[michal]

I'm interested in doing some more planned/structured training for bouldering.  My goal for 2011 is to climb some 7c+ boulders in Bishop and Yosemite.  The problems vary from gently overhanging to maybe 40 degrees overhanging and primarily feature edges/crimps, though there are a few openhanded slopers. 

The year started with a pulley injury that has now healed and left all of my potential sending for the fall season (too hot in the late spring/summer) - so I've got plenty of time to get better.

I've been climbing for 14 years, have good technique/footwork on granite and have done many 7b+ problems and a few at the 7c grade outdoors.  At this point I consider my weaknesses to be: flexibility, back/shoulder girdle strength, core strength, one-arm strength and power endurance.  I can campus 1-4-7 fairly easily yet cannot hang for even a few seconds one-armed on a large edge.  I tend to perform much better on gently overhanging climbs than on steep walls.  I'm 181cm tall and weigh 75kg...pretty lean so there is not much possibility of gaining a grade by losing weight.

My "training", such as it is, involves climbing 3-4 days a week, with one of those days followed by a weight lifting session for chest/triceps to balance my shoulders and arms out.  I have access to several gyms with good bouldering walls, a campus board and have a Beastmaker at home.  I currently do some hangboard work, but it's fairly unstructured and sporadic.

I'm wondering if it's worthwhile to have a more structured training plan and am at a bit of a loss as to how to construct one since the commonly seen plans seem to cater to training for sport climbing.  Any thoughts/suggestions are much appreciated....

[Paul B]

Today I have been mostly reading:

Designing Periodised Training Plans – Tom Randall
The Science behind Training – Dave Binney

(and failing to understand...)

[account_inactive]

75kg is 10Kg too heavy for hard climbing. Lose some bulk and you won't find steeper walls as challenging.

Stop looking at classic periodisation Paul, your not doing comps are you?  Look at dual factor training theory for a more relevant option

[Duma]

75kg is 10Kg too heavy for hard climbing. Lose some bulk and you won't find steeper walls as challenging.

Really? At 181cm - so  over 5'11" - that seems a pretty reasonable weight to me. Certainly not 10kg overweight. I'm 5'9" and around 70kg and haven't felt weight has been the limiting factor in my climbing.
I'd do flexibility work, ensuring you go for strength throughout the range of movement, and one arm stuff (1-4-7 and not able  to hang a big rung sounds pretty imbalanced to me). Try a pulley to take some weight off initially maybe?
Sounds like you have access to all the right tools, good luck!

(Disclaimer: I'm weak, barely climb 7C+, and am very ill-disciplined when it comes to training. Also Dylan knows much much more about this than me)
65kg is still too skinny for 5'11" though

[account_inactive]

You're right 75Kg is not heavy at all for the normal population, though on average you would have to say that it's too heavy to climb 8a+ or more.  I'm not saying that it's impossible just less likely and an area that you shouldn't overlook without question, although whether this is healthy or not is another question.......

[michal]

I don't think there's a conceivable way I could remain healthy and lose 10kg....two or three perhaps, and that probably only for a short period of time.  Point taken, though.

Dual factor training theory seems to be a good way at viewing fatigue/fitness.  The question remains whether there is a good way to organize training various lengths of problems to target power, strength and low-end PE, all the while mixing in fingerboard and campus workouts....

[pyrosis]

75kg is 10Kg too heavy for hard climbing.

So I have to lose 25kg to climb hard? Guess I had better give up the cheesecake.

[Paul B]

Stop looking at classic periodisation Paul, your not doing comps are you?  Look at dual factor training theory for a more relevant option

Linky?

[account_inactive]

75kg is 10Kg too heavy for hard climbing.

So I have to lose 25kg to climb hard? Guess I had better give up the cheesecake.

It depends what you call hard.  Things are always easier on your fingers if you're not lugging up bulk.

PaulB: http://www.higher-faster-sports.com/PlannedOvertraining.html

[galpinos]

75kg is 10Kg too heavy for hard climbing. Lose some bulk and you won't find steeper walls as challenging.

 

[account_inactive]

Sorry I wasn't trying to piss on anyone's chips.  You can climb reasonable grades at higher weights and there are many examples of people who do this.  All I was doing was picking up on michal's assumption that he would not gain a grade by losing weight.  If he's already lean then it would be harder to drop weight than if he was crisp shaped like myself  and time might be better spent elsewhere for short term goals

[Paul B]

your link only seems different to the 'Wave' theory put forward in Toms presentation?

