See

discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/24214916

How Well do Skinfold Equations Predict Percent

Body Fat in Elite Soccer Players?

Article in International Journal of Sports Medicine · April 2009

DOI: 10.1055/s-0029-1202353 · Source: PubMed

CITATIONS READS

33 1,291

6 authors, including:

Keith George Jo Wallace

Liverpool John Moores University Aberystwyth University
390 PUBLICATIONS 7,606 CITATIONS 19 PUBLICATIONS 166 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

The Athlete's Heart View project

Novel technologies to assess cardiovascular function View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Jo Wallace on 18 June 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Training & Testing 607

How Well do Skinfold Equations Predict Percent Body

Fat in Elite Soccer Players?

Authors T. Reilly1, K. George1, M. Marfell-Jones2, M. Scott1, L. Sutton1, J. A. Wallace3

1
Affiliations Research Institute for Sport & Exercise Sciences, Liverpool John Moores University, Liverpool, United Kingdom
2
Department of Health Sciences, Universal College of Learning, Palmerston North, New Zealand
3
Department of Sport and Exercise Science, Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth, United Kingdom

Key words Abstract to determine a novel soccer-specific equation.

Downloaded by: University Wales Aberystwyth. Copyrighted material.

●▶ adiposity & All players had a reference estimate of percent
●▶ BMI
The use of generic equations for estimating per-
●▶ DXA
cent body fat from skinfold thicknesses can be
●▶ fat patterning
criticised when applied to specific sports. The
●▶ skinfold
present aims were to compare existing methods
of using skinfold data and to derive an equation
for predicting body fat values in professional soc-
cer players. Forty-five professional soccer players
(24.2 ± 5.0 years; 82.0 ± 8.5 kg; 1.82 ± 0.07 m) par-
ticipated. Skinfold thicknesses were assessed at
eight sites for the application of existing predic-
tion equations. Skinfold data were also utilised
fat by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA).
The existing skinfold equations differed from
the DXA-referenced values by varying degrees,
the equation of Withers et al. (1987) demon-
strating the lowest bias and highest relationship
and agreement with DXA. Regression analysis
resulted in an equation incorporating anterior
thigh, abdominal, triceps and medial calf sites,
accounting for 78.4 % variance in DXA criterion
values.

Introduction who may display extremes of body composition

accepted after revision
January 19, 2009
Bibliography
DOI 10.1055/s-0029-1202353
Published online:
March 19, 2009
Int J Sports Med 2009; 30:
607–613 © Georg Thieme
Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York
ISSN 0172-4622
Correspondence
L. Sutton
Department of Sport and
Exercise Science
Liverpool John Moores Uni-
versity
Henry Cotton Building
Liverpool
United Kingdom
L3 2ET
Tel.: + 151/231/43 19
Fax: + 151/231/43 53
L.Sutton@2003.ljmu.ac.uk
& and fat distribution. In particular, the density of
The assessment of body composition, and specifi-
cally percent body fat, is regularly undertaken
when high-performance athletes are being moni-
tored as they progress through their seasonal fit-
ness goals. Most athletes attempt to reduce
adiposity levels alongside improving their fit-
ness, although there are no defined optimal val-
ues for specific sports, apart from reference
figures provided from descriptive data for per-
cent body fat. Reliance on such databases, how-
ever, can be fraught with error when the
observations are made on different groups of
varying fitness levels and at different phases of
preparation for the competitive season [10].
Additionally, a major source of error may arise
from the method employed to obtain the data
that provide an estimate of body fat mass. Fur-
ther, the utilisation of generic databases and pre-
diction models may introduce appreciable error.
The validity of existing predictive formulae for
estimating whole-body fat mass has been estab-
lished using hydrodensitometry. Though this
method has been long regarded as the best alter-
native to a ‘gold standard’, the assumptions in
densitometry may not hold true for elite athletes
the fat-free mass is assumed to be constant, as is
the density of the fat-free mass compartment.
Athletes tend to have a larger muscle mass and a
higher bone density than normal, a trend which
would affect these assumptions [10]. These defi-
ciencies have led to the use of dual-energy X-ray
absorptiometry (DXA), or multi-compartment
models frequently including DXA, as a reference
method for assessment of body composition.
Whilst remaining a clinical and experimental
tool, DXA is a promising candidate in any
comparison of methods for analysis of body com-
position.
Skinfold thicknesses have long been utilised to
predict body fat, with in excess of one hundred
equations being reported for this purpose. Such
use, however, has been criticised due its depend-
ence on the quantitative assumptions associated
with hydrodensitometry, the means by which
the equations were validated [6], as well as the
problems associated with the choice of equation
[26]. Nevertheless, the assessment of skinfolds
(SKF) is widely adopted when monitoring changes
in body composition due to training or dietary
interventions, and is suitable for field contexts

