[Nibile]

3.9 was a bit acid - who would have thought? - but I have to say that Macke made a terrible impression. Being unable to express your innovative training concepts in a clear and simple way is not good neither professional. Hiding behind strange words or confused explanations is a very poor show, especially if you're trying to revolution climbing's training well proven basics.

[jwi]

we may not know what is best yet, but we know how to get really strong. the hardest part is executing this properly and not fooling ourselves into thinking we are strong because we can do a shit one-armer, or feel like we trained hard because we are tired afterwards.

+1

[andy_e]

we may not know what is best yet, but we know how to get really strong. the hardest part is executing this properly and not fooling ourselves into thinking we are strong because we can do a shit one-armer, or feel like we trained hard because we are tired afterwards.

+1

Fuck's sake, that's pretty much my training session right there! Shit one-armers as finishers when I'm knackered from climbing... I bet you're going to tell me that I'm not allowed to have fun whilst training either? 

[Probes]

 

[Schnell]

I thought the podcast was ok though there was less innovative, groundbreaking info than was suggested. There was the muscle activation stuff, which sounded like a load of shit, and a general fetish for doing as much training as possible using gym equipment, which applies to the finger training question here. Other than that there wasn't much new.

[moose]

Maybe if you'd identified that you got one finger that was disproportionately weaker than the rest, but otherwise isn't it just going to take 8-10 times as long to do a training session, and potentially not be very specific to climbing?

For me, the time is the key factor.  I am a very recent convert to fingerboarding, so maybe I am misleading myself, but I feel that using added weight and all four fingers (in a Lopez type regime) gives me an effective use of the the odd spare hour on a night after work.  If I started isolating fingers, the effects might have a greater additive value but the session would take a lot longer to cover the whole hand.... and frankly if I had that much time to spare I would not be finger-boarding.

[Nibile]

Time is not an issue if you alternate different sessions regularly. I find my current schedule quite effective, with one session dedicated to full crimp and another dedicated to half crimp and monos.
They produce a various range of stimuli and I think they cover most of what you could encounter on rock, if that's your thing.
After the crimp session I feel my fingers, joints and hand tendons worked; after the other session it's mostly the forearm tendons that get a beating.

[mctrials23]

To be fair, the only reason the session took so long was because I was finding the max weight for each finger to use as a starting point and I don't have enough slings etc to do it efficiently at the moment so I was mucking around with weights for far more time than needs be.

If I group the weights into about 4 sets I can combine those sets to make every weight I need and simply clip/unclip the ones I need for a given finger. The rest after each set is a few minutes and you can easily do all 4 fingers and a pinch grip  one after the other for a combined total of perhaps 10 minutes. Rest 3. Repeat 3-4 times and you have everything done in less than an hour.

[Nibile]

So, how does the setup look like?
You have a string with a loop in which you put the finger, then you flex the finger?
(Couldn't bear the whole podcast...)

[blamo]

mctrials23,

Are you doing two-armed hangs, or one-armed?  Based on my listening of the podcast I got the impression he was suggesting training one-finger on one-hand at a time (so one-arm hangs).  These seem to be a logistical mess.  The two-arms less so. 

[Nibile]

In my opinion, that is the opinion I rate the most, the problem with this kind of innovative, revolutionary, ultra commercialized kinds of training is what is described in this article here:
http://www.t-nation.com/blogs/number-one-coaching-mistake

Coaches that want to get loads of clients and become popular, try to fool people by using complicated words, complicated patterns, complicated programs, complicated excercises, to show off their culture or their imagination.
To the opposite, before setting up slings and pulleys to train each finger individually, why not becoming able to conventionally deadhang a 1 cm edge with some added weight? Why not becoming able to one arm a 2 cm edge?
Foundation comes before everything else. The fact that a climber gets benefits from that kind of training, doesn't imply that it's the best training that he could do. Even the shittiest training is better than no training.
Moreover: the study that jwi posted, which stated that the sum of the force produces by each finger individually was a lot greater than that produced by four fingers together, is highly biased because of the different holds used to measure each.
The four fingers half crimp cannot be related to four single fingers dragged.
Basically, the more I see the internet and the climbing world polluted by these individuals who create new, dubious training techniques, the more I want to stick to the basics.
Training doesn't have to be fun. If you're having fun, often you're not training at your best. Performing is fun.

[mctrials23]

Just to clear a few things up because some people seem to be taking this topic a little strangely.

Training fingers on their own isn't a new idea, I was merely suggesting that we discuss the idea.

There is nothing wrong with training all fingers at once as is the more traditional wisdom. I'm not claiming that either method is definitely better than the other.

The guy in the podcast doesn't explain things that well and is quite frustrating to listen to but that doesn't mean that his ideas are necessarily shit.

Yes we already know how to get strong but I have no idea what that has to do with discussing different ideas or things that could potentially make us stronger in less time than other methods. Again though, I'm not saying that this is such a method.