[account_inactive]

Yes

[ghisino]

I don't think there's a conceivable way I could remain healthy and lose 10kg....two or three perhaps, and that probably only for a short period of time.

2 or 3 kgs over a (not too) short period of time can have more impact than you think.

personally speaking, whenever i've lost 3kgs in a reasonable way i've experienced a half grade bump.
This maybe explains why i've had the best climbing performance streaks of my life between late spring and late autumn : in summer i naturally have less appetite for calorie-dense stuff and more appetite for veggies and such so i naturally lose some weight, while i inevitably bulk up during winter.
It could also explain why some years ago, during a long trip to céuse where i'd climb 3 days in a row and rest one, i was still improving my climbing performances day by day at the end of the third week, even if i started to be generally fatigued, my pip joints were swollen, and i felt somehow starved : maybe the weight lost during each walk to the crag played a role?

ps
i am 170 cm tall and somewhere between 66 and 68 in my "fat" state and 64-65 in my "lean" one

[chris05]

 

I was thinking about this whilst doing some assisted one arm max hangs the other day, a kilo or two in assistance makes a big difference to the holds that I can hang, I assume that losing just a couple of kg would have a comparable effect as long as the loss wasn't muscle mass etc.

[John Gillott]

I was thinking about this whilst doing some assisted one arm max hangs the other day, a kilo or two in assistance makes a big difference to the holds that I can hang, I assume that losing just a couple of kg would have a comparable effect as long as the loss wasn't muscle mass etc.

But then there's Malcolm Smith who improved when he put on a stone and a half - going back up to his comfortable weight of between 11 and 11 1/2 stone after the excessive dieting when he was young. He says in interviews that his improved performance wasn't about better technique as such - his strength to weight ratio as well as his performance went up despite the extra weight. He just felt a lot more comfortable and able to make strength gains at his normal weight.

[account_inactive]

I was thinking about this whilst doing some assisted one arm max hangs the other day, a kilo or two in assistance makes a big difference to the holds that I can hang, I assume that losing just a couple of kg would have a comparable effect as long as the loss wasn't muscle mass etc.

But then there's Malcolm Smith who improved when he put on a stone and a half - going back up to his comfortable weight of between 11 and 11 1/2 stone after the excessive dieting when he was young. He says in interviews that his improved performance wasn't about better technique as such - his strength to weight ratio as well as his performance went up despite the extra weight. He just felt a lot more comfortable and able to make strength gains at his normal weight.

I think this is the exception rather than the rule

[Paul B]

wasn't this because Malc lost the weight in a poor way, leaving him fatigued enough to faint at the crag?

Leaning up and starving yourself are completely different things.

[John Gillott]

I was thinking about this whilst doing some assisted one arm max hangs the other day, a kilo or two in assistance makes a big difference to the holds that I can hang, I assume that losing just a couple of kg would have a comparable effect as long as the loss wasn't muscle mass etc.

But then there's Malcolm Smith who improved when he put on a stone and a half - going back up to his comfortable weight of between 11 and 11 1/2 stone after the excessive dieting when he was young. He says in interviews that his improved performance wasn't about better technique as such - his strength to weight ratio as well as his performance went up despite the extra weight. He just felt a lot more comfortable and able to make strength gains at his normal weight.

I think this is the exception rather than the rule

I'm not sure how many exceptions there are, but man of the moment Sharma is amongst them (he's the same weight as chunky old me and not much taller).

[douglas]

Today I have been mostly reading:

Designing Periodised Training Plans – Tom Randall
The Science behind Training – Dave Binney

(and failing to understand...)

Where did you find those?

[Paul B]

Shark (simon) linked them (with permission) from the other forum GBindoorclimbing.com

[account_inactive]

I was thinking about this whilst doing some assisted one arm max hangs the other day, a kilo or two in assistance makes a big difference to the holds that I can hang, I assume that losing just a couple of kg would have a comparable effect as long as the loss wasn't muscle mass etc.

But then there's Malcolm Smith who improved when he put on a stone and a half - going back up to his comfortable weight of between 11 and 11 1/2 stone after the excessive dieting when he was young. He says in interviews that his improved performance wasn't about better technique as such - his strength to weight ratio as well as his performance went up despite the extra weight. He just felt a lot more comfortable and able to make strength gains at his normal weight.

I think this is the exception rather than the rule

I'm not sure how many exceptions there are, but man of the moment Sharma is amongst them (he's the same weight as chunky old me and not much taller).