Reilly T et al. Skinfold Equations for Elite Soccer Players … Int J Sports Med 2009; 30: 607–613
608 Training & Testing
with athletes in training camps and sports clubs. For many years,
the most common approach was to determine the skinfold thick-
ness at four sites: biceps, triceps, subscapular and iliac crest [9].
This concentration on upper-body sites only, however, is unrep-
resentative of the body as a whole and is theoretically problem-
atic in athletes who train the lower limbs. The concerns led Reilly
et al. [16] to recommend the use of summed skinfolds (ΣSKF) in
regular assessments, including five skinfold sites – the four loca-
tions used by Durnin and Womersley [9] plus the anterior
thigh.
Whilst equations are available for estimating percent body fat in
the general population, little attention has been directed towards
the generation of sports-specific equations. Errors in applying
generic equations are likely due to the specificity of sports caus-
ing a distinct fat patterning and the narrow range of adiposity to
be expected at the elite level. This homogeneity is promoted in
sports such as professional soccer (association football), where
individuals function within a team unit and participate mostly
in common training practices. Soccer is the most popular sport
worldwide, with 205 national associations affiliated to the inter-
national governing body and around 240 million active partici-
pants. Since assessment of body composition is a routine feature
of monitoring competitive soccer players, the need for a dedi-
cated equation to estimate percent body fat of participants is
apparent. The aims of this study were to: 1) Compare existing
methods of using skinfold data with a DXA assessment; and 2)
Derive a ‘novel’ equation for predicting body fat values in elite
soccer players.
Methods
& minutes. Each scan was performed and analysed by the same
Participants
In total, 45 male professional soccer players from three Premier
League clubs agreed to participate in the study. The majority of
the data were collected prior to the commencement of the com-
petitive season. The mean ± SD age, mass and height were
24.2 ± 5.0 years, 82.0 ± 8.5 kg and 1.82 ± 0.07 m, respectively. Data
from all 45 participants were used to assess the different meth-
ods of predicting percent body fat or adiposity and to generate a
soccer-specific skinfold equation. The participants could be
regarded as highly trained at the time of observation. Written
informed consent was received from all players prior to testing.
Ethics approval for this study was obtained from the Institution’s
Research Ethics Committee.
Research design
Assessments were conducted according to the anthropometric
profile recommended by the International Society for the
Advancement of Kinanthropometry (ISAK [13]). All of the par-
ticipants were further assessed using DXA. The skinfold data
were applied to a number of existing methods commonly
reported in the literature for the prediction of adiposity and per-
cent body fat, and comparisons were made with DXA values. A
new prediction equation was derived from the skinfold and the
DXA data using multiple regression analysis.
Anthropometry
Height (stretched stature), mass and skinfold measurements
were taken according to standard procedures used by ISAK [13].
Body mass index (BMI) was calculated and eight skinfold thick-
nesses (triceps, biceps, subscapular, iliac crest, supraspinale,
Reilly T et al. Skinfold Equations for Elite Soccer Players … Int J Sports Med 2009; 30: 607–613
abdominal, anterior thigh and medial calf) were marked and
measured. Data were collected by two ISAK Criterion Anthro-
pometrists. Duplicate measurements were obtained from each
site and a third measure was triggered if the technical error of
measurement advised by ISAK was exceeded. Harpenden skin-
fold callipers (Cranlea, Birmingham, UK) were used in collection
of data.
A new prediction equation was derived from the data obtained
from the 45 soccer players. A series of existing equations was
applied to the dataset to estimate percent body fat: Durnin and
Womersley [9]; Lohman [12]; Withers et al. [26] (The equation
of Withers et al. [ %BF = 495/(1.0988–0.0004*Σ7) − 450] was
derived from the 1987 dataset, but not published in full in the
original study; the Σ7 is all sites, minus the iliac crest); and Eston
and co-workers’ Σ2 and Σ6SKF [11]. Where body density was cal-
culated from a formula, the formula of Siri [19] was used to esti-
mate percent body fat. The Σ4SKF [9], the British Olympic
Association’s Σ5SKF [16], the Σ8SKF (sum of all measured skinfold
sites) and the body mass index (BMI) were employed as predic-
tors of adiposity.
Downloaded by: University Wales Aberystwyth. Copyrighted material.
Dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry
All 45 participants underwent measurement of percent body fat
( %BF) by DXA (Hologic QDR Series Discovery A, Bedford, MA).
The adult whole-body fan-beam mode (QDR for Windows Ver-
sion 12:4:3) was used according to standard protocol. All par-
ticipants were asked about current injuries, orthopaedic pins or
implants, and then to remove any jewellery and other metal
objects from their person. The participants assumed a station-
ary, supine position on the bed, with hands level with the hips
and feet slightly apart. Total scan time was approximately three
investigator.
Statistical analysis
Assessment of residuals using the Shapiro-Wilk test revealed a
violation of the assumption of normality in the raw skinfold
data; therefore, Spearman’s rho was used in establishing the
relationships between DXA values and skinfold thickness values.
The technical error of measurement of each anthropometrist
was calculated. Summed skinfold values and predicted percent
fat values did not violate the assumption of normality of distri-
bution. Existing skinfold equations were compared through the
assessment of bias, correlations and limits of agreement. When
assessing agreement, data showed heteroscedasticity and, as
log-transformation had an adverse effect on the normality of
distribution and did not remove fully the relationship between
the differences and the size of the measurement, a regression-
based approach was used to calculate 95 % limits of agreement.
With this approach, the relationship between the difference and
the magnitude is accounted for by modelling the variability in
the SD of the difference directly as a function of the level of the
measurement using linear regression [2]. Relationships between
DXA and BMI and the ΣSKF methods were determined using Pear-
son’s correlation coefficient with 95 % confidence intervals. Step-
wise multiple regression analysis was performed using the
skinfold and DXA data, from which a ‘novel’ soccer-specific pre-
diction equation was derived. Data for the regression analysis
conformed to the assumptions of homoscedasticity, independ-
ent and normally distributed errors, and no multicollinearity.
Statistical analyses were conducted with SPSS for Windows ver-
 Training & Testing 609

