[moose]

This is like the training equivalent of that Hubble philosophy thread. I've got no idea whats going on. If this is a simple fingerboarding programme according to TN I must be training at an amoebic level. 

Covid isolation has my mind drifting to the books of my teenage years, for some reason a bit of Pratchett seems appropriate:

*The first pizza was created by the Klatchian mystic Ronron “Revelation Joe” Shuwadhi, who claimed to have been given the recipe in a dream by the Creator of the Discworld Himself, Who had apparently added that it was what He had intended all along. Those desert travelers who had seen the original, which is reputedly miraculously preserved in the Forbidden City of Ee, say that what the Creator had in mind then was a fairly small cheese and pepperoni affair with a few black olives** and things like mountains and seas got added out of last-minute enthusiasm as so often happens.

**After the Schism of the Turnwise Ones and the deaths of some 25,000 people in the ensuing jihad the faithful were allowed to add one small bayleaf to the recipe.
 

and,

"(the war) is over a word in their holy book, sir. The Elharibians say it translates as "God" and the Smalies say it's "man"."
How can you mix them up?"
"Well, there's only one tiny dot difference... and some people reckon it's only a speck of fly dirt in any case."
"Centuries of war because a fly crapped in the wrong place?"
"It could have been worse, sir...if it had been slightly to the left the word would have been "liquorice" ".

[Rob F]

Lost me there- I'm off back to have another go at understanding the philosophising on that thigh blood flow restriction thread...

[Sasquatch]

Lost me there- I'm off back to have another go at understanding the philosophising on that thigh blood flow restriction thread...

sounds like fun.   

[Nibile]

How a three sheets long fingerboarding plan could possibly be sold as "The Simplest" goes beyond my comprehension.
On a side note, there's only one true simple fingerboarding plan, and we all know which one is.

[DAVETHOMAS90]

A few things to refer to here.

First, replying to Sasquatch, yes, as you've described, "interval training" can be used to target many different things, and will involve vastly different work/rest programmes. The word "interval" came from a reference to the period of rest, and not work.

I was using this solely as an analogy - to highlight the varied pace/load.

Webbo, posted this up on the running thread.

Here's what I think is significant about "recruitment pulls", and I think the adaptation process is very specific.

This is a question really.

Recruitment pulls are one form of Overcoming isometric, and they are designed to target Recruitment.

I think this is significant. It's not just about another way of "working hard, and being rewarded for it".

The way that the load is applied and increased, is important.

Lastly, Sasquatch, your thoughts on this one? If you have sufficient added weight, I think it is possible to work Recruitment Pulls with feet off, as long as you build load in the right way.

I'm surmising that it's the increase in load that is important, and results in improvements in recruitment - not just the top end load.

If it makes it easier to think about it - and I find this really effective - with the right added weight, you can focus on "crushing" the holds, applying much greater force than is necessary just to hang the holds. You're working an isometric position, and the added weight makes this more possible. Having said that, you could even work trying to finger curl from 90° to a crimp.

In short, as I understand it, it's the increase in load which is important - in order to target recruitment - not the holding of a static load - as with Max hangs.

[webbo]

Thanks for putting in the running thread Dave. However its not much use to me there as I don’t run anymore. I have been a cyclist for 39 years on and off and have competed at a reasonable level. So I do know about interval training having first being  introduced to it in 1983. I still do a couple of sessions a week. I can bore you to death with different versions if you are interested.

[Anti]

I had a thought while catching up with this thread, that due to the RPE based nature of recruitment pulls they may well be in some circumstances an entire waste of a session.

Let's say at max with weights added you can hang +40kg for 10sx6reps. You've been training and climbing lots and carrying loads of fatigue, or you're coming down with something etc. You warm up and first rep feels nails and you fail.

Common sense would suggest that you need to rest an extra day. Dropping the weight to 30kg would be a waste of a session and recovery due to the lack of stimulus (it's not a max hang anymore).

With no numbers and only "pull hard" you could dig yourself into a potential recovery hole over multiple sessions with a protocol like this. RPE 9 is always RPE 9 irrelevant to what you're actually hanging.

