[SA Chris]

I think the concept of doing 1 or 2 moves that are near or above your limit is definitely a worthwhile exercise

Is that like giving 110%?

[tomtom]

I think the concept of doing 1 or 2 moves that are near or above your limit is definitely a worthwhile exercise

Is that like giving 110%?

For me its closer to 100.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001 %

[turnipturned]

Trying several individual hard moves that take you more than 3 sessions at a climbing wall is surly pretty demoralising, boring and you probably end up doing very little climbing.

Why don't you give yourself 6 weeks, two sessions each week and set yourself 6 boulder problems varying between 4-8 moves on a 45 board. All problems should be different in style using different kind of holds.

Problem 1 (easiest): Should be fairly hard but suits your style and strengths, should aim to do this in a session 10-20 goes of trying super hard.
Problem 6 (Hardest): Super hard, have two back to back moves that are ridiculous. First session you should be able to tag the holds of the back to back moves individually, but not be able to hold them, the style should be something you are rubbish at/ or holds you are not very good at using. You should aim to send this on your last session of your 6th week.

All the other problems should be somewhere in between, but the harder ones should be tailored towards your weakness or a certain problem you have in mind for the real stuff that actually matters (rock). Ideally, first week, you should be able to do one of them in a sesh, week 2 should able to do two of them in a sesh, week 3, 3 of them etc etc.

Before you try any of your problems, warm up well (20-30mins) on easy problems but also pulling on some crimps, pinches or whatever type of holds your board problems have on them. Then have between 1hour- 1 1/2 hours on the board pulling as hard as you can, give 100% and no less on each try whether that being one individual moves or linking the whole problem. Remember to try and finish relatively strong.

By the end of the six weeks, you should aim to do all the 6 problems you have set in a session.

Not that I know anything about training but this is something that I tend to do if I am preparing myself to try a hard problem on rock! Probably total rubbish, but it's pretty satisfying when you send all 6 in a sesh. 

[Charlton Chestwig]

This might be slightly an aside but, I think, useful point to make within this topic...

I think for a long time I had no concept of the difference between adapting to an exercise and 'real' training.

Using the campus board as and example: If you haven't done much and then choose to get started laddering away twice a week you may find yourself improving quickly up to say 1-4-7. If this has taken 4 weeks work you would be forgiven for thinking that you have just done 4 weeks of hard training and achieved a gain. But most of that ability will have come from (IMO) technique and adapting to the exercise. Continuing doing the ? x 1-4-7s each session twice a week and not being tempted to seek something harder now that this is within your limit (just) for say a further 8 weeks is where the real gain would come from.

You could level the same argument at the example posted by turnipturned above. Once you can do the 6 hard problems in a session, perhaps see this as the start of the training proper and then use the next 8 weeks to do these problems each session several times. I think that at the end of this period you would be a "stronger" climber than if you had used this time to create another 6 problems to work out how to do.

Of course this is based on my experience and my logic, not science!

Rich

[Moo]

No dense you said weren't calling somone a dick but then called them a dick. I'm a dick and I'm still waiting on a picture of a goose.

[SA Chris]

Have two.

[Nibile]

My ideal session is:
- get to the gym late
- chat around being cool
- crush the hardest problems in a vulgar display of power. Children cry. Adults hide. My hair is still perfect
- leave the gym surrounded by girls.

As you can imagine, it's not common for me to have such a session.
I think that all previous posts make sense. Somehow even just failing to do a move is training: I train the power to propel me up, the technique, etc.
What I think is often overlooked, especially in gyms, is that some problems must be so hard that you can't "cheat" your way up with technique or tricks, or jumps, etc. I mean, bad holds, bad feet. It's not always a matter of linking the moves, it's a matter of holding the positions first. This makes me progress also.
Power training happens at various levels: the power to do the move, and the power to do the problem. These two must go hand in hand. If you only do single moves, you'll climb small bits of hard problems, if you only do 4x4 you could climb problems but could easily find a stopper move.
It's important to train close to the max: while this is very easy to assess on very short problems, it's difficult in longer links. Many people mistake failing on a link because pumped and failing on a link because weak (at that point of the problem or session). They keep training, they get less pumped, but they don't grow stronger, so the harder problem will still be too hard for them.
Finally, I think that every option has its place, but it's crucial to know what you're doing and why you're doing it (what you'll reap out of it). A goal, in terms of project or training goal.

[Nibile]

Oh, and this:
][url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/70381658@N00/9616127716/]
image by Nibile, on Flickr[/url]

[Sasquatch]

What I think is often overlooked, especially in gyms, is that some problems must be so hard that you can't "cheat" your way up with technique or tricks, or jumps, etc. I mean, bad holds, bad feet. It's not always a matter of linking the moves, it's a matter of holding the positions first. This makes me progress also.

This is absolutely key to strength training by actually climbing. If this is the case, then the only solution to doing the move or problem is to get stronger.  I'd argue though that this is Exceptionally hard to find unless you set the move yourself - think Malc in Splinter.  Very rarely will you ever find this set at a gym. 

Finally, I think that every option has its place, but it's crucial to know what you're doing and why you're doing it (what you'll reap out of it). A goal, in terms of project or training goal.

So going back to the original post. A maximum strength cycle(max hangs) was followed by a strength endurance cycle(not specified type), and the strength gains were greater from the strength endurance cycle for the given period of time.  The question was if one was better than the other.  Without more knowledge of the training history or actual results (for example how was the strength measured?)  it's very difficult to answer the question.  A good comparison though can be  repeaters (strength endurance) vs. Max hangs(max strength).  Both will gain you finger strength at different rates.  Is one better than the other-No.  As Nibs states above you have to understand the goal of your training.  I find alternating the two to be very effective for me for strength training.  As Charlton mentioned below there's an adaptation period to all types of training, so the question is whether the gains are muscular, nuerological, or technique.

[Nibile]

This is absolutely key to strength training by actually climbing. If this is the case, then the only solution to doing the move or problem is to get stronger.  I'd argue though that this is Exceptionally hard to find unless you set the move yourself - think Malc in Splinter.  Very rarely will you ever find this set at a gym.

This is absolutely true. For me it's a non-issue because I only train on my board (I set) or set my own problems at the gym. I am a moody bastard though.

[Nibile]

As for the main question: I know that strength and power gains are systemic. The famous test with deadlifting only and biceps curls only.
Could it be that a very tailored PE training (real power) could involve more body muscles than single moves or deadhangs, thus provoking a major activation and systemic response?
Just an idea.

[fried]

I think the concept of doing 1 or 2 moves that are near or above your limit is definitely a worthwhile exercise

Is that like giving 110%?

You missed the word 'fabled' in that sentence. oh and 'the'.

[Sasquatch]

As for the main question: I know that strength and power gains are systemic. The famous test with deadlifting only and biceps curls only.
Could it be that a very tailored PE training (real power) could involve more body muscles than single moves or deadhangs, thus provoking a major activation and systemic response?
Just an idea.

Now that's a very good question regarding the value of systemic training activation, but probably far beyond the scope of the original question.