How heavy is the other man of the moment Ondra?

[John Gillott]

I was thinking about this whilst doing some assisted one arm max hangs the other day, a kilo or two in assistance makes a big difference to the holds that I can hang, I assume that losing just a couple of kg would have a comparable effect as long as the loss wasn't muscle mass etc.

But then there's Malcolm Smith who improved when he put on a stone and a half - going back up to his comfortable weight of between 11 and 11 1/2 stone after the excessive dieting when he was young. He says in interviews that his improved performance wasn't about better technique as such - his strength to weight ratio as well as his performance went up despite the extra weight. He just felt a lot more comfortable and able to make strength gains at his normal weight.

I think this is the exception rather than the rule

I'm not sure how many exceptions there are, but man of the moment Sharma is amongst them (he's the same weight as chunky old me and not much taller).

How heavy is the other man of the moment Ondra?

Indeed. I get the impression that in both cases they've gone with what came naturally - i.e. Ondra was always the lanky skinny kid whereas Sharma wasn't. That's the message I got from the Smith interviews as well - he just didn't feel very comfortable when he was light and found it easier and more natural to train hard at the weight his body was comfortable with. Obviously, it's good to get the lard off, and Sharma's not carrying any of that (unlike me).

[pyrosis]

While I certainly agree it would be easier to send harder if lighter, I also know in my heart that there is no way I could ever be 60kg. I'm 90kg now at 6'2", probably 15% body fat, and I have been bouldering harder than ever. Granted, harder than ever for me is not 'hard' for others. I regularly see people warm up on my projects (damn that Matt Birch...)   At any rate, should I be shooting for 80kg then? It might be the lowest weight at which I could be reasonably healthy with my frame and musculature.

[Eddies]

Lets not turn this into a rant about how heavy we all are and the best way to lose it/beef up/convince ourselves its all good (delete as applicable)

I think the link Dylan posted was excellent and have taken something from it and will adjust my training according once im back to climbing in my urban cave again.

If I was after getting better for a bouldering trip I would sit down and work out which areas of my fitness I thought needed work, and which areas were most important and base my training accordingly.
For you that might mean, fingerboarding 2 times a week, with 2days a week bouldering in a gym with one of those sessions ending in a weights routine.
If you think you need to loose a few pounds by cutting back on the junk then go for it but it has to be enjoyed not endured!

[Tommy]

[/quote]


PaulB: http://www.higher-faster-sports.com/PlannedOvertraining.html
[/quote]

What you've got there in that article is pretty useful - quite a nice realistic view of how to combine intensity with volume and the reprecusions for progressive load. I think often people don't quite understand the constant overtraining/over-reaching (or however you'd like to refer to it as) complexities and how you can waste yourself out slowly for 3 works of hard work, but with 1 to 2 weeks of good rest intervals you'll be even better than before. You hear people down the wall worrying that they've over trained and they've messed up their entire year, but in fact they're just very, very fatigued. Nice one for posting up that link Dylan.

Anyone reading that link that Simon put in for my PyB presentation, should be aware that it's a summary of the most basic kind. I had to start somewhere with everyone and unless you go fairly basic, people just get very confused! Oh - and some kind of formatting problem has happened as there are loads of weird spelling mistakes in it now! I'm not that shit at English I promise.... 

[Muenchener]

PaulB: http://www.higher-faster-sports.com/PlannedOvertraining.html

What you've got there in that article is pretty useful

I read that article and came away with the message that it can be effective to beast oneself for three weeks, then ease off for a week or two. Fine. But beast oneself with what exactly? 

Would it, for example, be effective to combine this with something like classic periodisation, e.g. three weeks focus on bouldering/power ... ease off ... three weeks focus on routes/endurance ... ease off / crush projects ?

(I think I did reach an overtrained state once in my life. It was in my overenthusiastic student days, and my "programme" consisted of weights or circuit training alternate lunchtimes, wall or karate class alternate evenings. After a few months of which I was permanently listless and had no appetite - the only time in my life that has ever happened to me  . Took a few weeks of easing off / largely resting to get over it.)

[shark]

PaulB: http://www.higher-faster-sports.com/PlannedOvertraining.html

What you've got there in that article is pretty useful

I read that article and came away with the message that it can be effective to beast oneself for three weeks, then ease off for a week or two. Fine. But beast oneself with what exactly? 

Would it, for example, be effective to combine this with something like classic periodisation, e.g. three weeks focus on bouldering/power ... ease off ... three weeks focus on routes/endurance ... ease off / crush projects ?