Table 1 Technical error of measurement for skinfold measurements.

Anthropometrist 1 Anthropometrist 2
TEM % TEM %
triceps 0.15 1.96 0.08 1.51
subscapular 0.13 1.76 0.13 1.77
biceps 0.07 1.83 0.14 3.99
iliac crest 0.21 1.42 0.16 1.95
supraspinale 0.15 2.00 0.20 3.35
abdominal 0.33 2.10 0.15 1.64
anterior thigh 0.24 2.26 0.19 2.76
medial calf 0.16 2.37 0.13 2.97
TEM = technical error of measurement

Table 2 The relationships between the different skinfold sites and percent Table 3 Relationships between DXA-derived body fat values and i) existing
body fat by DXA in professional soccer players (n = 45). equations for the prediction of percent body fat and ii) prediction of adiposity
by BMI and the ΣSKF method in professional soccer players (n = 45).
DXA rs 95 % CI
triceps 0.64 0.45–0.77 DXA r 95 % CI
subscapular 0.40 0.15–0.60 i) Durnin and Womersley (1974) 0.83 0.70–0.90

Downloaded by: University Wales Aberystwyth. Copyrighted material.

biceps 0.39 0.15–0.59 Lohman (1981) 0.83 0.72–0.91
iliac crest 0.60 0.40–0.74 Withers et al. (1998) 0.88 0.80–0.94
supraspinale 0.51 0.29–0.68 Eston et al. (2005) Σ2 0.85 0.74–0.92
abdominal 0.62 0.43–0.76 Eston et al. (2005) Σ6 0.86 0.76–0.92
anterior thigh 0.63 0.45–0.77 ii) BMI 0.19 − 0.07–0.43
medial calf 0.52 0.30–0.68 Σ4SKF (triceps, subscapular, triceps, iliac crest) 0.80 0.68–0.88
CI = confidence interval Σ4SKF (thigh, abdominal, triceps, calf) 0.88 0.81–0.93
Σ5SKF 0.84 0.74–0.90
Σ8SKF 0.88 0.80–0.92
sion 14 (SPSS, Chicago, IL); an alpha-level of .05 was used for all BMI = body mass index; CI = confidence intervals
significance tests. Σ5SKF = biceps, subscapular, triceps, iliac crest, anterior thigh; Σ8SKF = biceps, sub-
scapular, triceps, iliac crest, supraspinale, abdominal, anterior thigh, medial calf.

