[galpinos]

In an effort to mix up the 4 week lockdown hanging protocol, I am considering introducing these.

Any experiences, any good, worthwhile etc or just do max hangs or max hangs and density hangs?

Any help much appreciated.

[cowboyhat]

Never heard of this guy or the fingerboard plan he has prescribed.

This thread should have been called, classic n00b post that should get shut down immediately but I know you'll all just use google and do the reading.

This is the boring article that i have read: https://www.trainingbeta.com/the-simplest-finger-training-program/

Why are you only 'considering' introducing it? Whats the reservation?


Sounds alright as an idea, especially as a build up towards one arm hangs. I wonder if it would only be beneficial to a relatively narrow band of climbers; those who can't quite one arm hang an edge already...? So pretty much very competent but not semi-pro.

Why don't you just try it and report back...

[Anti]

In an effort to mix up the 4 week lockdown hanging protocol, I am considering introducing these.

Any experiences, any good, worthwhile etc or just do max hangs or max hangs and density hangs?

Any help much appreciated.

With the recruitment pulls, why not just do one arm max hangs with a pulley for assistance? That's effectively what they are, for people who don't want to set up a pulley.

He's an interesting guy with some interesting stuff going on but I wonder if some of it is just a bit too academic to be practical.

[SA Chris]

Is this anything to do with scoring at the Job Centre?

And the word is prescribed

[DAVETHOMAS90]

First of all, Galpinos, thank you for the link 

I am confused though, having read his article, that you're separating out the Recruitment Pulls, which are part of his protocol overall.

I've trained what you might call "Recruitment Pulls" in a number of other ways. You might find this useful/interesting to try.

Put a set of bathroom scales under the fingerboard, and conduct the RPs as described. This way, you get to monitor progress.

A way of working a yielding isometric, is to give assistance with the other hand, say on the doorframe, to pull to a given load - e.g. body weight minus 2.5st on the scales - and then reduce the assistance while attempting to maintain the figure on the scales. Works in a similar way to Chris Webb P's protocol, if you're familiar with that.

Agree with Cowboy about why not try it and report back though. We'd like to know. Would be good to have some feedback   

Importantly though, yes, this programme is useful for climbers of all abilities, as it looks at the way that load is applied to the edge - not just what bracket of performance you might consider yourself to be in, i.e. not about whether you can hang one-handed or not. I'm stronger, but heavier than I used to be.

I'll say thanks for introducing the article in that context, if that seems appropriate 

Some other things to consider.

Try working different selections of fingers on a given edge. Working front three/back three (two handed, or Recruitment Pulls with the scales) can give you some significant carry overs to four finger strength. Also useful for the other parts of the protocol as described.

It's amazing just how much harder it can be to do fingertip pull-ups with three fingers rather than four.

In the article, there's mention of hypertrophy having a negative impact on endurance. There's research to indicate that this probably isn't true. Sorry about not referencing.

What I like about the article, is it's emphasis on applying principles, rather than just coming up with a range of "new" exercises.

[DAVETHOMAS90]

With the recruitment pulls, why not just do one arm max hangs with a pulley for assistance? That's effectively what they are, for people who don't want to set up a pulley.

He's an interesting guy with some interesting stuff going on but I wonder if some of it is just a bit too academic to be practical.

Anti, yes, you could do the RPs with a pulley. That would also give a good measurable reference point with the amount of assistance. I think it's a potential problem with the "simplicity" of Tyler Nelson's protocol - the difficulty in monitoring progress - but his description of Recruitment Pulls focuses on the way that contraction and load is applied.

It might seem academic, but this is the important detail, differentiating between max hangs (and other hangs) and the purpose of RPs as described.

Something I've thought about investing more time in exploring, is the effectiveness of Recruitment Pulls at a much lower load level:- looking at rate of contraction as being more significant than level of load.

[Bradders]

Never heard of this guy or the fingerboard plan he has prescribed.

This thread should have been called, classic n00b post that should get shut down immediately but I know you'll all just use google and do the reading.

This is the boring article that i have read: https://www.trainingbeta.com/the-simplest-finger-training-program/

Why are you only 'considering' introducing it? Whats the reservation?


Sounds alright as an idea, especially as a build up towards one arm hangs. I wonder if it would only be beneficial to a relatively narrow band of climbers; those who can't quite one arm hang an edge already...? So pretty much very competent but not semi-pro.

Why don't you just try it and report back...

Why the rude response to Galpinos' question? Really doesn't seem justified. Yes he could just try it and report back but he's asking if anyone else has experience of it first, which I know for a fact a few members of this forum have!