[teestub]

I guess this scenario would rely on you not doing anything else where you would notice a dip in performance related to fatigue. It’s likely that if your fingerboard numbers were down then you’d also feel rubbish on the board and notice your warm ups outside feeling hard for example.

It’s also interesting that you’d consider just completely sacking off a max hangs session if you couldn’t hit your target load. I’ve deffo had loads of sessions where I’ve had to drop the load for all sorts of reasons (often being tired from life rather than climbing, or during particularly bad conditions in the summer). I hadn’t previously considered these sessions a waste, mainly because as you say the RPE is still high.

[petejh]

That's the part I find troubling too. RPE seems to be used by some like it's a 'good' measure. I find it hard to believe it's as good as objective measures for measuring progression.
Take for e.g. having a flu or cold - walking upstairs to bed can be RPE 9. Is walking upstairs useful leg training for a normally-adapted athlete, no. You could do a lot of low-quality work at a high RPE, it doesn't make it good training.
Compared to objective measures like timers for reps/rest in endurance workouts or weight for strength workouts. Can't cheat the clock.

[Aussiegav]

I follow TN on a number of social media outlets
And do ind it very informative and creates thinking on what I’m doing. There’s no dispute that TN’s training methods & theories are backed with clinical and academic evidence.

However there’s a lot of reliance of replicating his environment if one wants to achieve the gains that are published.
 
Personally, I think it makes great fodder for forum threads and pub chatter (remember pubs???), however there is a high risk of it becoming ‘junk’ training and not a good use of time in what’s becoming a time poor society.

[abarro81]

There’s no dispute that TN’s training methods & theories are backed with clinical and academic evidence.

I looked into Tyler's stuff on density hangs a while ago. Only read the review studies, not the individual papers, but the evidence around long hangs being better for tendon stiffness/health was pretty limited. So based on what's out there its a decent guess, but it's basically still guessing until someone does some better studies.

[Anti]

It’s also interesting that you’d consider just completely sacking off a max hangs session if you couldn’t hit your target load. I’ve deffo had loads of sessions where I’ve had to drop the load for all sorts of reasons (often being tired from life rather than climbing, or during particularly bad conditions in the summer). I hadn’t previously considered these sessions a waste, mainly because as you say the RPE is still high.

But RPE isn't an indicator of stimulus quality. If you're too tired (big session, poor recovery, flu etc) to pull your max then you're not training your max anymore. All you're doing is getting more tired, when really you're better resting and coming back when you can pull your max.

In other sports you'd call it junk miles. If you just want to hang on s fingerboard with a random amount of weight then go wild, they're not max hangs anymore and the adaptations aren't happening in the same way.

[teestub]

In other sports you'd call it junk miles. If you just want to hang on s fingerboard with a random amount of weight then go wild,

Thanks, seems to be working out ok for me so far 😄 If I had to always wait until life outside of climbing left me fully recovered enough to do a fully maximal effort max hangs sesh it wouldn’t happen regularly enough for training adaption.

Also far from it being ‘junk miles’, Bechtel’s book notes that you can have good performance increases for isometric exercises with loads way less than max.

[Anti]

Of course you can. Repeaters, for example, are less weight than max hangs... Its just different energy system s. In reality max hangs aren't even max anyway, you shouldn't be going to failure imo.

My point was more that if you have a training plan and you have numbers to hit, not being to hit the numbers means stop and rest. Presumably the plan is periodised in some shape or form and the exercise you're supposed to be doing has a goal and a reason.

Coming from a cycling background I've always thought most people's problem with training is they don't rest properly or go hard properly. Just faff about too fatigued to work properly.

[shark]

In reality max hangs aren't even max anyway, you shouldn't be going to failure imo.

I go to failure. It’s misleading when those who don’t describe it as max hangs.

[Anti]

In reality max hangs aren't even max anyway, you shouldn't be going to failure imo.

I go to failure. It’s misleading when those who don’t describe it as max hangs.

