[Danny]

Alright collective UKBers, I'm looking for a bit of board advice.

I'm moving house shortly—from Northern Ireland down to Falmouth. Here in NI I have a fairly large wall in my garden which I've had a lot of fun on over the years. It's ~45 degrees into a roof to lip affair (contrary to received wisdom, I've found the roof to be more than worth it, if only to maintain interest). The new house in Falmouth has a garage, so I'll be looking to build a more typical woodie.

I'm thinking of steepening the board to about 60 in order to get a bit more out of the space. Is this a punt move? I'm thinking I could still use boney small holds by setting a number of them on little triagular blocks to vert them up a bit. Larger holds on the 60 for a bit more thuggery. Does anyone have any experience climbing on 60 degree boards? Comments and advice much appreciated.

For reference on a good day I'm a fairly unheroic mid to high 7s climber.

[Nibile]

Good idea. End of Story.

[lagerstarfish]

if you build it steep, then you can find out how you like it and know that you can rebuild it less steep by just cutting down the supports and panels and refitting them

if you build less steep, you can't easily make the beams and panels longer to make it steeper

that's logic that is

[ducko]

I personally prefer less steep boards im making one atm and it'll be 40 deg and be full of poor hand and foot holds, i get much better gains outside after training on the 30deg board we have at the mill, I bareky touch the 55deg except for a bit of a power top up now and then. Either way having a woodie is mega regardless of angle

[Danny]

Good idea. End of Story.

Brevity.

[Doylo]

Personally I wouldn't want to go much over 50 even if it means less moves. 60 is too steep to train small holds effectively and finger strength is the most important thing outside.

[Danny]

I personally prefer less steep boards im making one atm and it'll be 40 deg and be full of poor hand and foot holds, i get much better gains outside after training on the 30deg board we have at the mill, I bareky touch the 55deg except for a bit of a power top up now and then. Either way having a woodie is mega regardless of angle

Agree here in general, but where I'm limited by height the 40-and-less gets me less climbing surface...on that subject, I've always disliked kickboards on small boards as a lank b/c probs tend to follow the same pattern: crouchy small hold setup into big move to slightly better hold and done.

[Danny]

Personally I wouldn't want to go much over 50 even if it means less moves. 60 is too steep to train small holds effectively and finger strength is the most important thing outside.

Mebs I'll do 50 into a roof section. As much as I know that's an anathema to the training hardcore, in practice my motivation to train remains a little higher when I can cock around a bit between the serious stuff.

[Will Hunt]

With regards Ducko's comments, I think it will depend what you want to use the board to train. If you're prepared to build some mini volumes to stick tiddly crimps on then it sounds like a win to me, especially if anything less than a 60 is going to mean too short a board.

Andy Popp's board has a short roof section at the end of it and it worked quite nicely. I can't see why people have a problem with adding that? If you've got room to do it then it just adds extra versatility to the board.

[slackline]

Adjustable angle? 

Perhaps slightly more work.

[remus]

Extra board surface is tempting, but I think 60 degress is a bit too steep for any proper small holds. If you're relying on volumes for usable small holds I think you'll just end up with very few small holds on your board because having lots of volume son your board is a pain in the ass.

[Will Hunt]

Extra board surface is tempting, but I think 60 degress is a bit too steep for any proper small holds. If you're relying on volumes for usable small holds I think you'll just end up with very few small holds on your board because having lots of volume son your board is a pain in the ass.

This is also true. Basically just don't listen to anything I say about training as I'm crap at it.

[Danny]

Adjustable angle? 

Perhaps slightly more work.

I think you misunderstand Slackers—remember that the whole point of steepening would be to get more climbing surface in a garage with limited vertical height. Adjustable would be limited to the max surface you could get from the least steep angle.

[Danny]

I'm leaning towards 50 max with a roof. I'm also crap at training Will.

[SA Chris]

I'm leaning towards 50 max

Impressive balance skills!