Results and Womersley [9]) agreement with DXA are displayed in

& ●▶ Figs. 1, 2, respectively. The remaining existing equations all

The technical error of measurement expressed as an absolute showed similar trends to ● ▶ Figs. 1, 2, with regression-based

value and percentage value for the two anthropometrists is 95 % limits of agreement ranges between 4.7 % and 5.4 % (● ▶ Table

shown in ● ▶ Table 1. The coefficient of variation for DXA relative 4).

body fat values within the laboratory is 1.25 %.
The mean total percent body fat ( %BF) from the DXA method for
the professional soccer players was 11.2 ± 1.8 %. The relationship
between each skinfold site and DXA-derived %BF is shown in
●▶ Table 2.
All of the skinfold equations showed strong, positive correlations
with DXA (● ▶ Table 3). The highest correlation was shown by the
equation of Withers et al. [26]; however, caution must be exer-
cised when comparing correlation coefficients, given the rela-
tively wide ranges and overlap between the 95 % confidence
intervals. The sum of the four sites used in the ‘novel’ equation
(anterior thigh, abdominal, triceps and medial calf) showed a
The gradient of the line depicting the predicted difference
between %BF obtained by DXA and the equation of Withers et al.
[26] indicates reduced accuracy at the extremes of body fat
within the present sample, with the equation slightly underesti-
mating those with very low %BF and overestimating those with
relatively high %BF. The present reference %BF results derived
using DXA range from 7.9 % to 14.3 %. In a practical sense, for an
average %BF of 7.9 %, there is a bias of − 1.9 %BF between DXA and
the equation of Withers et al. [26], whilst for an average %BF of
14.3 %, assuming DXA to be the ‘true’ value, the equation appears
to overestimate %BF by 1.6 %. The 95 % limits of agreement
between methods cover a range of 4.4 % body fat (● ▶ Fig. 1).

strong correlation with DXA reference %BF, and was greater than
that of the traditional Σ4SKF [9]. Again, it is difficult to draw firm
conclusions due to the width of the 95 % confidence intervals.
There was no significant correlation between BMI and refer-
ence %BF values (p = 0.201).
The predicted difference () between %BF obtained by DXA and
predicted by the equation of Durnin and Womersley [9] indi-
cates low bias at the lower end of the range of %BF found in the
professional soccer players, but reduced accuracy the higher
the %BF (●▶ Fig. 2), with the skinfold equation producing higher

The agreement between the different skinfold equations and
DXA-derived %BF was assessed using a regression-based
approach. Although sloping, the range between the upper and
lower regression-based limits of agreement remains the same
across the increases in %BF. The mean difference between meth-
ods and the 95 % limits of agreement varied depending on the
values than DXA. In a practical sense, the predicted difference
between the methods would be only 0.2 % for players with an
average %BF of 7.9 %, but at the other end of the range, the equa-
tion of Durnin and Womersley [9] would appear to overesti-
mate %BF by 4.0 %. The 95 % limits of agreement are wider than
those in ●▶ Fig. 1, indicating a lower agreement between meth-

average %BF. For comparative purposes, the two skinfold equa- ods (the limits demonstrating the interval within which 95 % of
tions showing the best (Withers et al. [26]) and worst (Durnin the differences between DXA and skinfold methods would be

Reilly T et al. Skinfold Equations for Elite Soccer Players … Int J Sports Med 2009; 30: 607–613
610 Training & Testing

Fig. 1 Difference in percent body fat and

regression-based 95 % limits of agreement for
DXA and the skinfold equation of Withers et al.
[26] in professional soccer players (n = 45).
ULOA = upper limit of agreement; LLOA = lower
limit of agreement; D̂ = predicted mean difference
between methods.

Fig. 2 Difference in percent body fat and

regression-based 95 % limits of agreement for
DXA and the skinfold equation of Durnin and
Womersley [9] in professional soccer players
(n = 45). ULOA = upper limit of agreement;

Downloaded by: University Wales Aberystwyth. Copyrighted material.

LLOA = lower limit of agreement; D̂ = predicted
mean difference between methods.

Table 4 Agreement between DXA-determined percent body fat and values given by skinfold equations for professional soccer players (n = 45).

