A COMPARISON OF THE ACTIVITY PROFILE AND
PHYSIOLOGICAL DEMANDS BETWEEN ADVANCED AND
RECREATIONAL VETERAN TENNIS PLAYERS
JAIME FERNANDEZ-FERNANDEZ,1 DAVID SANZ-RIVAS,1 CRISTOBAL SANCHEZ-MUÑOZ,2
BABETTE M. PLUIM,3 IVO TIEMESSEN,4 AND ALBERTO MENDEZ-VILLANUEVA5
Downloaded from https://journals.lww.com/nsca-jscr by BhDMf5ePHKav1zEoum1tQfN4a+kJLhEZgbsIHo4XMi0hCywCX1AWnYQp/IlQrHD3Jml3GHIkbwwSbUd1DiVX8DLTDsdQ6b5Hmc/8LYe6mfIl7JdpP/ssWQ== on 04/23/2020
1
Tennis Performance Research Group, Spanish Tennis Federation (RFET), Barcelona, Spain; 2Faculty of Physical Activity and
Sport Sciences, University of Granada, Granada, Spain; 3Royal Netherlands Lawn Tennis Association, Amersfoort,
The Netherlands; 4Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; and 5ASPIRE, Academy for Sports Excellence,
Doha, Qatar
ABSTRACT
Fernandez-Fernandez, J, Sanz-Rivas, D, Sanchez-Muñoz, C,
Pluim, BM, Tiemessen, I, and Mendez-Villanueva, A. A compari-
son of the activity profile and physiological demands between
advanced and recreational veteran tennis players. J Strength
Cond Res 23(2): 604–610, 2009—The aim of the study was to
examine whether differences in playing level influence the
activity profile and physiological demands of advanced and
recreational veteran men’s tennis players during an hour of
tennis match play. Ten advanced (International Tennis Number
[ITN] 3–5, 45.3 6 5.1 years) and 10 recreational (ITN 7–9,
44.8 6 4.7 years) veteran men’s tennis players participated in
4 experimental sessions: (1) an ITN on-court assessment, (2)
a laboratory incremental treadmill test, (3) an hour of simulated
tennis match play, and (4) 30 minutes of tennis match play
using a portable gas analyzer. Subjects’ V_ O2 and heart rate (HR)
were recorded by portable analyzers. Moreover, energy expen-
diture was evaluated by indirect calorimetry. Temporal structure
and distance covered were determined from video recordings.
Subjects’ V_ O2 (24.5 6 4.1 vs. 23.3 6 3 ml
kg21
min21), HR
(148.3 6 11.5 vs. 149.8 6 8.4 bpm), duration of rallies (DR)
(6.3 6 4.1 vs. 7.6 6 5.5 seconds), and effective playing time
(EPT) (21.7 6 5.0 vs. 23.6 6 5.4%), HR (148.3 6 11.5 vs.
149.8 6 8.4 bpm), and energy expenditure (263.1 6 49.4 and
281.3 6 61.8 kcal
min21) during play did not differ significantly
(p . 0.05) between advanced and recreational players. The
advanced players covered significantly more meters than the
recreational players during their 1-hour tennis matches (mean 6
SD: 3568.8 6 532.2 vs. 3173.8 6 226 m, p , 0.01) at lower
Address correspondence to Jaime Fernandez-Fernandez, jauma_fernandez@
hotmail.com.
23(2)/604–610
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Ó 2009 National Strength and Conditioning Association
the TM
604 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright © N ational S trength and Conditioning A ssociation. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
running speeds. The results indicate that, independently
of ability, tennis match play satisfies the American College of
Sports Medicine recommendations for quantity and quality of
exercise for the development and maintenance of cardiovas-
cular fitness in healthy adults and seems to be a viable and
highly popular mode of healthy activity.
KEY WORDS energy expenditure, fitness, heart rate, racquet
sports, oxygen uptake
INTRODUCTION
T
ennis is one of the most popular sports worldwide;
however, relatively few studies have investigated
the activity profile and physical demands during
play (2,4,6,28,31). A better understanding of the
physiological demands and movement profile of tennis is
important, to develop optimal practice drills and to give
sound training recommendations. In addition, knowledge
of the intensity, volume of work involved, and estimation
of energy expenditure in playing tennis enables a comparison
to be made between tennis and other forms of physical activ-
ity from a health perspective, which may lead professional
tennis organizations (e.g., International Tennis federation
[ITF]) to espouse health benefits of tennis participation on
the basis of experimental interventions (13,24).
