[slackline]

Ok, just that your statement about the alternative hypothesis (even under a one-sided test) was confusing, as all a one-sided test does is stipulate the direction of an effect, its opposite is still the null, and not an effect in the other direction.

Its also not the size of a dataset that increases the risk of a false positive (large datasets actually decrease the chance of this, although small differences will be statistically significant in larger datasets), rather the number of tests that are being performed.

Anyway, I'll shut up and say no more, its your work not mine. 

[jwi]

1   Benchmarking


1.1  What should be tested

...

1.2  What can we learn from tests?


Demonstrating strength is different from having or acquiring strength.

   Every climber needs to understand the results of the benchmarks according to his or hers own training background. Someone that is demonstratively good at holding on to small flat edges might be strong on that because a) climbed a lot on small flat edges, or b) have trained a lot on small flat edges and has achived a high neural recruitment ("technique") specific for the testing apparatus.

   Compare yourself to others, and compare to your own results from before, but remember that lots of the variation can be explained by familiarity with the testing apparatus.


2   Survey


2.1  What kind of climbers took part of the survey?


21 male climbers and 0 female climbers with the following characteristics filled in the self-evaluation questionaire:

Sport RP: 7c/+
Sport OS: 7a+/b
Boulder RP: 7B+
Boulder flash: 7A
Trad X: 5c+/6a
Trad OS: 6c+/7a
Number of pull-ups: 17
Pull-up strength/weight ratio: 32% of body-weight added
16 mm open crimp, strength/weight ratio: 44% of body-weight added
Minimum edge open crimp: 8.6 mm
No repeaters (10s on, 5s rest) on 16 mm open crimp: 5.5
Static hang 16 mm open crimp: 33 s
Hanging knee raises: 23
Cooper test: Average (for untrained), VO2max 45 mls/kg/min

Code: [Select]

   Quantiles:______________________________________________________________
   _Test___________________________________0%____25%____50%____75%___100%__

    Number of pull-ups                     8     13     18     23    28
    Pull-up strength/weight ratio          0.035 0.169  0.312  0.368 0.926
    16 mm open crimp, strength/weight ratio0.036 0.276  0.512  0.584 0.913
    Minimum edge open crimp                5.5   6.75   8      9.875 14
    Intermittent endurance 16 mm open crimp4     4      5      6     9
    Static endurance 16 mm open crimp      12.5  25     30     45    60
   _Abs_stamina____________________________2.5___13_____20_____30____50____


3   Results


I have only counted grade-differences in full french letter grades.  E.g.  the difference between 8b and 8c is 1 grade, the difference between 8b and 8b+ is .5 grades.



3.1  Tradclimbing


The difference between the sport and safe trad o/s grades was on average 0.6 full french grades, and the quantiles are given by


 0%   25%   50%   75%  100%
-3.00  0.00  1.00  1.75  3.00


   The difference between the scary but relatively safe trad and safe trad o/s  grades was on average -0.82 full french grades. and the quantiles are given by


 0%  25%  50%  75% 100%
-2.0 -1.0 -1.0 -0.5  0.0


   The difference between the risky and safe trad o/s grades was on average -2.1 full french grades. and the quantiles are given by


 0%  25%  50%  75% 100%
-4.0 -2.5 -2.0 -1.0 -1.0



   The difference between the sport and (safe) trad o/s grades was on average -3.3 full french grades. and the quantiles are given by


  0%  25%  50%  75% 100%
-6.0 -4.5 -3.0 -2.0 -1.0


   Assuming linear behaviour over the grades the typical climber that onsight 7b/5.12b on safe trad is onsighting between 6b+ and 7a (5.10a-5.11d) on risky trad. Values outside these indicates an outlying behaviour.
   