That would mainly be dictated by the weaknesses you were seeking to correct, your goals and the length of the training programme. Unless you were super-specific on the former two then each 3/5 week block would probably empasize certain things as part of a programme. Some adaptions to take longer than others which dictate how soon you start them. Tommy is a big advocate of emphasizing aerocap early on and continuing for quite a few blocks with it as lasting adaptions take 16? weeks and it provides a good base for harder training later in the programme. Things like dynamic recruitment take less time and are less generally important so would come at the end of a programme.

[Tommy]

That would mainly be dictated by the weaknesses you were seeking to correct, the length of the training programme and your goals. Unless you were super-specific on the former two then each 3/5 week block would probably empasize certain things as part of a programme. Some adaptions to take longer than others which dictate how soon you start them. Tommy is a big advocate of emphasizing aerocap early on and continuing for quite a few blocks with it as lasting adaptions take 16? weeks and it provides a good base for harder training later in the programme. Things like dymaic recruitment take less time so would come at the end unless you were just training for dynamic movement throughout like maybe a basketball player would.

Simon's pretty much on the money there. What you're doing in your training model will always be dictated by your end goal (with a few very pedantic exceptions) and so you'd taylor what you're doing in reverse.

If you do expect to make decent changes in your climbing/physiology don't ask your body to do it too quickly! I'm an advocate of slow progressive changes in a structured manner that then last for months and months to come. If you're a route climber - aim to work in useful blocks of no less than 4 months.

Oh and unless I misread your words, don't do stamina/endurance right at the end - it doesn't produce the best results. Leave power (not strength) and power endurance until the end.

That's my opinion anyway.... 

[Tommy]

Bollocks. I somehow quoted myself - can I change that?

[slackline]

Bollocks. I somehow quoted myself - can I change that?

Theres about a twenty minute grace period whereby you can click on a "Modify" link on the top right of a post you've just made and modify it, after that time its only admins/moderators who can modify posts.

[shark]

Oh and unless I misread your words, don't do stamina/endurance right at the end - it doesn't produce the best results. Leave power (not strength) and power endurance until the end.

That's my opinion anyway.... 

Worth picking up on this as it is diametrically the opposite of what most sport climbers do over the winter period which is to concentrate on strength/bouldering then top up on endurance at the end ready for climbing outdoors.

[Muenchener]

Oh and unless I misread your words, don't do stamina/endurance right at the end - it doesn't produce the best results. Leave power (not strength) and power endurance until the end.

That's my opinion anyway.... 

Worth picking up on this as it is diametrically the opposite of what most sport climbers do over the winter period which is to concentrate on strength/bouldering then top up on endurance at the end ready for climbing outdoors.

My understanding is that what people do "at the end" is (supposed to be) primarily aimed at *anaerobic* endurance, where I think I read Udo Neumann saying that this peaks fairly quickly and doesn't stay peaked long. Whereas aerocap, ARC etc. are aimed at aerobic endurance at much lower intensity.

But I climb 6b so what do I know? Otoh, 6b is around 4 grades harder than I was climbing a year ago, so something I'm doing is clearly working. Otooh, at this level *anything* that involves a respectable amount of climbing would probably be working

[Rocksteady]

Really interesting thread.

I was particularly struck by this from the article Dylan posted:
"Say you train 3 x per week for 3-4 weeks and then once every 4 days for 4 weeks. Your gains will be out of this world during the 2nd phase because you heighten your ability to adapt in the first phase."

How often do you read/hear that 'the more climbing sessions the better'? I've definitely got into stages in the past where I've upped my climbing sessions and seen a decline in performance and got frustrated by it, through not understanding the link between over-reaching/rest/supercompensation.

I've only once achieved a PB on holiday, and it strikes me that the usual format of a climbing holiday (i.e. one week-2 weeks long, climb as much as possible) is really more a 'training' schedule than a 'performance' schedule...unless you've followed a periodised training plan to peak for the holiday.

I'm going to give periodisation a try.

Nice info Dylan & Tommy, much appreciated.

[Paul B]

I've only once achieved a PB on holiday

Visit Spain more often? (this is a joke before anyone gets too upset)

Its interesting periodization but I'm struggling to get my head around some of it. Mainly, where the actual climbing fits in (mildly ironic I know).