Plus the article he's referring to has been discussed previously on here I'm sure.

Personally the so called "simplest" finger training plan sounds pretty damn complex to me, so I've never tried it. I don't really see what you'd get from recruitment pulls that you wouldn't from 5s max hangs, either weighted two arm or one arm with weight off.

[reeve]

Never heard of this guy or the fingerboard plan he has prescribed.

This thread should have been called, classic n00b post that should get shut down immediately but I know you'll all just use google and do the reading.

This is the boring article that i have read: https://www.trainingbeta.com/the-simplest-finger-training-program/

Why are you only 'considering' introducing it? Whats the reservation?


Sounds alright as an idea, especially as a build up towards one arm hangs. I wonder if it would only be beneficial to a relatively narrow band of climbers; those who can't quite one arm hang an edge already...? So pretty much very competent but not semi-pro.

Why don't you just try it and report back...

I totally agree with Bradders - I mean, if you can't discuss training for bouldering on the training sub-forum of a bouldering website I don't know what you can talk about...

Galpinos: I can't offer any personal experience of these I'm afraid, but with that caveat established, I won't let it stop me from spouting what I think   After solely fingerboard during the first lockdown I had no contact strength (just to make sure, by contact strength I'm referring to the speed of contraction when you grab a hold). This may be from doing lots of repeaters and long (i.e. 30s) hangs for two months. I suspect that even 10s hangs would not be sufficient to maintain or improve contact strength though, as you still load them gradually. Personally I would rather train contact strength by climbing because I think there are other factors which you can't improve on a fingerboard, such as accuracy when you're slapping, timing the deadpoint, and catching the hold at the right moment. However, whilst wall's are closed, I can imagine the benefit of doing these to try and maintain your contact strength if you don't have regular access to actual climbing.

[moose]

I can't comment on the efficacy of recruitment pulls. I listened to that trainingbeta podcast, read the article, and got confused as to what each of his three protocols comprised and how they helped. When it comes to my time, I'm conservative and have Warren Buffett tendencies "never invest in a business you don't understand".  So, I figured I'd prefer to stick to what made sense to my simple brain - as much weight as possible,  for numbers of seconds I could count on my fingers; mixing up hold sizes and grips for variety.

But I definitely agree with reeve that fingerboarding does little for contact strength.  Big increases in fingerboard performance only transfer very slightly to outdoors. 

For me, it's like normal max hangs result in "laboratory" fingerstrength: the highest possible under perfect, controlled conditions. It seens to translate poorly to hitting irregular shaped holds,  at speed, and off balance. 

I've just started using my woodie again (after a lengthy hiatus involving a loony neighbour and work commitments, and enabled by a need to Covid isolate) and it was dismaying how bad my contact strength was, despite best ever fingerboarding - I tend to climb very statically outdoors, so my lack of contact strength wasn't as evident. But it's also been heartening how fast contact strength seems to develop with exposure to desperately slappy climbing (presumably a neurological adaptation, rather than physical strengthening). So, if someone can't access a woodie or campus board,  I can see how exploring any protocol that targets contact strength would be worth a try, and more effective than pursuing more max hang strength for diminishing "real world" gains.

[Sasquatch]

The difference between max hangs and RP's.  Recruitment pulls are a form of overcoming isometric vs. max hangs as a yielding isometric.  Subtle difference, but there it is.  What I like about them is that there are disproportionately safe to do compared with max hangs.  if you're tired or not fully recovered from a climbing or previous session and try to do max hangs(or use the scale) then you're likely to have your ego get in the way.  RP's are simply "try hard" which is naturally relative to those other factors. You do what you can. 

Re moose and Reeve:  I think t depends on strengths/weaknesses and style.  I have very very good contact strength.  BAsically if i can hold onto a hold, I can hit it fast/dynamically and still hold it.  So for me, FB work is incredibly helpful.  The raw strength is my area of weakness.  I rarely climb statically, controlled yes, but "static" never.

I found RP's a very effective way of adding a bit of max pull and max finger work at the end of climbing sessions, while feeling safe doing them.  I would never be comfortable doing max hangs at the end of a session. 

[shark]

I don't really see what you'd get from recruitment pulls that you wouldn't from 5s max hangs, either weighted two arm or one arm with weight off.

With the recruitment pulls (after the 1 sec build up) you are applying 100% force for the duration of the pull. For max hangs you are only applying full force just before failure.