[SA Chris]

as a lank b/c probs tend to follow the same pattern: crouchy small hold setup into big move to slightly better hold and done.

Surely that's a product of poor problem setting?

[dave]

as a lank b/c probs tend to follow the same pattern: crouchy small hold setup into big move to slightly better hold and done.

Surely that's a product of poor problem setting?

It's also a product of what happens if you buy a set of holds that are roughly of similar size and stick them on in a random pattern - i.e. the usual starting point when you build a board. Big kickboards and very steep boards are easier to deal with if you have a big range of holds at your disposal (most home boards don't), and ideally lots of users of different ability and/or lots of man-hours available to finetune it (i.e. lots of wasted session on your board pissing around moving holds). For the above reasons most average home board users would be best sticking to non-extremes of angle and a small or nonexistent kickboard, IMHO.

[Doylo]

I can see why people say no kickboard but I've always climbed on boards with kickboards and prefer them so I'm just going to go with a small one on mine.

[andy popp]

Andy Popp's board has a short roof section at the end of it and it worked quite nicely. I can't see why people have a problem with adding that? If you've got room to do it then it just adds extra versatility to the board.

I think the board is about 45 (with short kick board) into maybe 2 and half/3 foot of roof and round the lip is a short vertical section with one long rail. Almost all the problems finish matching the rail. I've also no idea why roofs are seen as a bad thing - it has allowed for much more variety and  greater climbing surface and we didn't have to compromise the size of the 45 in order to build the roof.

[SA Chris]

I'm just going to go with a small one

And what about the kickboard size?

[slackline]

I think you misunderstand Slackers—remember that the whole point of steepening would be to get more climbing surface in a garage with limited vertical height. Adjustable would be limited to the max surface you could get from the least steep angle.

Apologies yes I have misunderstoodd.  If maximising climbing surface area is the intended goal then its surely a question that doesn't need to be asked, just go ahead and maximise the space. 

[Ti_pin_man]

for me there is a trade off between max surface area you can build Versus how much you might use it   I have a board that's about 48 degree and there are certainly days I wish it was slacker and the knowing that its use will be a hard session sometimes puts me off.  Its a trade off and only the OP can decide what he wants.

[DAVETHOMAS90]

Sounds like you might be thinking of something like:



That'd be rubbish, almost as bad as moving to Falmouth.

If you want a hand building it... 

Sounds mega

[tomtom]

It would be a bit disappointing to find someone had left a large turd near the footboard...

[Probes]

This is my old 60, I wish I still had it and would have one again every time over a lesser angled. The big kicker mean't you could put together some knarly crimps and snatches off the deck. Also my core and shoulders have never quite been the same after it got taken down.
Shocking quality vid  and ignore the blurb at the start it's bullshit.

[ducko]

I'm in the no kick board camp 100% saves you making the start moves all easier which is what you tend to do with a kick board I think..
You don't need a big board because Id imagine you want to work power? Having a good angle combined with good holds to use is the key.
You could do short three move boulders and get mega strong (I often making 3/4 move problems on the boards)
Maybe go try out a few boards if you know people who have them?

[Danny]

If you want a hand building it... 

Careful, I might hold you to that.

[honroid]

I've just been faced with a similar dilemma. Previously we were in a house with a garage with pitched rood over 3 meters and had been blessed with a 45 at over 3.5m of climbable surface. It was awesome and served well for hard fingery problems, circuits. We had a kickboard. Previous to that we had the same board in an upstairs double bedroom (with less fall zone and half a pannel shorter).

We've just bought a new place and the garage is 2.2m high and 2.2m wide only (I don't see how you'd even open a car door to exit your car in there...). When we bought it we envisaged extending the rood up a bit and having a board running the full length of the garage at 30 or 35 degrees. I had a few builders round to work out the cost of extending the roof up to accommodate a bigger board but the estimates ran into the thousands.... Errrrr. Scrap plan A.