I've seen people with training plans and generally the weekend has been left free and clear to do as you wish (climbing). The problem that I see is that these people are often training heavily during the week and will therefore be tired (and perform sub-optimally) at the weekend. Maybe I'm off the mark with this, but you're effectively accepting this for large periods to reap a benefit when you allow your body to recover from the over-training/reaching.

Secondly, if you follow the aerobic capacity line of thinking, or do things as Simon has suggested, during bouldering season you're going to be training like a Stamlord. At the weekend when you go out and try and pull on some freezing Grit is that at all worthwile (yes in the longrun, no in the short-term)? The same can be said for trad season / sport where you'll effectively be training the 'wrong' energy system [ i.e. the more rounded you are as a climber the less applicable this becomes (or maybe more complex?) as a single peak just doesn't really apply? (Was this what Dylan was suggesting?)].

 

[account_inactive]

Tommy: Does your view of periodisation run like this- Hypertrophy-Strength-Power-Peak as in the traditional linear model? Also the end of the cycle you speak of training Power/PE, is this seen as the preparatory stage (for the next cycle)?
Also how many peaks are you creating during the year as I would have thought that comp climbers would need to peak at the start of the season an then again several times during the year.

[ghisino]

[ i.e. the more rounded you are as a climber the less applicable this becomes (or maybe more complex?) as a single peak just doesn't really apply? ].

 

for the record, the only training book i've owned so far had a big list of one-month training programs, all being three weeks on one off, nothing longer than that.
Reasoning : author expects that 95% of the readers are sport7a to sport8b outdoor climbers not willing to sacrifice year-round performance for a single peak/performance season

[mr__j5]

That seems to be the general opinion towards periodisation for recreational climbers.

If you are climbing just for fun, then you are more likely to be happy with climbing at 90% ability for most of the season, instead of dropping off towards 80% ability for a time with an increase over the period until 100%, hold that for a few weeks and drop off again.

This is why periodisation suits the comp climbers, but doesn't really fit for anybody else. However, as I understand it, if you can stand to do periodisation properly, each time you go around the loop your peak should be higher than the last. But from most of the sports that I pay attention to, people tend to only manage 2 peaks a year of maybe 6 weeks max.

[Falling Down]

Oh and unless I misread your words, don't do stamina/endurance right at the end - it doesn't produce the best results. Leave power (not strength) and power endurance until the end.

That's my opinion anyway.... 

Worth picking up on this as it is diametrically the opposite of what most sport climbers do over the winter period which is to concentrate on strength/bouldering then top up on endurance at the end ready for climbing outdoors.

I'm no training expert nor coach and sh*t at climbing but I did live at Ben Moon's house for a year and some when he was training for what eventually became Northern Lights at Kilnsey. Marius Morstad had given him a periodised programme that was initially weighted to what is now Aerocap (toproping the E4's in Stoney Quarry) with a power top up at the end.   He didn't do the route of course and felt that his training programme was a contributing factor.  This was a long time ago when training was nowhere nearly as well understood, but, Tommy & Shark, it might be worth picking his brains on his experience (unless you have done already).

[Tommy]

Tommy: Does your view of periodisation run like this- Hypertrophy-Strength-Power-Peak as in the traditional linear model? Also the end of the cycle you speak of training Power/PE, is this seen as the preparatory stage (for the next cycle)?
Also how many peaks are you creating during the year as I would have thought that comp climbers would need to peak at the start of the season an then again several times during the year.

Hi Dylan - yeah, very broadly speaking it does, but only in the broadest terms, because every model has to be catered to the individual. I'm not particularly keen on this view of periodisation as I don't think it's particularly helpful to route climbers as much of the gain is through training correctly in terms of intensity and volume through the year and not whether they are training for hypertrophy or power. For example, during a base period/winter for X-comp climber I would expect them do be doing mainly strength work, anaerobic capacity training and endurance work. They would characteristically be strong (but not explosive), very very fit and have good long boulder ability during this period. Stick them on an onsight route at their max though during this period....... and they'd be shit......... that's where the trickiness of bringing them to fruition for comps comes and much of my hard work.

Regarding peaking - normally once or twice in the year depending on the individual. The greater the depth and volume of training carried out during the base season, the greater the peak they're able to hold in general.

[Tommy]

Falling Down: yeah. I've read some of his stuff. Quite a bit of it is a bit vague on precise details so I tend to rely on sources elsewhere. He did some great articles in OTE way back...