The American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM), to
promote and maintain health in healthy adults, recommends
engaging in moderate-intensity aerobic physical activity (i.e.,
intensities of 40–60% of V_ O2max; 60–75% of maximum heart
rate [HRmax]) for a minimum of 30 min
d21, 5 d
wk21 or
vigorous-intensity aerobic activity (i.e., 60% of V_ O2max; 75%
HRmax) for a minimum of 20 min
d21, 3 d
wk21 (1,13).
Previous studies on the physiological demands of tennis have
focused on activity profile (2,8,15,19,20,23,26,28), heart rate
(HR) (2,8,15,15,20), blood lactate concentrations (2,4,8,24,28,30),
and V_ O2 (9,28,29) during tennis play. Mean HR during singles
play ranged from 140 to 180 bpm, equating to 70–90%
HRmax, and mean V_ O2 during play ranged from 23 to

40 ml
kg21
min21, reflecting 50–80% V_ O2max (8,15,16).
Thus, exercise intensity during singles tennis play seems
high enough to categorize it as a moderate- to vigorous-
intensity sport. However, most of the previous studies
investigated young, regular tennis practitioners exclusively
(2,4,6,8,19,20,23,26,28), who usually carry out intensive
tennis practice with the goal of mastering sport-specific
skills. It is likely that many of the adults who can choose
tennis as the preferred physical activity to promote and
maintain health have lower-skill levels than their younger
and more dedicated counterparts. As tennis has an important
technical component, poor sport-specific skills can prevent
less skilled practitioners from deriving sufficient health
benefits out of tennis match play (18). Therefore, the aim
of this study was to examine the physiological parameters
(HR, V_ O2), energy expenditure, and activity profiles of
advanced (high skill level) and recreational (low to average
skill level) tennis players during match play. In addition, this
study investigated whether the physical demands of tennis
meet the criteria laid down by the ACSM for improving and
maintaining cardiovascular fitness in healthy adults (1,13).
METHODS
Experimental Approach to the Problem
To determine whether tennis match play can provide an
adequate intensity stimulus to improve cardiovascular
capacity, we recruited 20 physically active recreational (n =
10) and advanced (n = 10) men’s tennis players. The variables
analyzed were used to describe various physical and
physiological responses of veteran (i.e., $40 years) tennis
players when playing an hour of tennis.
Subjects
The study population consisted of 20 men’s tennis players,
divided into 2 groups according to standards of play based on
the International Tennis Number (ITN) test, which represents
a player’s general level of play (14). The subjects in the first
group (group A) were advanced tennis players (ITN levels
3–5, which represent top division/middle division county
players and top club team players). The subjects in the second
group (group B) were recreational tennis players (ITN levels
7–9, which represent lower club team players and players
competing regularly in singles and/or doubles) (14). Each
subject gave written informed consent to participate in the study,
which was approved by the university institutional review board
for studies involving human subjects. A medical examination
was required of all subjects before participation in the study.
Study Design
Four experimental sessions were conducted during a 30-day
testing period: a) the ITN on-court assessment, b) a laboratory
incremental treadmill test to identify HRmax and V_ O2max, c)
an hour of simulated tennis match play with video analysis
to record the activity profile and HR monitoring, and d)
30 minutes of tennis match play using a portable gas analyzer
to determine V_ O2 and energy expenditure during play.
Copyright © N ational S trength and Conditioning A ssociation. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca-jscr.org
Laboratory Treadmill Test
On arrival at the laboratory, anthropometric measurements
including height and weight were determined, and skinfold
measurements were taken. Percent body fat was determined
from the sum of 7 skinfolds (34) using a Lange skinfold caliper
(Takei Grip-A, Takei Scientific Instruments, Japan). The
complete set of skinfold measures was taken 3 times, and
median values were used for analytical purposes. All subjects
performed a maximal exercise test on a motorized treadmill
(RAM 550S) to determine HRmax and V_ O2max. The
treadmill test consisted of an initial workload of 8 km
h21
with an increase of 2 km
h21 every 3 minutes at a constant
grade of 3%, with a 1-minute break between each stage, until
exhaustion (31). Respiratory gas exchange measures were
taken using a breath-by-breath portable gas analyzer (K4b2,
Cosmed, Rome, Italy) and recorded at 5-second intervals.