Edit - Sasquatch just beat me to it

[DAVETHOMAS90]

The difference between max hangs and RP's.  Recruitment pulls are a form of overcoming isometric vs. max hangs as a yielding isometric.  Subtle difference, but there it is.  What I like about them is that there are disproportionately safe to do compared with max hangs.  if you're tired or not fully recovered from a climbing or previous session and try to do max hangs(or use the scale) then you're likely to have your ego get in the way.  RP's are simply "try hard" which is naturally relative to those other factors. You do what you can. 

Re the scales - I work several different things using the scales, what you might call "max hangs", Recruitment Pulls, warming up, injured fingers etc.

I'm not sure I would put RPs opposite max hangs though, although agree with the overcoming/yielding distinction. I'm not sure RPs are a stand alone loading/strength training exercise. I see them as something akin to "strides" in running training:

"Strides are 15-to-30-second bursts of speed up to the fastest pace you can go while staying totally smooth and comfortable (it's not a sprint)." ..etc

It's a way of"bringing everything together" , emphasising output without the stress levels of normal loading .. and yes, the problems associated with yielding when tired!

In case anyone's interested:

[abarro81]

The difference between max hangs and RP's.  Recruitment pulls are a form of overcoming isometric vs. max hangs as a yielding isometric. 

[...]

I found RP's a very effective way of adding a bit of max pull and max finger work at the end of climbing sessions, while feeling safe doing them.  I would never be comfortable doing max hangs at the end of a session.

My intuition would be that them feeling safe probably just means you're not really trying hard... which seems to somewhat defeat the point of using overcoming isometrics in my mind? I do agree w.r.t. ego not getting in the way etc, but you could just not write any of your weights down and use RPE (say 8/10) and probably achieve the same effect. I guess this comes down to individual psychology more than than anything else.

With the recruitment pulls (after the 1 sec build up) you are applying 100% force for the duration of the pull. For max hangs you are only applying full force just before failure.

You mean effort, not force.

RE: contact strength - you'd be better off jumping to holds or doing doubles on the fingerboard*. I don't think these "recruitment pulls" would lead to a significantly different outcome on contact strength vs 5 second max hangs, if anything the time taken ramping up to max would make them less relevant.

*old school inspiration:

[shark]

I’m lost on the distinction between effort and force but I’m sure you’re right.

Re contact strength his complementary exercise of “speed pulls” was a magic bullet for me earlier this year as I’m a naturally poor recruiter.

[lagerstarfish]

I’m a naturally poor recruiter.

Says the recruitment professional

[tomtom]

I’m lost on the distinction between effort and force but I’m sure you’re right.

Re contact strength his complementary exercise of “speed pulls” was a magic bullet for me earlier this year as I’m a naturally poor recruiter.

Hold onto two jugs until your eyes bulge, your forearms feel like they're popping and you're just about to drop off. Thats maximum effort - but minimum force as you're putting your weight on the holds via two hands over a large surface area (jugs).

Hold on to a 20mm edge one handed for (5-10 secs) and you may end up giving your max effort - but your force, how much you're driving into the hold through your fingers - is much much greater.

Either that or its some star wars jedi shit.

Steep board or campus (foot on or off) shirley is great for contact strength?

[shark]

Steep board or campus (foot on or off) shirley is great for contact strength?

That’s the theory and obviously I’ve been on both over the years but the most obvious and immediate recruitment gains I’ve experienced that immediately translated to rock (throwing for a crimp on Bens) was from doing a few sessions of speed pulls at the start of the year.

[shark]

I’m a naturally poor recruiter.

Says the recruitment professional

  I was magnificent in that respect

[abarro81]

I’m lost on the distinction between effort and force but I’m sure you’re right.

With a max hang (or any other hang with feet off the floor) your force stays constant through the hang*. Otherwise you would fall off. So if I hang bodyweight on an edge, that arm/fingers will be exerting a force equivalent to approx. 750N (i.e. 75kg); at 2 seconds this is <100% effort, at maybe 5 or 10 seconds or whenever, this becomes 100% effort, then >100% and so I fail. So force is constant but effort varies during the hang.
* Some subtleties at start/end of hang that I've ignored and that would be complex

On an edge with knees under a bar, or on an edge that's too small to hang 1-armed, you could try to pull down with 100% effort for the entire duration, but the force exerted would not be constant. So at 2s I might be at 100% effort and 800N (I wish), at 5s I might be at 100% effort but I'm fatiguing so now force is only 750N, by 15s I'm still putting in 100% effort but I can only exert 600N etc... so effort is constant (in theory) but force declines as I get fatigued.