Queue plan B: a board 2.2m wide and 2.2m high. We've built it at 55 degrees overhanging after a lot of thought. That means it's over 3.5m long again to maximise climbable surface again. It's now up and I have to agree with Probes. It really is the best wall I've climbed on. Probably it's early days and makes a change from the old 45 but really, every problem is a joy. I climb high sevens for reference. The shoulders and core get worked and you can still have small holds set in little volumes and go small small small.

Build it steep.

[36chambers]

I wish I had a woodie

Our spare room is too small and my gf wasn't too happy about the idea of putting our bed in there so we could use the master bedroom.

[DAVETHOMAS90]

If you want a hand building it... 

Careful, I might hold you to that.

Hey, do so, could be fun!

Always great to share your board ideas for inspiration!

[b3n99]

I would say 60 degrees may be a bit on the steep side, 50-55 would be maximum for me I think, can always just use better feet at that angle to get involved with little holds!

My previous board had a kickboard but I would definitely sack it off when I build another, all the best moves start when your feet leave the kickboard anyways!

[Doylo]

My previous board had a kickboard but I would definitely sack it off when I build another, all the best moves start when your feet leave the kickboard anyways!

I'm in two minds whether to have a kickboard on my board. I've always climbed on boards with kickboards and i prefer them but with it being a standard garage (I.e. Not very high) I'm wondering if I'd be better off without. Not having a kickboard would also make the board slightly less steep which would be better for my aims. The middle ground could be having a small kickboard , one line of holds. What do people think?

[Andy W]

I'd say if you have the space have a kickboard, you could always not use!

having tried both, my thoughts are that with a kickboard, you set problems with poor footholds, which often means feet popping, twisting moves, drop knees etc. No kickboard means getting straight into the hard moves. So kickboard better to mimic bouldering, no kickboard better training.

[Oldmanmatt]

My previous board had a kickboard but I would definitely sack it off when I build another, all the best moves start when your feet leave the kickboard anyways!

I'm in two minds whether to have a kickboard on my board. I've always climbed on boards with kickboards and i prefer them but with it being a standard garage (I.e. Not very high) I'm wondering if I'd be better off without. Not having a kickboard would also make the board slightly less steep which would be better for my aims. The middle ground could be having a small kickboard , one line of holds. What do people think?

I replaced the kickboard on my second board with a strip of stud framing (90x30mm) cut at an angle to make it a vertical face and added a grip strip (decking grip) to make a friction only bar.

Easy to take on and off, you can move it up or down as required. I actually made three of them, because this board (as a second board) is used for systems work (aka. steep foot on Campusing). It is vertical on the face, the board was propped up for some adjustments when I took the photo.


All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. Looking at you, here, Dense.

[webbo]

I have a kick board on my board it's about 7 inches, the boards 40 degrees. I have recently trying lots of my old problems not using any footholds on it, which turns a warm up in to a project.
That's even with footholds large enough to bivi on.

[Nibile]

My experience goes as follows.
Kickboard: better not. It makes the first moves much easier and when you've built it it's difficult not to use it, because the boards starts too high from the ground.
Steepness: better to build it steep, it's easier to tweak a steep board with volumes than to make a less steep board steeper.
In general: in my opinion very steep boards are more useful because they train the whole body, but the thing is quite complex and is largely influenced by the real aim of the person, training versus climbing.
Many people think that a steep board is good for your guns but not for your fingers, and vice versa, but that's partial, it all depends on what you put on the board. On less steep boards to make things really hard you have to resort to very small and slopey holds, and often it all boils down to skin and friction, not to mention that you often end up climbing with better technique without any serious physical improvement (the horror, the horror).
If the real aim is finger strength, nothing, no thing on Earth is better than fingerboarding. No thing.
How many times climbing on a board you have to make an effort similar to a one arm dead hang, in terms of pure % of effort? Never. That's because you want to do multiple moves to climb the problem and then go bragging at the cafe.
Boards are to try and seek the magic formula between isolation and general improvement.
You have to use small holds even on steep boards, but no so small that you need massive footholds. Some bigger holds (like, first joint, like those slappy guys back in the day) and small feet require a far greater effort from the fingers.
But: small feet don't mean good feet. They must be small and bad, that is downfacing, not incut. With present shoes you can pull on anything vaguely incut and as soon as you're able to do that, any hold becomes a bucket.
On less steep boards you have less options for this.
So, my experience is that very steep boards work better for training both fingers and big muscles, depending on how great a bad time the owner wants to have while training.
If the single aim is finger strength, nothing beats a fingerboard.