Heart rate was recorded by the K4b2 with athletes wearing
a chest belt (Suunto t6). The volume calibration of the system
for gas analysis was conducted before each test day, and the
gas calibration was performed before each test using instruc-
tions provided by the manufacturer. The highest 30-second
mean V_ O2 and HR values measured during the test were used
as maximum reference values (HRmax and V_ O2max). Criteria
for determination of V_ O2max included plateau in V_ O2 despite
an increase in workload, respiratory exchange ratio .1.1, and
HR . 90% of predicted HRmax (12).
On-Court Testing
International Tennis Number Test. The ITN On Court Assess-
ment is an objective on-court assessment based on a set
number of tennis-specific tasks (i.e., ball control, accuracy,
power), developed as a tool to enable players to benchmark
their tennis level against themselves and others around the
world (14). The ITN On Court Assessment was performed
following the instructions provided by the International
Tennis Federation (www.internationaltennisnumber.com).
A ball machine (Tennis Tower, Professional Model, Sports
Tutor Inc.) was used to feed balls to the players who were
tested. A radar machine (Speed Chek, Personal Sports Radar,
Tribar Industries Inc.) was used to measure ball velocities
during the ITN tests. Previous research has demonstrated the
accuracy of the ball feed from the tennis ball machine (5).
Tennis Match Play. Each player (groups A and B) played
a singles match of 1 hour (in pairs), resulting in 10 matches
(5 matches for players of group A and 5 matches for players of
group B). All players were equipped with a Suunto t6
chest-belt telemetry monitor to record HR. Before each
match, subjects performed a standardized warm-up for
5 minutes, including ground strokes (players were asked to
play the balls to the center of the court), volleys plus overhead
plays (one player on the baseline, the other playing volleys),
and services. All matches were conducted on an outdoor clay
court and were played according to the rules of the ITF. A set
of 4 new balls (Slazenger, London, UK) was used for each test.
VOLUME 23 | NUMBER 2 | MARCH 2009 | 605
Physical and Physiological Characteristics of Veteran Tennis Players

Activity Profile. Each player was individually videotaped for 0.80 or higher was considered reliable (27). The differences
the entire duration of the match. A match protocol developed between the group mean values of the variables measured
by Smekal et al. (31), which has been shown to be reliable with the treadmill test and the on-court assessments were
(20), was used to monitor and record the duration of each tested by unpaired Student t-tests. Data were checked for
game and each rally, the duration of the rest intervals normality (Shapiro-Wilk test), and, in cases of nonnormality,
between games and changeover breaks, and the number of nonparametric Wilcoxon signed rank tests were performed.
shots per rally. From these data, the following variables were Values of p # 0.05 were considered statistically significant.
calculated for each game: 1) the duration of rallies (DR in Data were analyzed using SPSS statistical software (version
seconds), 2) the rest times (RT in seconds), 3) the work:rest 13.0; SPSS Inc., Chicago, Ill).
ratio (W:R; the ratio of duration of rallies to rest times), 4)
effective playing time (EPT; expressed as a percentage of the RESULTS
total time of play in a game), and 5) strokes per rally (SR).
Subjects’ characteristics and the results of the laboratory
The EPT was determined by dividing the entire playing time
treadmill test are shown in Table 1. Both groups were com-
of a game (from the beginning of the first rally until the end of
parable with regard to age, height, weight, and fat percentage.
the last rally) by the real playing time (sum of the single
In addition, there were no statistically significant differences
duration of rallies) performed in a specific game.
in the mean V_ O2max (p = 0.64) and HRmax (p = 0.25) values
Distance Covered and Running Speed. The distance covered (m) that advanced and recreational players achieved during the
during the entire match by each individual player and the time treadmill test.
spent (seconds) in various speed categories were measured
using the software Winanalyze V1.4 (Mikromak, Berlin, Activity Profile
Germany) (6,7,24,25). This automated software tracks a visual The variables describing the characteristics of the matches for
marker frame-by-frame in the video files taken during the both groups are shown in Table 2. The results show that
matches. The visual marker was set afterward and was placed differences between the advanced and recreational players in
on the right hip of each tennis player. This position was DR (p = 0.98), RT (p = 0.94), SR (p = 1.00), and EPT (p =
chosen because during the analysis it became apparent that 0.80) were not statistically significant. Figure 1 shows the
the visual marker kept best track on the right hip compared mean distribution of work (i.e., DR) and recovery (i.e., RT)
with all other body parts. In case the visual marker lost track, periods at given time intervals during the 166 games
the marker position was reset manually by one experimenter. analyzed. For both groups, most of the rallies (about 55%)
Final marker positions were analyzed using Matlab 6.5 (The were performed at time intervals between 1 and 6 seconds
Mathworks, Natick, Mass) to calculate distance covered and (p , 0.05); when combined with rallies between 6 and
running speed (by differentiation). Five different speed 9 seconds (about 20%), this represents 70–80% of the total
categories were defined according to a study by Burgess points performed during the matches in groups A and B.
et al. (3): 0–7, 7–12, 12–18, 18–24, and .24 km
h21. More than 70% of the RT was between 9 and 18 seconds.