I’m a naturally poor recruiter.

Says the recruitment professional

Hope that was deliberate Simon?

[tomtom]

Steep board or campus (foot on or off) shirley is great for contact strength?

That’s the theory and obviously I’ve been on both over the years but the most obvious and immediate recruitment gains I’ve experienced that immediately translated to rock (throwing for a crimp on Bens) was from doing a few sessions of speed pulls at the start of the year.

6 months of training a couple of times a week on a 50 deg board (where you have to lunge for everything..) has improved mine no end...

[Duma]

RE: contact strength - you'd be better off jumping to holds or doing doubles on the fingerboard*. I don't think these "recruitment pulls" would lead to a significantly different outcome on contact strength vs 5 second max hangs, if anything the time taken ramping up to max would make them less relevant.

Agree with barrows. Plus I find little sequences on the fb are much less boring than hangs (though prob more risky injury wise). I've got a bm2000 on one side of a doorway and a lattice rung on the other, and have an unfinished project from lockdown 1 of 6 moves between the lower levels of both that I'm genuinely quite psyched for...

[Hamfunk]

I think if you are going to get involved in the recruitment pulls you should probably go with the whole TN approach.

Personally I found small gains in the recruitment pulls themselves but saw bigger gains in the density hang and as a protocol, it's not massively complicated or time consuming. I actually enjoyed the velocity pulls as well.

TN provides a thorough explanation of why each part of the protocol is useful for tendon development and it seemed sensible to me.

I believe he works with a force meter so it is quantifiable but the "simple finger" protocol is intended for any punter off the street to pick up.

[DAVETHOMAS90]

I’m lost on the distinction between effort and force but I’m sure you’re right.

Re contact strength his complementary exercise of “speed pulls” was a magic bullet for me earlier this year as I’m a naturally poor recruiter.

Alex is right there, in the distinction between effort and force.

And, I'd dispute the claim that you're "a naturally poor recruiter" 

The two things are linked.

I like to think of Recruitment Pulls as "accelerations". (BTW "Strides" in running are often called this).

What's significant, is how quickly you can bring what you have available, together.

A very common mistake when we're training, is that we're trying to perform - we're trying not to yield
- rather than doing the things that would actually make us stronger.

The "effort" we feel, is the result of getting weaker. The feeling is not the cause of us getting stronger, but it is an indicator of overload.

We have two things we can work on - separate from the other conditioning factors in TN's method.

We have the amount of work we can do, and the way we can apply what we have. Athletic performance has been described as the ability to respond. I think that's a very helpful way of looking at it.

When we're focusing on the effort, we're actually getting in the way of the output. We want a relaxed release of everything we have available, and RPs are how we train this.

Hard moves on a woody - as per TTs post - can be an excellent way of emphasising recruitment, as long as you target hard moves you actually do.

[User deactivated.]

With a max hang (or any other hang with feet off the floor) your force stays constant through the hang*. Otherwise you would fall off. So if I hang bodyweight on an edge, that arm/fingers will be exerting a force equivalent to approx. 750N (i.e. 75kg); at 2 seconds this is <100% effort, at maybe 5 or 10 seconds or whenever, this becomes 100% effort, then >100% and so I fail. So force is constant but effort varies during the hang.
* Some subtleties at start/end of hang that I've ignored and that would be complex

On an edge with knees under a bar, or on an edge that's too small to hang 1-armed, you could try to pull down with 100% effort for the entire duration, but the force exerted would not be constant. So at 2s I might be at 100% effort and 800N (I wish), at 5s I might be at 100% effort but I'm fatiguing so now force is only 750N, by 15s I'm still putting in 100% effort but I can only exert 600N etc... so effort is constant (in theory) but force declines as I get fatigued.

Further to this, Tom Randall posted to the Lattice Instagram page a while ago about his measured force differences between overcoming / yielding isometrics. Counterintuitively, he claims he could produce more peak force on a 5s yielding isometric (max hang) in comparison to a 5s overcoming isometric (recruitment pull). Perhaps a placebo type effect.

[cowboyhat]

Why the rude response to Galpinos' question? Really doesn't seem justified.

Loads going on here but ultimately it comes down to me being a bit of an arsehole etc, however I stand by this being a shit way to start a new thread.

Luckily I included a link and kick started a discussion that was hitherto being ignored.


Feel free to topic split this where I'm rounded on by all the millennial snowflakes, I outline what I was going for and make a weak case in defense of my personality.