Gradient Intercept SD of residuals 95 % rLoA range

Durnin and Womersley (1974) 0.65 − 5.34 1.44 5.6
Lohman (1981) 0.73 − 7.81 1.39 5.4
Withers et al. (1998) 0.54 − 6.15 1.11 4.4
Eston et al. (2005) Σ2 0.57 − 4.19 1.22 4.8
Eston et al. (2005) Σ6 0.49 − 4.76 1.20 4.7
rLoA = regression-based limits of agreement
(see ●
▶ Figs. 1, 2 for a graphical representation)

expected to lie). The coefficients from the analysis of agreement
between the remaining equations and DXA are provided in
●▶ Table 4.
The combination of anterior thigh, abdominal, triceps and
medial calf sites selected by the stepwise procedure explained
78.4 % variance in DXA total %BF. The new formula produced
was:
%BF = 5.174 + (0.124 × thigh) + (0.147 × abdominal) + (0.196 × trice
ps) + (0.130 × calf)
The equation of Stein [20] was employed to estimate the average
cross-validation predictive power. The adjusted R2 value was
found to be 0.732.
Discussion
& employs seven skinfold sites. The use of only four sites, without
The skinfold formulae compared in this study showed similar
relationships, but varied in terms of their bias and agreement
with DXA. The equations all overestimated %BF to varying
degrees at the higher end of the body fat range in the present
sample. Of the existing formulae, the seven-site skinfold equa-
tion of Withers et al. [26] proved to be the most accurate and
highly correlated with DXA-derived %BF. The skinfold data were
also used to derive a ‘novel’ soccer-specific skinfold equation.
The equation of Stein [20] was used to indicate how well the
derived equation should predict %BF using other samples from
the same population. The resulting adjusted R2 value predicts
that if the ‘novel’ equation were applied to completely different
samples from the same population, on average it would account
for 73.2 % variance in %BF. This value indicates potentially good
predictive power for the equation in any subsequent cross-vali-
dation studies. More extensive validation work with elite soccer
players is warranted, as the parsimonious use of four skinfold
sites would provide a great advantage in the field-based assess-
ment of %BF in soccer players. The equation of Withers et al. [26]
any significant loss in predictive accuracy, would represent an
important economical use of available time, particularly when
assessments are made on entire squads of players. Therefore,

Reilly T et al. Skinfold Equations for Elite Soccer Players … Int J Sports Med 2009; 30: 607–613

