[ghisino]

Hello everybody.

A french guy selling training plans suggests 1-minute hangs for building stamina.

hanging on an edge for more or less 1 minute, adjusting load so that failure comes at the 60th second of the 1st rep.

series of 3 reps with 3' rest in between.

i won't go in too much details, but very little volume of this is advised, and long supercompensation times are expected (6 weeks for a 3 week cycle).

question: has anyone experimented/seen/heard about anything similar?

the only other voice i remember on this subject is an italian trainer who sounded more or less against this kind of work.

[rodma]

Our measurement of time is pretty much arbitrary compared to the tasks that we are able to perform. Might as well do max hangs for whatever you decide is sensible. Why not for 83 seconds and just what exactly is a three foot rest measured in seconds?

But seriously though, Why not try it and report back?

Sent from my GT-N7000 using Tapatalk

[abarro81]

http://www.nicros.com/training/articles/training-with-long-duration-isometrics/

Dunning advocated 25-30sec hangs on a old thread, which I've played with a bit as a novel alternative to doing short (3-4 hang) repeaters

[jwi]

There seems to be a group of researchers in Japan that has done some recent work, from a quick search on google.scholar

One group of 6 subjects trained by developing maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) for 6 s per set with 12 sets per session (100%G), while the other group of 6 subjects trained at 60% of MVC for 30 s per set with 4 sets per session (60%G).
Training significantly increased the muscle volume (V_m) […] and torque output […] with no significant differences in the relative gains between the two programs.
However, 100%G showed significantly greater V_m than 60%G after training, when V_m before training was normalized. Thus, only 60%G significantly increased the ratio of torque to V_m
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00421-002-0604-6

The present study demonstrates a greater increase in stiffness of human tendon structures following isometric training using longer duration contractions compared to shorter contractions. This suggests that the changes in the elasticity of the tendon structures after resistance training may be affected by the duration of muscle contraction.
http://jp.physoc.org/content/536/2/649.short


This one seems to support the idea of doing dead hangs openhanded:

Although significant gain was limited to angles at or near the training angle for ST [shorter muscle length], increases in MVC [maximum voluntary contraction] at all angles were found for LT [longer muscle length]. These results suggest that only mechanical stress (internal muscle force imposed on muscle and tendon) contributes to adaptation in the tendon stiffness, although metabolic (relative torque level, etc.) and mechanical stress relate to muscle hypertrophy. Furthermore, increment of tendon stiffness for LT might contribute to increase torque output at smaller angles other than the training angle.
Effects of isometric training at different knee angles on the muscle–tendon complex in vivo

[abarro81]

For that last study, what makes you think that their LT corresponds to open handed? I'd have thought that their LT would correspond to forced half-crimp since this seems to put most force in the muscle?

[J_duds]

Some interesting studies there.
I occasionally (about once week/fortnight) do assisted one arm lock offs on a bar for 30sec, and have in the past done 30sec rock up with a deep lock on a board where only one foot and one hand is on holds - which sounds similar to the nicros Steep-wall twist-lock mentioned in here http://www.nicros.com/training/articles/training-with-long-duration-isometrics/

I have seem some gains in my shoulder strength since doing 30s lock offs but I think this may be due to host of other training exercises that I now try do once a week (weighted pull ups, one armers, assisted one armers, 30s lock offs etc).  So I can't attribute any gains to one single exercise!

Note - this hasn't yet improved my outdoor grade! But does help release some stress after work!

[jwi]

For that last study, what makes you think that their LT corresponds to open handed? I'd have thought that their LT would correspond to forced half-crimp since this seems to put most force in the muscle?

Because I have seen similar results previously. Isometric training with the muscle in an elongated position has some transfer to other positions; the other way around, not so much.
http://books.google.fr/books?id=ylsfDoufD_4C&pg=PA19&lpg=PA19#v=onepage&q&f=false

[rodma]

For that last study, what makes you think that their LT corresponds to open handed? I'd have thought that their LT would correspond to forced half-crimp since this seems to put most force in the muscle?

Because I have seen similar results previously. Isometric training with the muscle in an elongated position has some transfer to other positions; the other way around, not so much.
http://books.google.fr/books?id=ylsfDoufD_4C&pg=PA19&lpg=PA19#v=onepage&q&f=false

open-handed doesn't transfer very well to half-crimped, unless you'er half way to half-crimping, or half-crimping in error.

[jwi]

As someone who used to have a decent open-hand strength and shockingly bad half-crimp strength I quite agree. I have spent some time the last 4 months getting stronger in half-crimp.

[rodma]

oops, didn't realise i "oo-er"ed in my "you're"

It really would be interesting to know how long people could half crimp an edge for (if at all); i used to be able to open hand a small edge one-handed for slightly over 30seconds, but could never (and still can't) one-hand hang half-crimped, presumably as barrows said, due to the greater load and therefore force required in the forearm.

[bendavison]

For that last study, what makes you think that their LT corresponds to open handed? I'd have thought that their LT would correspond to forced half-crimp since this seems to put most force in the muscle?

Because I have seen similar results previously. Isometric training with the muscle in an elongated position has some transfer to other positions; the other way around, not so much.
http://books.google.fr/books?id=ylsfDoufD_4C&pg=PA19&lpg=PA19#v=onepage&q&f=false

Seems like you just answered the question with the fact that prompted it in the first place. The root of the question was whether half crimped of open handed 'creates' a longer muscle.

But I digress from the topic... I've never tried deadhanging for longer than 7 seconds except for benchmarking. And 1 minute seems like too long to me - longer than I think I've ever held a hold on a route or problem, and therefore a pretty low intensity/% of max to build much finger strength. Something tells me this won't become as fashionable as the 'Lopez Protocol'. For what its worth though, most people who are just beginning fingerboarding or have weakish fingers will improve from just about any duration of hanging, and its only once your fingers are really strong that you need to worry about getting the duration perfect. As Rodma said earlier, the hang duration for most of these exercises are pretty arbitrary. Their main use is that they become a standard for that exercise for that person, so the gains are very measurable.

[abarro81]

"The internal muscle force (mechanical stress) is higher at 100° than at 50°" is what made me think that forced half-crimp would be the more likely equivalent to their 100. This is based purely on the fact that it's freaking hard for the muscles in a forced half crimp. Not got time to look up the references that talk about differences between torque and force at different angles, nor time to think too hard on it so I may be totally wrong.


The more I've seen studies on isometric strength work the more I think this (within reason):

most people who are just beginning fingerboarding or have weakish fingers will improve from just about any duration of hanging

(so long as it's hard)
5s, 10s, 30s as one hang, 30s as 3 hang repeaters, 7/3 repeaters, 5/5 repeaters etc etc