[slackline]

I agree that BMI is a bit crap, but it can be got from the exising data

waist measurement might be better - or some waist/height/weight magic athleticism index probably better

Waist to hip ratio is my preference, but likely awkward for people to measure consistently.

as regards the tan investigation; we could use Tanners to test/corroborate predictions made after analysing the existing data

There might just be enough data to do that (usual approach is to split a data set in half, derive a model in that half and see if the predictions are accurate in the second half to validate the model).

[stevej]

I'm not a great fan of BMI as it tends not to work too well for particularly muscley people.

Shirely a height against weight relationship makes perfect sense to climbing (whereas we all know BMI is only used because it's easy, not because it means anything). Try turning it on its head, height over weight squared perhaps?

[lagerstarfish]

at least he's not trying to paint the Forth Bridge

[lagerstarfish]

some sort of aerobic performance measure could be interesting, but the distances that people cover vary so much

maybe just - "do you do aerobic exercise" yes/no

resting heart rate?

vegetarian?

frequency of posts on popular climbing based forums?

number of children?

income?

marital status?

religion?

[Nibile]

maybe just - "do you do aerobic exercise" yes/no NO

resting heart rate? 48

vegetarian? AH AH! IN TUSCANY???

frequency of posts on popular climbing based forums? DAILY

number of children? ZERO

income? PATHETIC

marital status? SINGLE

religion? THE RELIGION OF FONT 8B

[tomtom]

Or number of Rock Shoes?

[jhd746]

I would think there would be an good correlation between height, grade climbed and number of pullup.  ie shorter your are the stronger the shoulders?

[Muenchener]

Or number of Rock Shoes?

Oh come on. Apparently people couldn't even enter their height in centimetres consistently. What possible chance do you think there might be that they could/would enter number of *shoes* or number of *pairs of shoes* consistently?

(5 pairs btw)

[slackline]

Some more graphs.  I was mistaken about front-levers there is plenty of data for those (a lot of zero's though!) its the one-armers where there is so many missing or zero's its barely worth bothering.

Front-lever by Boulder (Outdoors)


Front-lever by Boulder (Indoors)


Height by Boulder (Outdoors)


Height by Boulder (Indoors)


Weight by Boulder (Outdoors)


Weight by Boulder (Indoors)


BMI by Boulder (Outdoors)


BMI by Boulder (Indoors)



Front-lever by Routes (On-sight)


Front-lever by Routes (Redpoint)


Height by Route (On-sight)


Height by Route (Redpoint)


Weight by Route (On-sight)


Weight by Route (Redpoint)


BMI by Route (On-sight)


BMI by Route (Redpoint)



NB - The BMI outlier who can climb 8b has I suspect entered their weight incorrectly at 155kg  (== BMI 54.9 )

[Sasquatch]

Dammit    you've confirmed what I've always suspected.  I'm way to heavy to be climbing hard.  I have the highest BMI of anyone climbing over 7B+......

Cakes, pies, and  , or climbing harder....  Tough call

[slackline]

Dammit    you've confirmed what I've always suspected.  I'm way to heavy to be climbing hard.  I have the highest BMI of anyone climbing over 7B+......

Cakes, pies, and  , or climbing harder....  Tough call

I wouldn't worry about it too much, with a larger sample theres bound to be someone with a higher BMI than you who can climb as hard.


EDIT : Updated the PDF.

[Stubbs]

Oh shit look at that slight negative trend between height and bouldering grade, you've played right into the tallies' hands!

[slackline]

Don't worry its unlikely it will be "statistically significant" in predicting climbing performance.

[Sasquatch]

Dammit    you've confirmed what I've always suspected.  I'm way to heavy to be climbing hard.  I have the highest BMI of anyone climbing over 7B+......

Cakes, pies, and  , or climbing harder....  Tough call

I wouldn't worry about it too much, with a larger sample theres bound to be someone with a higher BMI than you who can climb as hard.


EDIT : Updated the PDF.