[Tommy]

This is why periodisation suits the comp climbers, but doesn't really fit for anybody else. However, as I understand it, if you can stand to do periodisation properly, each time you go around the loop your peak should be higher than the last. But from most of the sports that I pay attention to, people tend to only manage 2 peaks a year of maybe 6 weeks max.

I know what you're saying, but it depends on how extreme you go with the troughs and peaks. After all, nearly all climbers out there are periodising in some way (dividing blocks of training) by saying they'll boulder in the winter and do sport and trad in the summer. In most cases it's best to avoid looking at the extremes and think about how much people benefit from structured and organised training. It invariably results in less stagnation, less injury, more consistency and more goals achieved. By then again... maybe I'm just a progession geek? 

To illustrate the point of a comp climber's (perhaps the most extreme example) progression and annual performance take climber X

End of year A

Onsights 8a
Onsights V6
Aerocap on 7a

Beginning of year B (4-6 months after end of season A)

Onsights 7c+
Onsights V8
Aerocap on 7b/+

Mid of year B

Onsights 8a+
Onsights V7
Aerocap on 7a+

The differences in standard come about from slow progression in strength, but also in the waxing and waning of aerobic and anaerobic systems and how they complement certain types of training. So, whilst at the beginning of season B they are terrifically fit and are relatively strong, their onsighting will not be optimal. By the comp season (Mid B) then the bouldering ability will be suppressed down to perhaps V7, but their onsight level will peak.

Hope this helps! 

[michal]

Thanks for all of the responses....much appreciated.

I like the idea of progressive overload over a period of weeks as opposed to a session-to-session view of recovery.  The tricky bit is still deciding what to do of: bouldering limit problems, bouldering circuit training, bouldering or routes for power endurance, aerobic capacity work, campusing, hangboarding....  Is there an actual benefit to endurance/aerocap work if one is strictly interested in bouldering performance?  If so, are these sessions to be focused on for a block of time while other aspects are de-emphasized?

[slackline]

The tricky bit is still deciding what to do of: bouldering limit problems, bouldering circuit training, bouldering or routes for power endurance, aerobic capacity work, campusing, hangboarding....or just bouldering/climbing

  

[chris_j_s]

The tricky bit is still deciding what to do of: bouldering limit problems, bouldering circuit training, bouldering or routes for power endurance, aerobic capacity work, campusing, hangboarding....or just bouldering/climbing

  

On that list only campussing and hangboarding are not 'just bouldering/climbing'. 

[slackline]

On that list only campussing and hangboarding are not 'just bouldering/climbing'. 

I was suggesting something a little less focused on "training".

[douglas]

On that list only campussing and hangboarding are not 'just bouldering/climbing'. 

I was suggesting something a little less focused on "training".

But 'training' is just as much fun as 'climbing'.

[Paul B]

for the record, the only training book i've owned so far had a big list of one-month training programs, all being three weeks on one off, nothing longer than that.

Is this the Dave McBook?

[account_inactive]

Probably Horst I would have thought. The linear model allows for a single peak in performance and begins with high volumes and lower loads/intensities. As time progresses, volume decreases and loads/intensities increase to ensure that athletes’ are gaining strength and power for their sport. This model has many flaws in that hypertrophy is only focused on in the first mesocycle and the lean mass gains tend to diminish in the subsequent phases of strength and power due to the decrease in volume. Likewise, strength and power gains attained through neuromuscular adaptations during later phases are diminished during the return to the hypertrophy phase.

[slackline]

You should write a book Dylan, then you can just tell people to RMTM (Read My Fucking Manual) 

[chris05]

You should write a book Dylan, then you can just tell people to RMTM (Read My Fucking Manual) 

Wouldn't that be RMFM? 

[slackline]

Yep, typo, but I got it right when spelling it out in brackets, comes from working and pissing around on forums simultaneously 

[chris05]

Yep, typo, but I got it right when spelling it out in brackets, comes from working and pissing around on forums simultaneously 

You need to prioritise.... 

[slackline]

I know, work is such a hassle.

[ghisino]

for the record, the only training book i've owned so far had a big list of one-month training programs, all being three weeks on one off, nothing longer than that.

Is this the Dave McBook?

nope. i own it but that's not a training book in the strictest sense, for me. At it is very far from giving you a list of recipes.

the book i refer to is "jollypower". italian only.
very helpful if you're the kind of climber that will benefit from a lot of strenght training on campus boards, weighted pulls/hangs, one-armed bouldering and similar stuff : that's were you get tons of details and suggestions.
Of course it doesn't suggest it as a one-size-fits-all solution.