[Duma]

...not to mention that you often end up climbing with better technique without any serious physical improvement (the horror, the horror).

I love this bit, nibs in a nutshell

[Doylo]

Was hoping for a bit less than 50 degrees for purposes of a replica Nibs. It's going to the same beam regardless so no kickboard will mean it's slightly less steep.

[Will Hunt]

With all respect to Nibs, because he clearly knows A LOT more about training than I do, is it worth taking some of his advice with a pinch of salt? I get the impression that Nibs' training is as much geared around seeing improvements in his board climbing as it is about seeing improvements in his rock climbing (I understand that the two are largely, though perhaps not entirely, interchangeable).

[dave]

Surely there is an important aspect of finger strength relating to being able to hit a hold fast at full stretch and hang it, unless you're planning on doing every move on real rock static. Fingerboarding the way we normally do it doesn't really train this (unless you're jumping onehanded to a fingerboard about 10ft off the deck) and can only really be trained by steep board climbing or maybe campussing.

[T_B]

On a steep board, you're pulling on decent sized holds unless you're Megos (or his arch nemesis). Depends on your background too. I've felt more gains for the fingers f/boarding than I have climbing on steep boards, having done a lot of the latter o'er the years. I also think unless you're relatively pretty weak campussing on anything other than v small holds is not v useful for finger strength. The holds are too big and you're open on them.

[dave]

It's easier to quantify gains on a fingerboard though, whereas even on a basic woody you've got a lot of other factors to deal with, and that can give a false impression.

Let's not forget the anti-Megos was doing absolutely no fingerboarding whatsoever, and only very steep board work, at the time of their first bout.

[Nibile]

Surely there is an important aspect of finger strength relating to being able to hit a hold fast at full stretch and hang it, unless you're planning on doing every move on real rock static. Fingerboarding the way we normally do it doesn't really train this (unless you're jumping onehanded to a fingerboard about 10ft off the deck) and can only really be trained by steep board climbing or maybe campussing.

I'd say that it's more an application of strength. I think it's referred to as "contact strength" but in my experience it's far more related to body tension than to pure finger strength.
Even on a steep board you still have at least two other points of contact (one hand and one foot) if not three, to bear some of the weight, so the effort can be maximal on the specific move but it would never be your max %.
I don't say it's not useful - in fact I train it a lot - I think that it won't give max finger strength gains. Also because after latching the hold you still have to use it, and to be able to use it you have to have that level of strength. I can latch many holds on my board that I'm not able to hang and use because my fingers are not strong enough.
More or less the same thing with campusing, you always have the lower hand and there's a lot of weight on that.
As I said, I think it's a useful tool but not very specific to pure finger strength, also because it's a very complex and multi-factorial movement/excercise. That's why it's good training, because it has a huge carry-over to real climbing.
In my experience specificity and simplicity are the keys when you're looking for specific gains. Even though there's room for more than that obviously.

[Eddies]

Gaskins's board is 40degs and has a kick-board... Just saying!!

[DAVETHOMAS90]

Surely there is an important aspect of finger strength relating to being able to hit a hold fast at full stretch and hang it

That sounds very much like the result of a lack of strength - fingers, core, body tension, whatever - the symptoms of. What certain strong young boys referred to a little disdainfully as, being "a bit slappy". 

Hopefully by training and focusing on specific strength gains, we establish a more solid foundation, and that's always a better place to start from. The point at which we fail, is very often not our weak point. Strong fingers and a weak core, will probably leave you slapping for stuff anyway. Of course, it's the ability to "get the power down" that we need to work on.