Code: [Select]

     __________________________________________________________________
     | Trad OS (safe)||Sport OS grade||  Trad X|  |Trad R | |Trad PG/R |
     |_______________|25%____75%___|_25%__75%_|_25%___75%_|25%___75%__|_

     |       5c       |5c   6a+/b  | 4a+   5a  |4c+   5b  | 5b   5b+  |
     |       6a       |6a   6b+/c  | 4b+   5b  |5a+   5c  | 5c   5c+  |
     |       6b       |6b  6c+/7a  | 4c+   5c  |5b+   6a  | 6a   6a+  |
     |       6c       |6c   7a+/b  | 5a+   6a  |5c+   6b  | 6b   6b+  |
     |       7a       |7a   7b+/c  | 5b+   6b  |6a+   6c  | 6c   6c+  |
     |       7b       |7b  7c+/8a  | 5c+   6c  |6b+   7a  | 7a   7a+  |
     |       7c       |7c   8a+/b  | 6a+   7a  |6c+   7b  | 7b   7b+  |
     |_______8a_______|8a___8b+/c__|_6b+___7b__|7a+___7c__|_7c___7c+__|_


3.2  Stamina and strength-endurance for sport climbing


Be aware that there is yet little data to support these tables. However, they are reasonably close to a similar table an experienced coach I know (who work with beginners and world class climbers alike) use to prescribe levels.

Code: [Select]

    _______________________________________________________________________
  | Sport RP|| Fast RP  ||   Circuits| L|apping routes|| Treshold| |Continuous
  |
   |__________|25%__75%_|_25%___75%_|25%_____75%___|25%___75%_|_25%___75%_|_

   |    7a    |6c    6c  | 6a    6c  |6a      6b    |5c    6a  |5b    5c  |
   |    7b    |7a    7a  | 6b   7a  | 6b      6c    |6a    6b  | 5c   6a  |
   |    7c    |7b    7b  | 6c   7b  | 6c      7a    |6b    6c  | 6a   6b  |
   |    8a    |7c    7c  | 7a    7c  |7a      7b    |6c    7a  |6b    6c  |
   |    8b    |8a    8a  | 7b   8a  | 7b      7c    |7a    7b  | 6c   7a  |
   |____8c____|8b____8b__|_7c___8b__|_7c______8a____|7b____7c__|_7a___7b__|_


3.3  Stamina and strength for bouldering


So far this table looks loop-sided to my eyes, perhaps because of lack of data, or perhaps because my perceptions where wrong. Time will tell.

Code: [Select]


   ________________________________________________________
   | Boulder RP||Boulder quick send||Stamina laps|| Max level  |
   |____________|25%______75%_____|25%____75%__|25%___75%_|_

   |     6b     |6a        6b      |5b    5c   | 6b    6b  |
   |     6c     |6b        6c      |5c    6a   | 6c    6c  |
   |     7a     |6c        7a      |6a    6b   | 7a    7a  |
   |     7b     |7a        7b      |6b    6c   | 7b    7b  |
   |     7c     |7b        7c      |6c    7a   | 7c    7c  |
   |     8a     |7c        8a      |7a    7b   | 8a    8a  |
   |_____8b_____|8a________8b______|7b____7c___|_8b____8b__|


3.4  Physical tests


Unsurprisingly the tests shows that climbing performance is correlated with results from physical tests, even though the number of participants is yet to low to do any robust modelling.

[jwi]

Unsurprisingly, from the data I collected so far it is dead easy to guess someones max RP grade from their performance on circuits, 10 laps,  threshold- and continuous climbing level.

[Muenchener]

Interesting analysis jwi, thanks

   The difference between the risky and safe trad o/s grades was on average -2.1 full french grades.

This makes intuitive sense wrt the uk trad grading system: e.g. E3 can be anything from dangerous 6a to safe 6c

[jwi]

I have sent a long and confusing e-mail to the kind people who filled in my questionnaire.

Look in your spam-box...

Hopefully I will be able to give reasonable confidence intervals for predicted performance when I get more data (and when I have translated the questionnaire to spanish and french).

Cheers,