Test-retest reliability of the method was assessed within More than 60% of all rallies demanded players to execute
1 tennis match. between 1 and 2 strokes (p , 0.05). When combined with
rallies demanding 3–4 strokes, this accounted for more than
Physiological Demands 90% of the total rallies.
V_ O2 Measurement During Match Play. A week after the singles
match play, 13 players (group A, n = 7, group B, n = 6) played
singles for 30 minutes, using a Cosmed K4 portable gas
analyzer to measure V_ O2 and to estimate the quantity of TABLE 1. Subject characteristics.
energy expended during tennis play. Subjects’ V_ O2 and HR
were determined at 5-second intervals. Energy expenditure Advanced Recreational
was calculated from the V_ O2 values using 5 kcal
L21 O2 players players
(n = 10) (n = 10)
as the caloric equivalent. Values were averaged for the
30 minutes of each tennis match to obtain the total energy Age (y) 44.3 6 5.1 44.8 6 4.7
expenditure (31). Weight (kg) 75.9 6 7.9 79 6 3.9
Height (cm) 176.1 6 4 177 6 3.6
Statistical Analyses Fat (%) 21.6 6 3.2 21.9 6 4.8
Mean and SD were calculated for all specified outcome HRmax (bpm) 180.3 6 6.5 185.3 6 5.3
measures in groups A and B. Differences in rally duration, rest V_ O2max 44.9 6 4.3 44.1 6 3
times, and strokes per rally were evaluated using 2-factor (ml
kg21
min21)
analysis of variance. To test the test-retest reliability of the Values are mean 6 SD. HRmax = maximum heart rate.
Winanalyze system, we assessed the intraclass correlation
coefficient for single measures. An intraclass coefficient of
the TM

606 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright © N ational S trength and Conditioning A ssociation. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
 the TM

Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca-jscr.org

Advanced players spent more time in the lowest speed

category (0–7 km
h21) than recreational players and less time
TABLE 2. Movement pattern and associated in all higher-speed categories.
physiological responses during 1 hour of tennis
match play. Physiological Demands During On-Court Assessment
The physiological responses of the on-court assessment (i.e., 1
Advanced Recreational
hour of tennis match play and 30 minutes of play wearing the
players players
portable gas analyzer), which were calculated as mean values
DR (s) 6.3 6 4.1 7.6 6 5.5 for all games performed by players, are displayed in Tables 2, 3
RT (s) 14.5 6 5.2 13.9 6 5.5 and 4, respectively. During 1 hour of tennis match play,
W:R 1:2.3 1:1.8 differences in HR (p = 0.61) and %HR (p = 0.52) were not
EPT (%) 21.7 6 5 23.6 6 5.4
SR (no.) 2.1 6 1.3 2.3 6 1.6 significantly different between advanced and recreational
Distance 3568.8 6 532.2* 3173.8 6 226.0 players. The results also show no significant differences
covered (m) between the advanced and recreational players in HR (p =
HR (bpm) 148.3 6 11.5 149 6 8.4 0.39), HRmax (p = 0.79) and V_ O2 (p = 0.54) percentage of
%HRmax 80.4 6 5.1 80.7 6 3.5 laboratory V_ O2max (%V_ O2max; (p = 0.55), percentage of
Values are mean 6 SD. DR = duration of rallies; RT = laboratory HRmax (%HRmax) (p = 0.90), or energy expen-
resting time between rallies; W:R = work-to-rest ratio; diture (p = 0.18) during the 30 minutes of play wearing the
EPT = effective playing time; SR = indicates strokes per portable gas analyzer.
rally; HR = heart rate; %HRmax = percentage of maximal
heart rate obtained in the laboratory.