I am interested in this because I am quite heavy and tall and adding weight/ removing it for one arm work is not pleasant . The size of hold I use either has to be quite small and painful if I don't use extra weight or the amount of weight I have to add is so heavy that it just hurts my back. One arm hangs are better but I don't feel they target the fingers as much due to the shoulde, arm and back involvement. At 84kg one arm hangs usually fatigue my arms before fingers.

The system I rigged is very simple and is just a pulley with weight on one side and a block of wood with a single finger 30 degree pocket attached to it. That seems to give a good angle when you take into account the angle the hold ends up at based on the attachment point between the wood and the cord going through the pulley.

[blamo]

Good read Nible.  Thanks for that.

One arm hangs are better but I don't feel they target the fingers as much due to the shoulde, arm and back involvement.

I find the "more full-body" aspect of one-arm hangs to be an added advantage.  Again, I have tried the pulley with a mono and weight on the other end setup.  On the long-term I haven't noticed much improvement, but that is just my limited experience.

[jwi]

Moreover: the study that jwi posted, which stated that the sum of the force produces by each finger individually was a lot greater than that produced by four fingers together, is highly biased because of the different holds used to measure each.
The four fingers half crimp cannot be related to four single fingers dragged.

Exactly

Why they didn't measure the force of the individual fingers on the same wooden edge, I'll never know, and I suspect that explains why the deficit was so large.

However bilateral deficit is in all likelihood present in the fingers, it appears everywhere. Then again, how many cannot stimulate their fingers enough to gain strength with 2,3 or 4 finger hangs? Not many I'd wager.

[Nibile]

Yes, exactly.
Mctrials, I don't want to criticize your training, we're simply debating whether the Macke method is the most effective one. If it works for you, well we're all happy. I tend to think, though, that you could reap more benefits with something more traditional.

[Sasquatch]

Off Topic -

Training doesn't have to be fun. If you're having fun, often you're not training at your best. Performing is fun.

Training is Type 2 Fun

On-Topic -

I haven't finished listening so I haven't gotten to the part about training fingers individually, but I did get the impression he was really selling MAT and his services.  This makes me instantly skeptical about everything he says.  Probably more skeptical than I should be.

That said, I think the full body activation of weighted hangs and 1-arm hangs is really important, and maybe as important as the actual finger training. 

[mctrials23]

Isolating fingers is probably not a great idea for half crimping due to the lateral forces and the lack of stabilising fingers so I was planning to use standards methods to train that but I'm certainly going to give the one finger training a go on my open hand.

[Sasquatch]

So I finished this podcast, and SHOCK I agree with this:

...but I have to say that Macke made a terrible impression. Being unable to express your innovative training concepts in a clear and simple way is not good neither professional. Hiding behind strange words or confused explanations is a very poor show, especially if you're trying to revolution climbing's training well proven basics.

This is a bit Off Topic, but....  He basically argues that everybody is different, and therefore a one-size-fits-all training paradigm is worthless.  I think most people understand that if you get the "perfect" training plan, you improve at the most efficient rate.  However, I don't for one second believe his "methods" will get it right every time either.  And in the last few years I feel like we've seen leaps and bounds improvements in the understanding of climbing training.  He touts his stuff as "science" over and over.  I'd love to see this because there are so few scientific studies on climbing training.  I can only assume he's meaning that his training theory is based on other training paradigm's with scientific backing, but his own actually have no scientific backing. 

On topic.  Isolating muscles seems like a worthwhile means of determining if you have a weakness in the overall chain.  It seems like an extremely inefficient means of training though.  He argues against "hangboarding" and campusing on the premise that they teach/enforce bad technique, but this is also theoretical and has no scientific basis. Also it's entirely situational itself.  If you're terrible at cutting your feet, then these are both incredibly useful.   

Isolating fingers is probably not a great idea for half crimping due to the lateral forces and the lack of stabilising fingers so I was planning to use standards methods to train that but I'm certainly going to give the one finger training a go on my open hand.

Are you also going to spent significant time on pulling and core muscles which are crucial to the overall chain?  If not then you're sacrificing quite a bit of training potential.  I hope the benefit from the finger isolation is worthwhile.  This would be my biggest gripe.  I think the "hanging" part of deadhang's is quite important. 

[blamo]

Isolating muscles seems like a worthwhile means of determining if you have a weakness in the overall chain. 

I definitely agree with this, but how you apply the knowledge seems tricky.  My right hand pinky is a fair bit weaker than my left hand pinky when using an incut one-pad mono (~20 lb. difference).  I get an odd pain in my forearm when I try to train pinky monos.  I have attributed this to differences in lengths between joints and my nervous system telling me this is a bad idea, but I could be totally out to lunch on this. 

However, when I compare my back-two pair (pinky and ring), both sides are roughly equal in strength (within say ~5 lb.) and I can really hammer the back two pair in training.  I have also found both ring fingers are fairly equal in strength (same one-pad incut mono).   

However, I have found a weakness between my right side and left side when doing one-arm hangs on edges.  This is a case where I am seeing good gains by focusing on the results, while the pinky monos seem to be fairly academic in nature.

The end result in all this analysis suggests I probably need to find a few more hobbies.