Hah. It's more catchy than (percentage of) max hangs. I suppose the premise is you've figured out the max you can complete 6x10s hangs with or whatever you're doing. It's not that I don't see value in going to failure sometimes but I think I'd be going backwards quickly if I was going to failure on every session.

The beauty of training is it's individual though. Hopefully given a decent enough timeline everyone settles on a schedule that fits them.

[cofe]

In reality max hangs aren't even max anyway, you shouldn't be going to failure imo.

I go to failure. It’s misleading when those who don’t describe it as max hangs.

That's my understanding too: the load is adjusted so failure occurs at around or just before your target duration. And failure could mean technical failure, with a particular grip for example: I step off if I lose form with a half crimp, even if I could drop to open hands and hang on for longer.

[shoon]

Reading up on Eva's training she also suggest either a drop in added weight or edge size (to a certain limit) before calling it a day and not training, also that there will be daily fluctuations of form. 
On Will's Blogg (TensionClimbing) his suggestion on frequency is once every 5 days (up to once every max 10 days) with a quality session.
Both seem to agree on form being important.

So support for both sides....and more support for individual adjustments needed?

[Anti]

Reading up on Eva's training she also suggest either a drop in added weight or edge size (to a certain limit) before calling it a day and not training, also that there will be daily fluctuations of form. 
On Will's Blogg (TensionClimbing) his suggestion on frequency is once every 5 days (up to once every max 10 days) with a quality session.
Both seem to agree on form being important.

So support for both sides....and more support for individual adjustments needed?

I think it depends on the amount of adjustment though and perhaps that's where I'm coming over as confusing. 2kg seems to make sense for daily fluctuations I suppose; If we're talking more than that then (ie you're failing on your first hang of the session) then I'd feel more comfortable calling it a day and coming back tomorrow. In my experience I get a much more quality session then. Obviously it's anecdotal and I'm not an expert also I am assuming you've been doing hangs for a while, are hanging at a weight you're accustomed to etc. not just changing the weight every session.

Less frequent, quality sessions are a bigger aim for me than lots of shit ones. 6x10s hangs is still only 60s TUT. If you're peeling off at 7s in the hang every time then you're at 42s TUT. That's 30% less time on your fingers.

[tomtom]

My bodyweight will fluctuate by up to 2kg during a day....

[Anti]

My bodyweight will fluctuate by up to 2kg during a day....

Haha sure, but if you did your test in your underpants before breakfast and your actual sessions after a Chinese banquet then you can do what you like with your session. I dunno. I'm not an authority (and apparently in the minority) but I feel I get more mileage out of just doing something else instead of pushing on with a shit session where I'm failing, both physically and mentally.

[tomtom]

I do weigh myself before doing any weighted hangs - sure. Today (pre lunch) I was light - and technically did a PB, though it’s actually not as I was 1-1.5kg heavier when I did it last.

It also means I can do the exercises in whatever clothes I’m wearing (eg jeans and two jumpers) and account for the weight etc.

Though - this is more important for what I’m doing (assisted one arm pulls) where I’m down to <5kg - as opposed to weighted max deadhangs where an extra KG on 50kg isn’t going to be so crucial.. probably.. (I’ve not tried!!)

[Sasquatch]

Loads to respond to here.

Dave - I think you cannot work Rp's with feet off.  It will no longer be overcoming isometric.  If your goal was to do the finger curls as you suggest, but you were unable, but trying, then sure, that would be similar. 

Re: Anti - I agree and disagree.  As I mentioned earlier in the thread, if you are in lockdown and only doing a solid FB program, I probably wouldn't do these (it would depend on schedule.  They are great to add in when you are not 100% recovered, but know that you will not be able to get a session in for a couple of days).  As a finisher to a boulder session, they are great.  When bouldering it is so hard to really know what exactly is failing.  By adding a few recruitment pulls at the end of a session, say 3-5 reps of 3-5 seconds, you are doing enough to ensure you won't be losing anything if you didn't hit max(which is surprisingly common) and the overall load is low enough that you aren't digging much of a hole.   