Table 5 Reported values for percent body fat for elite soccer players estimated by means of generalised skinfold equations. Means ± SD are cited.
Source N Age (years)
Al Hazzaa et al. (2001) 23 25.2 ± 2.3
Bury et al. (1998) 15 24.2 ± 2.6
Casajus (2001) 15 26.3 ± 3.1
Dunbar and Power (1995) 18 22.5 ± 3.6
Mujika et al. (2000) 17 20.3 ± 1.4
Rienzi et al. (2000) 11 26.2 ± 4.0
Strudwick et al. (2002) 19 22.0 ± 2.0
Tiryaki et al. (1995) 16 18.0–30.0
16 18.0–30.0
16 18.0–30.0
White et al. (1988) 27 26.0 ± 4.8
future validation work in which the ‘novel’ equation is applied to
professional soccer players is recommended.
Previous research in which DXA has been employed to model
body composition has shown that elite, highly-trained soccer
players differ from their non-athlete counterparts in both seg-
mental and total body composition [4, 27, 28]. Assuming an ade-
quate diet, development of bone and muscle mass would be
anticipated, given the physical demands and loading patterns on
the soccer player during training and competition, and the accu-
mulation of body fat should be limited [18]. These findings sug-
gest that anthropometric equations generated using data from
the general population may not be appropriate, or at least intro-
duce more error in estimation aside from the measurement con-
text and the technical skills of the operator. Both operators in the
present study had demonstrated technical error of measure-
ment well within the highest standards of ISAK [13]. The fact
that the existing skinfold equations were generated by different
anthropometrists, and that some of the original generalised
equations were derived from data collected over 30 years ago on
heterogeneous groups, may serve to increase the bias of the
older equations in the comparisons made with the present
study.
With the exception of the equation of Withers et al. [26], the
application of generalised skinfold equations to professional
soccer groups cannot be regarded as adequate, as the assess-
ment of bias and modelling of differences between methods in
the present study showed an unacceptable high overestimation
of %BF, especially towards the higher end of the range of %BF in
professional soccer players, and relatively wide limits of agree-
ment. Discrepancies with generalised equations prompt ques-
tions about the currency of some %BF values reported in the
literature for elite players (●
▶ Table 5). Many conventional equa-
tions tend to be derived from reference body density and fat val-
ues obtained by the traditional hydrodensitometry method. The
two-compartment (fat and fat-free) hydrodensitometry model
of body composition is subject to a number of assumptions,
many of which may be violated in athletic populations. It is
assumed that the density of the fat-free mass is constant both
between and within individuals. In addition to differing from
non-soccer players, body composition is found to vary within
the individual soccer player, according to body region and stage
of season [10]. Changes in bone mass due to physical activity are
site-specific, meaning adaptations occur in the areas at which
increased loading and mechanical strain occurs [23]. Due to the
loading pattern and lower-body dominance of soccer, it would
therefore be expected that the density of the lower-body min-
eral compartment increases in soccer players, as has been found
Reilly T et al. Skinfold Equations for Elite Soccer Players … Int J Sports Med 2009; 30: 607–613
Training & Testing 611
Competitive level Occasion %BF
Saudi professionals Mid-season 12.3 ± 2.7
Belgian professionals Mid-season 7.9 ± 1.6
Spanish professionals Mid-season 8.2 ± 0.9
English professional Mid-season 12.6 ± 2.9
Spanish professionals End of season 7.9 ± 1.6
South American internationals Copa de America finals 11.6 ± 3.3
English Premier League Mid-season 11.2 ± 1.8
Turkish Div. 1 Mid-season 7.6 ± 0.7
Turkish Div. 2 7.1 ± 0.4
Turkish Div. 3 7.2 ± 0.5
Top English League Pre-season 19.3 ± 0.6
previously in the lower limbs and lumbar spine [4]. Similarly, the
mineral-free compartment of the fat-free mass is not constant
across the body, given that soccer players show a more pro-
nounced muscular development in the lower body, in particular
the hip flexors, quadriceps, hamstrings and ankle flexors [15].
Downloaded by: University Wales Aberystwyth. Copyrighted material.
Dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry and other indirect techniques
derived from this method are not affected by this limitation. The
equation of Withers et al. [26] and the ‘novel’ equation both
incorporate sites from the abdomen and lower body, whereas
some generalised equations, such as that of Durnin and Womer-
sley [9], only include sites located above the hip. In an assess-
ment of various skinfold sites, Eston et al. [11] found the anterior
thigh to have the highest single-skinfold correlation with DXA-
determined body fat and the combination of the thigh and calf
skinfolds explained more variance in percent fat than Durnin
and Womersley’s Σ4SKF. The authors concluded that lower-body
skinfold sites are more highly related to percent fat in healthy
individuals than are upper-body sites.
The ‘novel’ equation was derived from data collected from pro-