I don't know what this means, but it's scary    Just be careful    :
"Mariners have an expression that beyond forty degrees South there is no law; beyond fifty degrees, there is no God." The Tempest's Roar by R. A. R. Clouston.

[kelvin]

I don't know what this means, but it's scary    Just be careful    :
"Mariners have an expression that beyond forty degrees South there is no law; beyond fifty degrees, there is no God." The Tempest's Roar by R. A. R. Clouston.

The finest quote in a while.

[Nibile]

Excellent.

[dave]

Surely there is an important aspect of finger strength relating to being able to hit a hold fast at full stretch and hang it

That sounds very much like the result of a lack of strength - fingers, core, body tension, whatever - the symptoms of.

Sorry Dave but that is absolute nonsense.

[DAVETHOMAS90]

Surely there is an important aspect of finger strength relating to being able to hit a hold fast at full stretch and hang it

That sounds very much like the result of a lack of strength - fingers, core, body tension, whatever - the symptoms of.

Sorry Dave but that is absolute nonsense.

How about qualifying that somewhat Dave? Or at least include the rest of my post, which puts my comment into some context? Point being, that it might be better to look for ways to improve your control on a dynamic move, rather than how to make the catch.

Strength/weakness is always a matter of prioritisation, so by my comments, I'm referring to those areas you might be better off prioritising. That seems to make sense to me; it's often the hand you're going off, that needs to be stronger, to improve accuracy with the leading hand 

Can't seem to add smiley in edit mode. I think it's a good topic to debate though.

[r-man]

Climbing is a movement-based activity. the traditional approach to training concentrates on isolating static strength, but I often wonder if this is missing half the picture. There are strengths involved in snatching crap holds which I don't think are well trained (isolated) by fingerboarding or campussing on comfy rungs. Sure, you can get super strong and completely avoid dynamic slapping (eg. Paxti) but seeing this as the only route to success is possibly a bit blinkered (eg. Ondra).

Dave T, you are talking about accuracy, but there's much more to it than that. grabbing a hold fast means you always hit it slightly differently. having the finger strength to work in the less than perfect finger position and then readjust and/or power out of it is very different to hanging a carefully placed hold on a fingerboard.

[dave]

Climbing is a movement-based activity. the traditional approach to training concentrates on isolating static strength, but I often wonder if this is missing half the picture. There are strengths involved in snatching crap holds which I don't think are well trained (isolated) by fingerboarding or campussing on comfy rungs. Sure, you can get super strong and completely avoid dynamic slapping (eg. Paxti) but seeing this as the only route to success is possibly a bit blinkered (eg. Ondra).

Dave T, you are talking about accuracy, but there's much more to it than that. grabbing a hold fast means you always hit it slightly differently. having the finger strength to work in the less than perfect finger position and then readjust and/or power out of it is very different to hanging a carefully placed hold on a fingerboard.

Exactly.

[DAVETHOMAS90]

Yes, I  appreciate those points, but I think movement related issues can be worked in their own way too.

Gains and merits will always be relative.

It's very easy to say "work your weaknesses", but it's not always apparent what they really are. They're not intrinsic, absolute, or discrete. The relevant weakness is the one that helps achieve the gain you're looking for, and it's very often not at the point where you're failing.

There's often substantial risk involved in estimating where the best investment needs to be made. In contrast, it can feel comforting to focus on where you're failing, but that can be defensive and impact negatively in the long run - the trying not to fail approach.

Of course, this thread is about considering the relative merits of the different strengths/weaknesses targeted at 50+ vs say 40. That's why the thread is actually quite interesting, isn't it.

I think it's misleading to try to argue for one focus over an other, as though one is ultimately right, the other wrong, but I think it's relevant to differentiate between skills and strengths. They're matters of interpretation too, but I think it's important to be wary of which lens we're looking through.

[tomtom]

If you're not having to slap for it, then you need to try a harder problem