I'm sure you're right, but I've never met one.....  Looks pretty similar for routes.....

[Richie Crouch]

Oh shit look at that slight negative trend between height and bouldering grade, you've played right into the tallies' hands!

Looks like I'm the gangly outlier on that one! Imagine willackers should be there too though?

[jwi]

I wouldn't worry about it too much, with a larger sample theres bound to be someone with a higher BMI than you who can climb as hard.


EDIT : Updated the PDF.

I'm sure you're right, but I've never met one.....  Looks pretty similar for routes.....

Have you met Mark Smith from Canada?

[tomtom]

Oh shit look at that slight negative trend between height and bouldering grade, you've played right into the tallies' hands!

*yawns* you hobbits playing catch up still? :p

[slackline]

Imagine willackers should be there too though?

Only if he completed the survey.

[slackline]

I should add that if anyone keeps a diary of their training and climbing then they could easily analyse themselves to see what training level equates to what level of performance (although it might be a ballache to have to enter it all into a computer if its kept on paper). 

[nai]

its the one-armers where there is so many missing or zero's its barely worth bothering.

Assumes that respondents are unable to do a one-armer and therefore there's no correlation between grade climbed and the ability to perform this party trick exercise?

[rich d]

Confirms more of what I know. I'm a bit too heavy, don't have a strong enough core or fingers to climb as hard as I'd like. Thank fuck there's no measure of technique or flexibilty. I think slackers deserves an OBE for services to climbing training. I'm going to print off the height vs bouldering grade graph then laminate it and carry it around at all times so that when some short arse starts moaning about my lankiness helping me I can hit them with some science (obviously I'll have to bend down to show it to them)

[slackline]

Yep, missing I've replaced with zero and a graph with essentially flat lines showing zero variation for most grades is pointless and that its got no relationship to grade climbed.

[abarro81]

I should add that if anyone keeps a diary of their training and climbing then they could easily analyse themselves to see what training level equates to what level of performance (although it might be a ballache to have to enter it all into a computer if its kept on paper).

Do you mean in a manner like this - comparing training intensity/volume to performance level across lots of different people  or meaning correlating periods of varying training volume/intensity with performance level?

If the latter, I think it's actually quite a hard thing to do as you not only have to consider (and somehow gauge - hard to do accurately) intensity and volume, but also exactly which energy systems you're working on and how long for, and you have to worry about how to take into account what you've been doing previously. E.g. If you go day-on-day-off for a month and climb really hard it doesn't necessarily mean that you should be following that protocol all the time.

[slackline]

Do you mean in a manner like this - comparing training intensity/volume to performance level across lots of different people  or meaning correlating periods of varying training volume/intensity with performance level?

If the latter, I think it's actually quite a hard thing to do as you not only have to consider (and somehow gauge - hard to do accurately) intensity and volume, but also exactly which energy systems you're working on and how long for, and you have to worry about how to take into account what you've been doing previously. E.g. If you go day-on-day-off for a month and climb really hard it doesn't necessarily mean that you should be following that protocol all the time.

The later because whilst there are indeed the considerations you highlight the data is specific to you, your strength/weaknesses/styles etc. rather than trying to draw conclusions from others who are vastly different to your own physiology/psyche/strengths/weaknesses.  So whilst the things you are suggesting may be hard to quantify its just as hard to do so across many people completing a survey (be it this one or another) and on top of that you have the variation between others to compound things.  By using data on yourself over time you are taking out the variation between individuals.

EDIT : Obviously if many people keep diaries then there is the potential to perform some longitudinal analysis using retrospective surveys (or even better prospectively), but such a survey is a long way off, and would require more time than I've got to dedicate to this (unless the BMC wish to fund it ).

[Nibile]

(obviously I'll have to bend down to show it to them)

That's for sure with me, I am still a good few cm's shy of the shortest one in my grade category... (assuming I managed to read the graph correctly).
But I'm ahead on the front levers.
Hurrah for front levers.