*Significant difference between groups (p = 0.04). DISCUSSION
The purpose of this study was to provide a physiological basis
on which to recommend regular tennis play as a healthy
exercise modality in middle-age individuals. Accordingly,
Distance Covered this study investigated movement patterns, physiological
The reliability of the Winanalyze system for measuring the responses, and energy costs during tennis match play. The
distance covered during play was high. The intraclass coef- main finding of the present study was that singles tennis
ficient for single measures was 0.98, with a lower bound of match play can satisfy the ACSM recommendations for
0.57. The advanced players covered significantly more meters quantity and quality of exercise for the development and
than the recreational players during their 1 hour of tennis maintenance of cardiovascular fitness in healthy adults (1,13)
match play (3568.8 6 532.2 vs. 3173.8 6 226 m, p = 0.04, regardless of the playing ability of the participants (i.e.,
Table 2). Running speed between the advanced and recrea- recreational vs. advanced players).
tional players revealed differences in the average speed while Time motion analysis is important to quantify the
playing (3.8 6 0.3 vs. 5.0 6 0.3 km
h21, p , 0.01) and in the physiological responses and requirements of a particular
total time spent in the different speed categories (Table 3). sport (28,32). The present motion analysis characteristics (see
Table 2) showed no significant
differences between groups,
with average values (DR  7
seconds, RT  14 seconds, SR
 2 seconds) in agreement with
previous studies (8,16,17). In-
terestingly, playing level (ad-
vanced vs. recreational) did not
influence activity patterns dur-
ing tennis match play (see Table
2). We have previously shown
that physiological responses
during tennis match play are
influenced by movement pat-
terns (9,20). Thus, as can be
expected, none of the measured
physiological responses were
Figure 1. Mean percentage of playing time and rest intervals during an hour of simulated match play. Black and
white bars represent the duration of rallies (DR) and rest time (RT), respectively, for group A. Dotted and stripped significantly affected by the
bars represent the DR and RT, respectively, for group B. playing levels of the subjects in
the present study.

VOLUME 23 | NUMBER 2 | MARCH 2009 | 607

Copyright © N ational S trength and Conditioning A ssociation. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
Physical and Physiological Characteristics of Veteran Tennis Players

the current study: they drew

a grid on a 21-inch flatscreen
TABLE 3. Speed analysis: the average speed and the amount of time (s) the advanced television and calculated a pro-
and recreational players spent in each speed category during 1 hour of tennis match portionality model. They did
play.
not describe the reliability of
Advanced Recreational this method.
players players A subject’s V_ O2max value is
(n = 10) (n = 10) p an interesting variable from
21 which to glean information
Average speed (km
h ) 3.8 6 0.3 5.0 6 0.3* ,0.01
Walking (s) 2772.0 6 231.4 2525.2 6 194.3† 0.02 about the intensity of play
Jogging (s) 365.8 6 68.8 450.4 6 53.6* ,0.01 during a match, and it also may
Striding (s) 126.5 6 35.0 221.6 6 36.9* ,0.01 serve as a reference from which
Sprinting (s) 24.6 6 8.1 73.2 6 13.3* ,0.01 to provide practical informa-
Max speed (s) 11.2 6 8.6 29.6 6 9.1* ,0.01
tion about suitable condition-
Total match duration 3300 3300
ing for different players (8).
*p , 0.01; †p = 0.02. The mean V_ O2max of players
involved in our study was 44.9
and 44.1 ml
kg21
min21 for
advanced and recreational
During 1-hour matches of tennis, players covered distances players, respectively. Normative V_ O2max values for sedentary
of approximately 3–3.5 km at different running speeds. adults range between 30 and 40 ml
kg21
min21, and the mean
Although the emphasis of running speed is in the lowest V_ O2max reported for regular tennis players ranged from 35 to
speed category (i.e., walking 75–80% of the total time), players 65 ml
kg21
min21, depending on age, gender, and training
still need to accelerate for 10–15 minutes to reach the level (9,16,17). According to the ACSM, the minimal training
necessary running speeds to get to the ball in time. In this intensity threshold for cardiovascular exercise is approxi-
study, advanced players covered greater distances than mately 50% V_ O2max. Studies using portable gas analyzers
recreational players. This can be explained by the higher have reported V_ O2 levels during tennis play ranging from 23
skill level of the advanced players, enabling them to hit to 29 ml
kg21
min21 (2,8,23,31). This corresponds to about
sharper angles and resulting in full use of the court and longer 50% V_ O2max, with values ranging from 46 to 56% V_ O2max
running distances. However, speed analysis also revealed that (8,16,17). In our study, both groups achieved the recom-
advanced players had lower average speeds and spent more mended stimulus for effective initiation of cardiovascular
time in the lowest speed category (walking) during the 1 hour adaptations and conditioning as expressed by the percentage
of tennis match play compared with recreational players, of V_ O2max (50–85%), with exercise intensities ranging from
demonstrating a more continuous movement pattern on 53 to 55% V_ O2max, which is slightly above the minimum
court. These findings cannot be explained by longer rally intensity recommended by the ACSM (1,13). Moreover, the
durations of the advanced players because rally duration and results show no significant differences between groups,
EPT were not significantly different between the 2 groups. suggesting that a lower technical level (i.e., in the recreational
The most likely explanation is the better anticipation of the group) did not prevent these players from obtaining a positive
advanced players. Although the advanced players have to cardiovascular stimulus.