Pete - I think the flu analogy is poor strawman argument.  That's not at all what we're talking about.  RPE is both good and bad.  The bad is that it's not just the numbers so is less methodical.  The good is that it actually mimics climbing.  I've had amazing sends when feeling shite, and terrible days when feeling great.  Regardless of how you feel, just fucking pull. 

Anti - I disagree with the comparison of these being junk miles in that way.  When you're out doing sprint training and your times fall off just a bit do you sack of the 4th or 5th interval out of 8 just because you're not at max anymore.  Are they at 85% plus of your max?  If so, then they're probably not junk miles.  Junk miles would be doing repeaters at 60% after having done a massive roped session.  And then that still depends on your overall program and goals(which you generally allude to in your next post).

[Anti]

Loads to respond to here.

Dave - I think you cannot work Rp's with feet off.  It will no longer be overcoming isometric.  If your goal was to do the finger curls as you suggest, but you were unable, but trying, then sure, that would be similar. 

Re: Anti - I agree and disagree.  As I mentioned earlier in the thread, if you are in lockdown and only doing a solid FB program, I probably wouldn't do these (it would depend on schedule.  They are great to add in when you are not 100% recovered, but know that you will not be able to get a session in for a couple of days).  As a finisher to a boulder session, they are great.  When bouldering it is so hard to really know what exactly is failing.  By adding a few recruitment pulls at the end of a session, say 3-5 reps of 3-5 seconds, you are doing enough to ensure you won't be losing anything if you didn't hit max(which is surprisingly common) and the overall load is low enough that you aren't digging much of a hole.   

Pete - I think the flu analogy is poor strawman argument.  That's not at all what we're talking about.  RPE is both good and bad.  The bad is that it's not just the numbers so is less methodical.  The good is that it actually mimics climbing.  I've had amazing sends when feeling shite, and terrible days when feeling great.  Regardless of how you feel, just fucking pull. 

Anti - I disagree with the comparison of these being junk miles in that way.  When you're out doing sprint training and your times fall off just a bit do you sack of the 4th or 5th interval out of 8 just because you're not at max anymore.  Are they at 85% plus of your max?  If so, then they're probably not junk miles.  Junk miles would be doing repeaters at 60% after having done a massive roped session.  And then that still depends on your overall program and goals(which you generally allude to in your next post).

Yeah I don't mean that they're always junk efforts as such, just that they're in danger of becoming them - it's hard to know, very nuanced and possible not in the skillset of the people this original article was aimed at? If you're sensible and aware of how you feel then they seem fine but a lot of climbers don't seem to fall into that camp. I think if you're bouldering fingery problems / on a board you don't need supplemental finger work afterwards but if you're leaping around on volumes then it makes sense to do these?

With your running example I guess I'm spoiled, as I was a cyclist with a power meter. If I can hit the numbers I worry less about the RPE (85% of max always feels shit). I suppose the junk miles analogy would apply more if your pace was well off right from the start but you kept on running anway because "you're running". 5/6 reps out of 8 seems fine, just suck it up (tho depends how far off you fall?) but if at rep 1 and 2 you're not hitting the numbers then it's not going to be a quality session.

Anyway, it's a really interesting discussion!

[spidermonkey09]

Without reading the whole thread as I don't have the mental capacity currently...

if at rep 1 and 2 you're not hitting the numbers then it's not going to be a quality session.

...doesn't this fail to take into account the neurological gains that have to be made when doing, for example, max hangs? I say this because every time I drop a bit of weight on my assisted 1 arm hangs the first few sessions at the new weight are always shit; partly because I am weak and partly because I'm not yet used to how that hang feels. eg, I recently dropped down to 3kg assist on these hangs. The first session was appalling, I managed about 4 seconds per hang. The second session I managed a few hangs at the full 7 sec duration and then regressed rapidly. Hopefully this evening I'll be slightly better. If I had adopted your rationale as above I would have increased the assistance straight away because I very much wasnt hitting the numbers, but by doing them to failure hopefully in a few weeks time I'll manage the whole set. Once I've done that a few times I'll drop the weight again. Just seems like I'd never get any stronger if I made it easier as soon as I wasn't hitting the numbers.