Technique training

UKBouldering.com

Help Support UKBouldering.com:

2 Tru

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2012
Messages
45
As Slackline's recent survey suggests there are probably still a lot of UK climbers out there that resemble Dave Mcloud’s strong but unhappy ape and yet the thread posts are full of advice on deadlifts, deadhangs and finger injuries but very little advice on how to improve your technique.

The main response is just climb more but is that not the same answer people give when talking about training? There are more structured ways of improving.

The point of this thread is to have a place to post links on technique and skills training.

Here are a few to start the ball rolling.

Climbing Technique (1993)

http://www.onlineclimbingcoach.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/Technique%20Drills

Caveat. I am a punter with no technique or strength, there are many that climb a lot harder and know a lot more than me, this is mainly a selfish ploy to save hours of internet trawling.
 
Lalalalalalala, not listening.

Where's a fingers in ears smiley when you need one ...

good post
 
Technique training is as big a subject as physical training when you consider that even the most basic moves such as campus laddering have an element of technique. The challenge of moving efficiently is multiplied by the wide variety of features, textures and angles climbing presents you with. Breaking it down you would want to sub-divide the components of technique and think about those most important to the type of climbing you do. Elements of technique include pace, balance, reading sequences, movement initiation, momentum and body positioning but the solution is the same - repeated practice of those specific moves and sequences by bouldering and working routes and thinking hard about how to refine them. However, we all fall into habits and I think its useful to try and notice (or listen to criticism) and try to break out of the repertoire of moves you are locked into. Failing that, just get strong.
 
As others have pointed out, this is a huge and complex subject with relatively little (quality) research in it. In the resources thread are pretty much all the links you'll find useful. I'm starting a postgrad research degree in climbing movement next year, and have an article on technique training here.
http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=4383
 
shark said:
I think its useful to try and notice (or listen to criticism) and try to break out of the repertoire of moves you are locked into.

Watching other -good- climbers can do wonders..not so as to copy them exactly, but to see what they're doing that you're not.

I once watched Andy Pollitt get up to the powerful crux of Oyster on the Orme, look really smooth as he pulled through - and fall off. 20 minutes later he did exactly the same thing. 30 minutes after that he again looked to be cruising through the lock off but still fell without warning.

Then it hit me: he was giving his all to stay focussed on controlling the move to the point that there was no shaking, no irrelevant movement, no stressed behaviour as he felt it slide out of reach (like me), just 100% calm effort till the moment he had the hold or took flight.

100% focus. Amazing what you can learn sat on a wall eating sandwiches. Watch what the good ones do- but you need to understand it first, then try to put it into your practice.
 
Lets start with a generic definition of rock climbing technique:

The methods of applying strength, momentum, and balance to move across stone.

Anyone have any good comments on the above definition? Remember that there are no good or bad techniques, a technique is simply a technique. I think what we as climbers are looking for is "effecient" technique. This can be found in many ways, but generally this comes back to the individual climber. I distinctly remember Boone Speed talking about this with Dale Goddard in the "Fast Twitch" Video after watching a young Chris Sharma break all the classic "technique" rules, and it's always stuck with me.

That said, if we go back to Shark's Comment on the complexity of technique, then we find
shark said:
Elements of technique include pace, balance, reading sequences, movement initiation, momentum and body positioning...
So if we start from there (although I disagree that reading sequences is a matter of technique), then how do we identify and measure technique efficiency for these?

A starting point would be to test yourself vs. a partner and see if you are relatively weak or strong at these. Compare yourself on difficult routes/boulders, and see if there is a particular set of movements that you have issues with. Once you find it, then learn the most efficient way and practise, practise, practise.....

A few lessons applicable to all training:

1. Quantity is worthless if it is not quality. i.e., a pile of shit is still a pile of shit no matter how big you make it or how much shit you add to it.
2. All training should have a specific intent to it.

How these apply to technique training:

1. If you intend on practising a technique, you must first know how to do it correctly.
2. You should determine specific techniques to work on, learn them, then train them.
 
Sasquatch said:
Lets start with a generic definition of rock climbing technique:

The methods of applying strength, momentum, and balance to move across stone.

Anyone have any good comments on the above definition? Remember that there are no good or bad techniques, a technique is simply a technique. I think what we as climbers are looking for is "effecient" technique. This can be found in many ways, but generally this comes back to the individual climber. I distinctly remember Boone Speed talking about this with Dale Goddard in the "Fast Twitch" Video after watching a young Chris Sharma break all the classic "technique" rules, and it's always stuck with me.

that being said i think it definitely applies to whatever the individual finds most effective, body-types, strengths, weakness etc all mean that what's "most effective" can vary from person to person
 
Sasquatch said:
So if we start from there (although I disagree that reading sequences is a matter of technique), then how do we identify and measure technique efficiency for these?

Sequency moves are technical moves and IMO reading them correctly and quickly is a technical skill gained at a conscious level and unconscious one (engrams).
 
I think you need to make a distinction between learning technique (ie discovering or being taught a new way of doing something) and practicing or refining a technique. (Forgive me if someone's already said this)
 
And not to forget, that "strength" is often mistaken for "technique". Hanging on and implementing the required sequence can be more a matter of physical power and tenacity than any mystical physio-kinetic sense (you'll never be able to kick in that funky egyptian if you can't hang the holds beforehand).
Like everything else in climbing, "good technique" is so subjective it is almost meaningless. For campus board lovers with no core, going footless is often the best way to quickly dispatch a hard roof section. Myself, a spaghetti-legged weakling, prolonged crimping with much foot-faffery will be the solution.
 


Write your reply...
Back
Top