fessional soccer players, all within a narrow range of adiposity,
using a three-compartment model of body composition, and
explained a large proportion of the variability in DXA-derived %BF.
These factors provide a good basis for further investigation of
the soccer-specific equation, which uses the same number of
sites as the equation of Durnin and Womersley [9], but accounts
for fat patterning in the upper and lower body. Validation would
be required using a different sample of players from the same
population, in order to test the validity of the ‘novel’ equation
and whether it provides much of an advantage over the seven-
site equation of Withers et al. [26] when used in soccer players.
A limitation of the ‘novel’ equation is that it does not account for
error from including different racial groups in the sample. Nei-
ther does it account for age, although the age range in elite pro-
fessional soccer is rather narrow. The recommendation of Cohen
et al. [7] of a cases-to-variable ratio of 40 to one for stepwise
procedures could not be observed due to the limited sample
available and difficulties in recruiting soccer players of a similar
calibre. If this principle were applied, the inclusion of each inde-
pendent variable would require the recruitment of over half of
the playing squad in the English Premier League, La Liga in Spain
or Serie A in Italy, for example. An even larger sample would be
required for additional cross-validation to be carried out; there-
fore, the generalisability of the ‘novel’ equation was not tested in
the present study.
The use of summed skinfolds for monitoring changes in adipos-
ity regularly during the season and in field-based circumstances
was vindicated. The correlation analyses in the present study
612 Training & Testing
showed the Σ5SKF recommended by Reilly et al. [16] for British
Olympic athletes to be an acceptable means of assessing adipos-
ity in professional soccer players. The Σ5SKF showed a stronger
relationship with DXA-determined body fat than Durnin and
Womersley’s Σ4SKF, providing further support for the inclusion
of skinfold measurements from the lower body. Indeed, the
highest relationship was found with the combination of sites
from the ‘novel’ equation (Σ4SKF: thigh, abdominal, triceps, calf).
The sum of all measured skinfold sites (Σ8SKF) offered no benefit
over the ‘novel’ Σ4SKF, meaning the considerable extra time
needed to measure eight skinfolds as opposed to four cannot be
justified. The ΣSKF method was markedly superior to BMI as a
measure of adiposity in the present sample. Body mass index is
a ‘weight-for-height’ index and, therefore, does not take into
account the composition of the body. To illustrate the signifi-
cance of this limitation, if the limits set by the World Health
Organisation [29] were applied in the present sample, 20 of the
45 soccer players would be classified as ‘overweight’ or ‘pre-
obese’. In fact, the DXA-determined body fat for those 20 players
ranged from 7.9 % to 14.3 %. These values are in accordance with
Wilmore and Costill’s recommended range of 6–14 % body fat for
soccer players [25]. Body mass index was found to have no sig-
nificant correlation with DXA-determined body fat in the present
sample and cannot be recommended for the assessment of adi-
posity in professional soccer players.
Recommendations
The use of the gender-specific equation of Withers et al. [26] in
male soccer players was supported by its low bias, high correla-
tion and relatively high agreement with DXA. The generalised
skinfold equations all demonstrated a tendency to overesti-
mate %BF at higher levels of body fat in this sample. The lack of
transferability of some generalised equations within the current
study provides further support for the development of popula-
tion-specific anthropometric equations, especially for use with
highly-trained athletes. Specific regression equations should be
developed using the target group and validated against so-called
‘gold standard’ laboratory methods of body composition assess-
ment such as DXA. A ‘novel’ soccer-specific equation was derived
from the present dataset, but requires further validation work.
The recommendation of Reilly et al. [16] to use the sum of skin-
fold measurements, including sites from the lower body, shows
continuing promise as an indicator of adiposity. The use of BMI
as a measure of adiposity was contra-indicated.
Acknowledgements
& 22 Tiryaki G, Tunsel F, Yamer F, Agaoglu SA, Gumudad H. Comparison of
The authors wish to express thanks to all the players who par-
ticipated in the project. Gratitude is expressed to the three Pre-
mier League clubs who funded the research. We appreciated the
assistance of Steven Provyn from Vrije Universiteit Brussel and
Karen Williams from Liverpool John Moores University in record-
ing the data for the separate datasets. The authors had no com-
mercial interest in any of the equipment evaluated in the
project.
Reilly T et al. Skinfold Equations for Elite Soccer Players … Int J Sports Med 2009; 30: 607–613
References
1 Al-Hazzaa HM, Alumuzaini KS, Al-Rafaee A, Sulamainen MA, Dafterdar
MY, Al-Ghamedi A, Kuraiji KN. Aerobic and anaerobic power charac-