cover more meters during play (because of the wider angles) The measurement of match HR provides a useful index of
compared with recreational players, by anticipating well, overall physiological strain during play. The mean HR in
advanced players could use lower speeds to move to the ball. trained players ages 20–30 years ranges from 140 to 160 and
The values found for distance covered in this study were from 95 to 165 bpm during singles and doubles tennis
much higher than those reported by Murias et al. (21), who competitions, respectively, rising to 190–200 bpm during long
reported 1447 6 143 m for nationally ranked players on and fast rallies, reflecting phases of high activity (8,16,17).
a clay court during 90 minutes of play. The distances covered These mean values represent approximately 70–90% HRmax.
by the hard court players in that study were even lower The average HR values in this study were close to 150 bpm
(1199 6 168 m), which was to be expected, because rallies on for advanced and recreational players, with no significant
hard courts tend to be shorter than rallies on clay courts. differences between groups, which represented approxi-
There are several explanation for this difference. The main mately 80% HRmax. These values are well above the
reason may be that Murias et al. (21) only analyzed distances threshold (60% HRmax) for the cardiovascular training effect
when the ball was in play, whereas in the current study the and are, therefore, within the recommended cardiovascular
walking distances for picking up the ball and changing ends training zone for the entire hour of tennis play regardless of
were included as well. Furthermore, Murias et al. (21) used experience and level. Thus, on the basis of exercise HR
a different, less accurate methodology than the one used in responses, both groups achieved the recommended stimulus
the TM

608 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research

Copyright © N ational S trength and Conditioning A ssociation. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

TABLE 4. Physiological responses during 30 minutes
of tennis match play.
Advanced Recreational
players players
(n = 7) (n = 6)
HR (bpm) 150.5 6 7.8 148 6 7
%HRmax 83.5 6 3.5 79.8 6 2.8
_ 2(ml
kg21
min21) 24.5 6 4.1
Vo 23.3 6 3
_ 2max
%Vo 54.9 6 9.5 53.0 6 7.1
Energy expenditure 263.1 6 49.4 281.3 6 61.8
(kcal
min21)
Values are mean 6 SD. HR = heart rate; %HRmax =
percentage of maximal heart rate obtained in the
laboratory.
for effective initiation of cardiovascular adaptations and
conditioning as prescribed by the ACSM (60–90% HRmax)
(1,13).
The ACSM guidelines recommend that an exercise routine
should elicit an expenditure of 300 kcal and be performed for
a minimum of 3 d
wk21 for total body mass and fat weight
loss (1,13). An expenditure of 200 kcal is also recommended if
the frequency is more than 3 times per week. Data in this
study indicate a moderate caloric expenditure for this mode
of exercise (~265 and ~280 kcal
min21 for 30 minutes of
match play in advanced and recreational players, respec-
tively), which supports the notion that tennis is an exercise
modality that can be appropriately prescribed for enhancing
weight control and fat weight loss. On the basis of the
responses of the subjects to an hour of tennis match play, it
would require approximately 30 minutes to expend approx-
imately 260–280 kcal (i.e., between 8 and 10 kcal
min21).
These values are similar to the results obtained by other
authors (10,11,23). Thus, during 1 hour of singles tennis play,
a recreational tennis player would be expected to burn
approximately 500–600 kcal, which would represent an extra
energy expenditure of 1500–3000 kcal by playing tennis
3 times a week, contributing to long-term weight manage-
ment (22). This has important ramifications because weight
loss and fat reduction are often reasons that motivate people
to exercise (33). The Cardio-Tennis program promoted by
the United States Tennis Association seems to be the latest
trend and activity widely used by the adult population in the
United States as a fitness activity. Therefore, tennis match
play would be a good way to achieve the aforementioned
goals (i.e., weight loss and fat reduction), but more research is
needed to support this idea.
