Search

Golf is a sport played around the globe, with an estimated 42.6 million people playing within the United Kingdom and United States of America alone. To date, there is limited data on the energy expenditure of golf. The present study assessed the activity energy expenditure (AEE) of 16 high-standard (handicap under 5) golfers who completed three rounds of competitive golf either carrying the golf bag (BC), using a manual push trolley (MT) or an electric trolley (ET) (Stewart Golf, Gloucester, UK). Prior to each round, participants were fitted with an Actiheart® accelerometer (Camntech, Fenstanton, UK) to estimate AEE, whilst ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) and enjoyment were collected following each round. Data were analysed using a one-way repeated measures ANOVA, with Hedges g effect sizes (ES) calculated. Mean (SD) AEE was 688 ± 213 kcal for BC, 756 ± 210 kcal for MT and 663 ± 218 kcal for ET ( p  = .05) although these differences were deemed small or less. The ET condition resulted in the lowest mean heart rate, moderate or very large from BC or MT, respectively. There were no significant differences in enjoyment although perceived exertion was lowest in the ET condition. In summary, we report meaningful differences in AEE between the three conditions ( p  = .05), with perceived exertion and maximum HR being lowest when using the electric trolley. Golf may be considered as an effective intervention to increase step count and improve physical activity levels across the general population regardless of transportation methods of clubs.

Clubhead speed (CHS) is a commonly assessed golf performance measure and has been demonstrated to increase in response to physical training. Knowledge of the physical attributes that correlate with CHS will aid in developing effective testing and training protocols for golfers. Thus, the purpose of this review was to identify studies that evaluated the correlation between physical attributes and CHS and synthesise the correlation coefficients using three-level meta-analytic methods. Physical attributes were categorised first by general physical attribute categories. Pooled correlations were also estimated for specific attributes (e.g. jump height, body mass) that were evaluated across three or more studies. The results suggested that CHS had the strongest correlations with measures of upper body power/explosiveness (r = 0.51, 95% confidence interval [95CI]: 0.34, 0.67), lower body strength (r = 0.46; 95CI: 0.27, 0.66), upper body strength (r = 0.41; 95CI: 0.18, 0.63), and lower body power/explosiveness (r = 0.38; 95CI: 0.23, 0.53). Muscle endurance (r = 0.18; 95CI: 0.07, 0.28) and anthropometrics (r = 0.27; 95CI: 0.12, 0.42) had small, but significant correlations, while flexibility (r = 0.03; 95CI: −0.08, 0.14) had a trivial correlation. Several specific assessments such as squat strength, estimated jump power, and medicine ball throw outcomes had large pooled correlations with CHS (r = 0.55–0.63). Overall, the results suggest that measures of muscle strength and power/explosiveness have moderate-large correlations with CHS. Flexibility measures did not have significant associations with CHS, but this may be a result of the specific measures used within the literature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]