| Literature DB >> 35565702 |
Abstract
Nutritional guidance for competitive golfers to improve performance is limited. Recommendations and study conclusions from older research used smaller golf courses compared to today and require a reevaluation of energy expenditure. This review identifies aerobic fitness, in addition to strength, as a key determinant of success. A novel nutritional approach that incorporates carbohydrate supplementation to support aerobic fitness without sacrificing the ability to build strength is presented since longer courses require more stamina. Strategies for training, competition, and recovery are outlined based on different skill levels. American College of Sports Medicine (ACSM) guidelines for carbohydrates, protein, and hydration intake are tailored specifically for competitive golf based on this approach. Putting requires precise movement and can be affected by fatigue. Nutritional studies in golf and similar sports that require focused movements are presented, exhibiting an improvement with adequate hydration and carbohydrate status and caffeine use. Competitive golf poses unique challenges to an athlete and commonly used ergogenic supplements that can improve performance in a variety of circumstances during training, competition, and while traveling are reviewed.Entities:
Keywords: PGA; distance insight report; golf; sports nutrition
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35565702 PMCID: PMC9104041 DOI: 10.3390/nu14091732
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nutrients ISSN: 2072-6643 Impact factor: 6.706
Current distances for different competitive levels.
| Skill Level | Gender | Distance (yds) | Distance |
|---|---|---|---|
| High school | Boys age 15–18 | 6500–7100 | 5943–6492 |
| Girls age 15–18 | 5600–5850 | 5120–5349 | |
| NCAA | Men | 6500–7300 | 5943–6675 |
| Women | 5800–6300 | 5303–5760 | |
| Professional | PGA | 6800–7765 | 6217–7100 |
| LPGA | 6200–6600 | 5669–6035 |
NCAA-National Collegiate Athletic Association; PGA—Professional Golfers Association; LPGA—Ladies Professional Golfers Association.
Luscombe et al. summary table of distances and energy expenditure.
| Study | Year | Gender | Holes | Club | Mean Distance Walked | TEE | Article | Current |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crowell | 1970 | M | 9 | Pull cart | 4.58 +/− 0.44 | 411 | 2982 * | 3108–3550 ** |
| 9 | Carry | 4.02 +/− 0.52 | 450 | 2982 * | 3108–3550 ** | |||
| Gabellieri | 2011 | M | 18 | Carry | 8.7 +/− 0.6 | 1202 | 6067 * | 6217–7100 |
| Dear | 2010 | M | 9 | Carry | 4.4 +/− 0.36 | 511 | 2504 | 3108–3550 ** |
| Zunzer | 2013 | M | 18 | Mixed | 10.5 +/− 0.94 | 926 | 5525–5919 | 6217–7100 |
| F | 18 | 9.89 +/− 0.81 | 556 | 4871–5307 | 5669–6035 | |||
| M | 9 | 5.32 +/− 0.48 | 520 | 2762–2959 | 3108–3550 ** | |||
| F | 9 | 5.25 +/− 0.16 | 273 | 2435–2653 | 2834–3017 ** |
* Listed course yardages converted to meters and divided by 2 when 9 holes played. ** PGA published yardages converted to meters and divided by 2 for 9 holes played. M: male, F: female.
Golf laboratories club velocity data.
| Club Velocity (mph) | Power (amps) | Energy (kcal/hour) |
|---|---|---|
| 70 | 12 | 10.3 |
| 75 | 15 | 12.9 |
| 80 | 19 | 16.3 |
| 85 | 22 | 18.9 |
| 90 | 25 | 21.5 |
| 95 | 28 | 24.1 |
| 100 | 31 | 26.7 |
| 105 | 34 | 29.2 |
| 110 | 37 | 31.9 |
| 115 | 40 | 34.4 |
Conversion to kilocalories/hour by multiplying by 0.8598.
Sell et al. club carriage and metabolic demands.
| Transportation | Average Heart Rate (bpm) | Average VO2 | Expired VO2 | Respiratory Exchange Ratio |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Walking | 120 | 22.4 | 50.8 | 0.87 |
| Pushcart | 100 | 18.3 | 44.2 | 0.63 |
| Riding cart | 88 | 15.6 | 33.1 | 0.71 |
Summary table of recommendations.
| Findings/ | Summary | Level of Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Golf course distance walked is longer than published yardage | Many factors affect the total distance including longer courses, shot dispersion, and inter-tee distance | Strong: Multiple studies reviewed pertaining to golf courses and using golfers |
| Walking the course utilizes the most energy and the major energy system utilized playing golf is aerobic respiration | Of the 3 causes of energy expenditure: Club transportation, hitting the ball, walking the course uses the most energy | Strong/Good: Multiple studies reviewed using golfers, but related sports used to evaluate the anaerobic contribution to swing the golf club |
| Aerobic training improves acclimatization and performance | Endurance trained athletes showed less fatigue than untrained counterparts and a longer time to exhaustion | Good: Study reviewed in related sports at similar VO2 max as playing golf |
| Optimizing glucose and hydration in competition increases endurance, improves performance, and improves putting | Dehydration can cause fatigue, decrease shot accuracy and distance. Golf uses FT and ST fibers that utilize glycogen at an accelerated rate at submaximal levels | Strong/Good: Dehydration and putting studies performed on golfers. Related sports used to evaluate glycogen use in muscle fibers |
| At higher competitive levels strength and distance become more important | Strokes gained from the long game and driving distance are key determinants of success at elite competitive levels for both men and women | Strong: Studies reviewed using golfers |
| Caffeine supplementation improves performance | Caffeine improves club accuracy, driving distance, and overall score but its beneficial effect on putting is debatable | Strong: Studies reviewed using golfers |
| Menthol and cold slushies improve acclimatization and performance in hot environments | Both Menthol and slushies reduce fatigue and increase TTE. Menthol maintained peak power for short periods. | Good: studies reviewed on endurance athletes |
| Creatine supplementation in addition to a strength regimen improves performance | Creatine supplementation with a strength regimen increased driving distance | Strong: Study reviewed using golfers |
| Golfers that travel frequently are prone to infection due to alterations in diet and sleep. Vitamin D can inhibit URTIs in athletes | Vitamin D has been shown to inhibit infections but the level for athletes is higher than the current IOM recommendations | Good: Studies reviewed on endurance athletes |