In conclusion, we reported physiological (i.e., cardiorespi-
ratory responses and energy cost) and movement pattern
responses during tennis match play and compared these
responses in 2 groups of veteran tennis practitioners with
Copyright © N ational S trength and Conditioning A ssociation. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
the TM
Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research | www.nsca-jscr.org
different playing levels (i.e., recreational vs. advanced players).
No significant differences between the groups were found in
any of the parameters investigated. The results also suggest
that regular tennis play (i.e., 2–3 times per week) can satisfy
the ACSM recommendations for quantity and quality of
exercise for the development and maintenance of cardiovas-
cular fitness in healthy adults, regardless of the playing ability
of the participants (i.e., recreational vs. advanced players).
PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS
The results of the present study suggest that individuals
playing tennis on a regular basis (2–3 times a week) can work
at a sufficient intensity to meet the ACSM’s recommenda-
tions for enhancing aerobic fitness and promoting total body
mass and fat weight loss (1,13) regardless of their playing
ability (i.e., recreational vs. advanced players). Therefore,
even players with low to average skill capacities could obtain
positive health benefits from regular tennis play. Moreover,
the ACSM suggests that adults also will benefit from
performing activities that maintain or increase muscular
strength and endurance for a minimum of 2 d
wk21 (13).
Therefore, tennis, in combination with supervised strength
workouts, would therefore be an ideal sport to improve
physical activity levels of the general population, and it may
have positive benefits on lifelong health.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was supported by a research grant from the
International Tennis Federation (ITF). The authors would like
to thank the Royal Spanish Tennis Federation (RFET) and
the FIATC insurance company (Barcelona, Spain), especially
Arnau Florit, Drs Angel Cotorro, and Angeles Estruch for
their technical assistance. Moreover, the authors thank the
members of Real Club de Tenis Barcelona 1899 (Barcelona,
Spain), players and especially Ventura Durall for giving their
time and effort to participate in this study.
REFERENCES
1. American College of Sports Medicine. ACSM’s Guidelines for Exercise
Testing and Prescription (5th ed.). Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins,
1995.
2. Bergeron, MF, Maresh, CM, Kraemer, WJ, Abraham, A, Conroy, B,
and Gabaree, C. Tennis: a physiological profile during match play.
Int J Sports Med 12: 474–479, 1991.
3. Burgess, DJ, Naughton, G, and Norton, KI. Profile of movement
demands of national football players in Australia. J Sci Med Sport 9:
334–341, 2006.
4. Christmass, MA, Richmond, SE, Cable, NT, Arthur, PG, and
Hartmann, PE. Exercise intensity and metabolic response in singles
tennis. J Sports Sci 16: 739–747, 1998.
5. Cooke, K and Davey, P. Tennis ball diameter: the effect on
performance and the concurrent physiological responses. J Sport Sci
23: 31–39, 2005.
6. Elliott, B, Dawson, B, and Pyke, F. The energetics of single tennis.
J Hum Mov Stud 11: 11–20, 1985.
7. Federolf, P. Finite Element Simulation of a Carving Snow Ski. Zurich:
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, 2005.
VOLUME 23 | NUMBER 2 | MARCH 2009 | 609
Physical and Physiological Characteristics of Veteran Tennis Players
8. Fernandez, J, Mendez-Villanueva, A, and Pluim, BM. Intensity of
tennis match play. Br J Sports Med 40: 387–391, 2006.
9. Fernandez-Fernandez, J, Mendez-Villanueva, A, Fernandez-Garcia,
B, and Terrados, N. Match activity and physiological responses
during a junior female singles tennis tournament. Br J Sports Med
41: 711–716, 2007.
10. Ferrauti, A, Bergeron, MF, Pluim, BM, and Weber, K. Physiological
responses in tennis and running with similar oxygen uptake.
Eur J Appl Physiol 85: 27–33, 2001.
11. Ferrauti, A, Weber, K, and Strüder, HK. Effects of tennis training
on lipid metabolism and lipoproteins in recreational tennis players.
Br J Sports Med 31: 322–327, 1997.
12. Girard, O, Chevalier, R, Habrard, M, Sciberras, P, Hot, P, and Millet,
GP. Game analysis and energy requirements of elite squash.
J Strength Cond Res 21: 909–914, 2007.
