postural adaptation as a result of
certain motor program acquisitions which included specific
postural adaptations. In order to investigate this further, a
longitudinal study involving a large number of young
surfers would be required but, in practice, such a protocol
would be very complex.
EO EC linked to a reduction of the contribution of visual inputs for
* postural maintenance. Therefore, for surfing training it
would be useful to introduce balancing exercises with the
** ** EC on a seesaw platform to improve postural abilities and
proprioception. This type of training would enable surfers
to divert the visual function for maintaining balance and
devote it instead to the visual function of collecting
essential information necessary for anticipating the tech-
nical aspect of wave movement. Moreover, it is probable
that balance training in specific postural conditions con-
tributes to improvement in performance of the sport. It has
been demonstrated that balance training on a stabilometer
EO EC
2001). Balance training also induces better reflex adapta-
tions than traditional training such as strength training
(Taube et al. 2007). When the aim of surfers is to control
the effectiveness of training sessions and prevent the loss
of performance abilities (e.g., overtraining), the completion
of postural tests can be useful since postural abilities can be
correlated with competition level. In this last context, an
involution of the postural abilities enables the risk of
traumatic injury during surfing practice to be detected.
In conclusion, expert surfers could shift the sensorimo-
tor dominance from vision to proprioception for postural
maintenance. Furthermore, there is a relationship between
the postural ability and the competition level of surfers.
These observations are likely to induce new prospects of
training for surfers.
References
Asseman F, Caron O, Crémieux J (2004) Is there a transfer of postural
ability from specific to unspecific postures in elite gymnasts?
Neurosci Lett 358:83–86
Asseman F, Caron O, Crémieux J (2008) Are there specific conditions
for which expertise in gymnastics could have an effect on
postural control and performance? Gait Posture 27:76–81
Calavalle AR, Sisti D, Rocchi MBL, Panebianco R, Del Sal M,
Stocchi V (2008) Postural trials: expertise in rythmic gymanas-
tics increases control in lateral directions. Eur J Appl Physiol
104:643–649
Carrera DJ, Sharpe MH, Pearcy MJ, Frick RA (1996) The reliability
of postural sway measures using the 3SPACE Tracker. Clin
Biomech 11:361–363
Eur J Appl Physiol (2011) 111:1619–1623
Chapman DW, Needham KJ, Allison G, Lay B, Edwards DJ (2008)
Effects of experience within a dynamic environment on postural
control. Br J Sports Med 42:16–21
Era P, Konttinen N, Mehto P, Saarela P, Lyytinen H (1996) Postural
stability and skilled performance—a study on top-level and
naive rifle shooters. J Biomech 29:301–306
Herpin G, Gauchard GC, Lion A, Collet P, Keller D, Perrin PP (2010)
Sensorimotor specificities in balance control of expert fencers
and pistol shooters. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 20:162–169
Lamoth CJC, Van Lummel RC, Beek PJ (2009) Athletic skill level is
reflected in body sway: a test case for accelometry in combi-
nation with stochastic dynamics. Gait Posture 29:546–551
Lion A, Gauchard GC, Deviterne D, Perrin PP (2009) Differentiated
influence of off-road and on-road cycling practice on balance
control and the related-neurosensory organisation. J Electro-
myogr Kinesiol 19:623–630
Noe F, Paillard T (2005) Is postural control affected by expertise in
alpin skiing? Br J Sports Med 39:835–837
Paillard T, Noé F (2006) Effect of expertise and visual contribution on
postural control in soccer. Scand J Med Sci Sports 16:345–348
Paillard T, Noé F, Rivière T, Marion V, Montoya R, Dupui P (2006)
Postural performance and strategy in the unipedal stance of
1623
soccer players at different levels of competition. J Athl Train
41:172–176
Paillard T, Montoya R, Dupui P (2007a) Specific postural adaptations
according to the throwing techniques practiced in competition-
level judoists. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 17:241–244
Paillard T, Bizid R, Dupui P (2007b) Do sensorial manipulations
affect subjects differently depending on their postural abilities?
Br J Sports Med 41:435–438
Perrin P, Deviterne D, Hugel F, Perrot C (2002) Judo, better than
dance, develops sensorimotor adaptabilities involved in balance
control. Gait Posture 15:187–194
Shea CH, Wulf G, Whitacre CA, Park JH (2001) Surfing the implicit
wave. Q J Exp Psychol A 54:841–862
Taube W, Kullmann N, Leukel C, Kurz O, Amtage F, Gollhofer A
(2007) Differential reflex adaptations following sensorimotor
and strength training in young elite athletes. Int J Sports Med
28:999–1005
Vuillerme N, Danion F, Marin L, Boyadjian A, Prieur JM, Weise I,
Nougier V (2001) The effect of expertise in gymnastics on
postural control. Neurosci Lett 303:83–86
123