teristics of Saudi elite soccer players. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 2001;
41: 54–61
2 Bland JM, Altman DG. Measuring agreement in method comparison
studies. Stat Methods Med Res 1999; 8: 135–160
3 Bury T, Marechal R, Mahieu P, Pirnay F. Immunological status of com-
petitive football players during the competitive season. Int J Sports
Med 1998; 19: 364–368
4 Calbet JA, Dorado C, Díaz-Herrera P, Rodríguez-Rodríguez LP. High
femoral bone mineral content and density in male football (soccer)
players. Med Sci Sports Exerc 2001; 33: 1682–1687
5 Casajus J. Seasonal variations in fitness variables in professional soccer
players. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 2001; 41: 463–467
6 Clarys JP, Martin AD, Drinkwater DA, Marfell-Jones MJ. The skinfold:
myth and reality. J Sports Sci 1987; 5: 3–33
7 Cohen J, Cohen P, West SG, Aiken LS. Applied Multiple Regression/Cor-
relation Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences (third edition). London:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 2003; 162
8 Dunbar J, Power K. Fitness profiles of English professional and semi-
professional soccer players using a battery of field tests. J Sports Sci
1995; 13: 501–502
9 Durnin JVGA, Womersley J. Body fat assessed from total body density
and its estimation from skinfold thickness: measurements of 481 men
and women aged from 16–72 years. Br J Nutr 1974; 32: 77–97
Downloaded by: University Wales Aberystwyth. Copyrighted material.
10 Egan E, Wallace J, Reilly T, Chantler P, Lawlor J. Body composition and
bone mineral density changes during a Premier League season as
measured by dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry. Int J Body Compos
Res 2006; 4: 61–66
11 Eston RG, Rowlands AV, Charlesworth S, Davies A, Hoppitt T. Prediction
of DXA-determined whole body fat from skinfolds: importance of
including skinfolds from the thigh and calf in young, healthy men and
women. Eur J Clin Nutr 2005; 59: 695–702
12 Lohman TG. Skinfolds and body density and their relation to body
fatness - a review. Hum Biol 1981; 53: 181–225
13 Marfell-Jones M, Olds T, Stewart A, Carter JEL. International Standards
for Anthropometric Assessment. Potchesfstroom: International Soci-
ety for the Advancement of Kinanthropometry 2006; 1–137
14 Mujika I, Padilla S, Ibañez J, Izquierdo M, Gorostiaga E. Creatine sup-
plementation and sprint performance in soccer players. Med Sci
Sports Exerc 2000; 32: 518–525
15 Reilly T. Fitness assessment. In: Reilly T (ed). Science and Soccer. Lon-
don: E&FN Spon; 1996; 25–47
16 Reilly T, Maughan RJ, Hardy L. Body fat consensus statement of the
steering groups of the British Olympic Association. Sports Exerc Injury
1996; 2: 46–49
17 Rienzi E, Drust B, Reilly T, Carter JEL, Martin A. Investigation of the
anthropometric and work rate profiles of elite South American soccer
players. J Sports Med Phys Fitness 2000; 40: 162–169
18 Shephard RJ. Biology and medicine of soccer: an update. J Sports Sci
1999; 17: 757–786
19 Siri WE. The gross composition of the body. Adv Biol Med Phys 1956;
4: 239–280
20 Stein C. Multiple regression. In: Olkin I, ed. Contributions to Probabil-
ity and Statistics. Essays in Honor of Harold Hotelling. Stanford: Uni-
versity Press; 1960; 511
21 Strudwick A, Reilly T, Doran D. Anthropometric and fitness character-
istics of elite players in two football codes. J Sports Med Phys Fitness
2002; 42: 239–242
the physiological characteristics of the first, second and third league
Turkish soccer players. In: Reilly T, Bangsbo J, Hughes M, eds. Science
and Football III. London: E&FN Spon; 1995; 32–36
23 Uzunca K, Birtane M, Durmus-Altun G, Ustun F. High bone mineral
density in loaded skeletal regions of former professional football (soc-
cer) players: what is the effect of time after active career? Br J Sports
Med 2005; 39: 54–157
24 White JE, Emery TM, Kane JE, Groves R, Risman AR. Pre-season fitness
profiles of professional soccer players. In: Reilly T, Lees A, Davids K,
Murphy WJ, eds. Science and Football. London: E& FN Spon; 1988;
164–171
25 Wilmore JH, Costill DL. Physiology of Sports and Exercise (second edi-
tion). Champaign: Human Kinetics; 1999; 463

26 Withers RT, Craig NP, Bourdon PC, Norton KI. Relative body fat and
anthropometric prediction of body density of male athletes. Eur J Appl
Physiol 1987; 56: 191–200
27 Wittich A, Mautalen CA, Oliveri MB, Bagur A, Somoza F, Rotemberg E.
Professional football (soccer) players have a markedly greater skeletal
mineral content, density and size than age- and BMI-matched con-
trols. Calcif Tissue Int 1998; 63: 12–117
Reilly T et al. Skinfold Equations for Elite Soccer Players … Int J Sports Med 2009; 30: 607–613
View publication stats
Training & Testing 613
28 Wittich A, Oliveri MB, Rotemberg E, Mautalen C. Body composition of
professional football (soccer) players determined by dual x-ray
absorptiometry. J Clin Densitom 2001; 4: 51–55
29 World Health Organisation. Obesity: preventing and managing the
global epidemic. Report of a WHO Consultation. WHO Technical
Report Series 894. Geneva: World Health Organisation; 2000; 9
Downloaded by: University Wales Aberystwyth. Copyrighted material.