13. Haskel, WL, Lee, I-M, Pate, RP, Powell, KE, Blair, SN, Franklin, BA,
Macera, CA, Heath, GW, Thompson, PD, and Bauman, A. Physical
activity and public health: updated recommendation for adults from
the American College of Sports Medicine and the American Heart
Association. Circulation 116: 1081–1093, 2007.
14. International Tennis Federation (ITF). The ITF International Tennis
Number Manual, 2004. Available at: http://www.itftennis.com/itn/
news/newsarticle.asp?articleid=11891. Accessed December 3, 2007.
15. König, D, Huonker, M, Schmid, A, Halle, M, Berg, A, and Keul, J.
Cardiovascular, metabolic, and hormonal parameters in professional
tennis players. Med Sci Sports Exerc 33: 654–658, 2001.
16. Kovacs, MS. Applied physiology of tennis performance. Br J Sports
Med 40: 381–386, 2006.
17. Kovacs, MS. Tennis physiology: training the competitive athlete.
Sports Med 37: 189–198, 2007.
18. Marks, BL. Health benefits for veteran (senior) tennis players.
Br J Sports Med 40: 469–476, 2006.
19. Mazzeo, RS and Tanaka, H. Exercise prescription for the elderly:
current recommendations. Sports Med 31: 809–818, 2001.
20. Mendez-Villanueva, A, Fernandez-Fernandez, J, Fernandez-Garcia,
B, and Terrados, N. Activity patterns, blood lactate concentrations
and ratings of perceived exertion during a professional singles tennis
tournament. Br J Sports Med 41: 296–300, 2007.
the TM
610 Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research
Copyright © N ational S trength and Conditioning A ssociation. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.
21. Murias, JM, Lanatta, D, Arcuri, CR, and Laiño, FA. Metabolic and
functional responses playing tennis on different surfaces. J Strength
Cond Res 21: 112–117, 2007.
22. Myers, J, Prakash, M, Froelicher, V, Do, D, Partintong, S, and
Atwood, JE. Exercise capacity and mortality among men referred for
exercise testing. N Engl J Med 346: 793, 2002.
23. Novas, AM, Rowbottom, DG, and Jenkins, DG. A practical method
of estimating energy expenditure during tennis play. J Sports Sci
6: 40–50, 2003.
24. O’Donoghue, P and Ingram, B. A notational analysis of elite tennis
strategy. J Sports Sci 19: 107–115, 2001.
25. Orchard, J, McIntosh, A, Landeo, R, Savage, T, and Beatty, K.
Biomechanics of Kicking in the AFL With Respect to the Development
of Quadriceps Strains. Sydney: University of New South Wales, 2003.
26. Pluim, BM, Staal, JB, Marks, BL, Miller, S, and Miley, D. Health
benefits of tennis. Br J Sports Med 41: 760–768, 2007.
27. Portney, L and Watkins, M. Foundations of Clinical Research:
Applications to Practice. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall, 2000.
28. Reilly, T and Palmer, J. Investigation of exercise intensity in male
singles lawn tennis. In: Science and Racket Sports. T. Reilly, M. Hughes,
and A. Lees, eds. London: E & FN Spon, 1994. pp. 10–13.
29. Richers, TA. Time-motion analysis of the energy systems in elite and
competitive singles tennis. J Hum Mov Stud 28: 73–86, 1995.
30. Seliger, V, Ejem, M, Pauer, M, and Safarik, V. Energy metabolism in
tennis. Int Zeitschrift Angewendete Physiol 31: 333–340, 1973.
31. Smekal, G, Von Duvillard, SP, Rihacek, C, Pokan, R, Hofmann, P,
Baron, R, Tschan, H, and Bachl, R. A physiological profile of tennis
match play. Med Sci Sports Exerc 33: 999–1005, 2001.
32. Spencer, M, Bishop, D, Dawson, B, and Goodman, C. Physiological
and metabolic responses of repeated-sprint activities: specific to
field-based team sports. Sports Med 35: 1025–1044, 2005.
33. Stiegler, P and Cunlifte, A. The role of diet and exercise for the
maintenance of fat-free mass and resting metabolic rate during
weight loss. Sports Med 36: 239–262, 2006.
34. Toskovic, NN, Blessing, D, and Williford, HN. The effect of
experience and gender on cardiovascular and metabolic responses
with dynamic Tae Kwon Do exercise. J Strength Cond Res 16: 278–
285, 2002.