[Nibile]

OK, I have a question. Bear in mind that I have almost no idea of physics.

In the video there are three hangs, all performed taking off the same weight.
The third hang is the normal one, with the counterweight static.
The second one is with the counterweight moving down (I let go).
The first one is with the counterweight moving up (I pull).
My opinion is that in the second hang my fingers support more weight because of the counterweight moving with gravity, and that in the first hang they support less weight because of the counterweight moving against gravity.
Is that right?

[lagerstarfish]

Yes

[DAVETHOMAS90]

I was feeling disappointed at the lack of further reaction about the Johnson, so thank you Lore for exploring the reaction of 5kg* of iron to differing forces.

I'm not much of a physicist either, but if you were forcibly accelerating the weight upwards, then yes, in that scenario, you would be taking more load off of your hang than when you are reducing the acceleration of the plate downwards.

Subjectively, because as you start pressing down on the handle, to pull the weight upwards, there is an initial acceleration, the start of that hang will begin with a lower load on the hang than in the other examples. There will also be the additional force required to overcome some friction. However, without friction, I would have thought that the degree of assistance remains the same, once the plate is no longer accelerating.

This is an interesting question, because for me it's important when you consider the actual loading on the fingers. I believe the training effect occurs during the phase of the hang where you are either accelerating the grip (contracting forcibly) or when the grip collapses - which is the bit Taylor is emphasising in the "CWP" method. When we're "training", we're very often really trying to chase a better performance, so optimise grip, trying to find a better structure in order to increaswe the length of time before it collapses. I appreciate that's not what we want to think we're doing, but we all know what it's like to feel a bit p'd off when we're not getting the numbers we want when we're training 

Sorry for going a bit OT at the end there. I'll post up some stuff about my own efforts.

*just flattering you there of course

[Oldmanmatt]

I would suspect the “moving up” cycle has more to do with the complimentary contraction of the non-hang side of your body than the moving mass per se.

But arresting the decent of the weight, on the down cycle, would absolutely have induced a higher peak load (good o’le F=MA) at the nadir of the movement.

Edit:

Ha! Long day. Wrote that backwards. Swap up for down. I mean the descending weight has a greater acceleration, so gravity plus it’s decent rate.

Ah, my brain is fudge tonight. I’m handing my degree back in the morning.

If it’s moving down, it’s providing less assistance to your hang, if it’s static, it’s a fixed assistance as you simply balance it against the acceleration of gravity; pulling it up, means you are imparting more force into the weight as you accelerate it against gravity.

[DAVETHOMAS90]

I think that whether you're lifting or lowering the mass, there's no difference in the assistance if the mass is moving at constant velocity. In both scenarios the force exerted is what's required to prevent further acceleration due to gravity.
However, when raising the mass, the initial acceleration from rest requires a greater force in order to raise the velocity from rest (zero), than when lowering, although when lowering you still have to curtail that initial acceleration.

You can feel this when lifting/lowering a dumbell.

The friction in the system will make this feel different of course, because when lowering, it's the force due to gravity which is doing the extra work of overcoming the friction in the system. When the weight is static, it's the same situation. There's no change in velocity. In all three scenarios, the force applied is what's required to prevent the acceleration due to gravity.

[Fultonius]

I think that whether you're lifting or lowering the mass, there's no difference in the assistance if the mass is moving at constant velocity. In both scenarios the force exerted is what's required to prevent further acceleration due to gravity.
However, when raising the mass, the initial acceleration from rest requires a greater force in order to raise the velocity from rest (zero), than when lowering, although when lowering you still have to curtail that initial acceleration.

You can feel this when lifting/lowering a dumbell.

The friction in the system will make this feel different of course, because when lowering, it's the force due to gravity which is doing the extra work of overcoming the friction in the system. When the weight is static, it's the same situation. There's no change in velocity. In all three scenarios, the force applied is what's required to prevent the acceleration due to gravity.

Assuming constant velocity (it did look fairly constant), I would have thought that:

Scenario 1: friction is ADDING to the mass of the weight, therefor giving you slightly more assistance.

Scenario 2: Friction is reducing the tension on your side (you need to put less force on the rope), so you lose some assistance.

Scenario 3: Well....it would probably be about the same. I'd have to do some more thinking about this, as there might be some differences due to static vs dynamic friction of a rope on a pully, but it's 16 years since I did my undergrad project on......a rope around a winch! 

In the third scenario, I would expect you have about midway levels of assistance, with it getting worse throughout the pull as you relax a little and the mass drops a bit, reducing the tension on your side.

I think the third is by far the most repeatable and useful for training.  But really, nibs, you should have the weight in your hand, not via a pulley 

[DAVETHOMAS90]

I think we're in agreement there Fultonious.

I've noticed that as soon as I'm fatigued enough to apply enough extra force on the pulley handle to overcome friction and the m x g, as soon as the weight is moving, the assistance is much lower than I'd expect.

For Lore, I've added an interesting little article about the difference in the adaptive process between eccentric/concentric work, and the significance of different rates of raising/lowering. Didn't know this. Seems quite interesting.

https://sandcresearch.medium.com/why-does-lowering-tempo-affect-muscle-growth-but-lifting-tempo-does-not-32b322c6fdaf

[Fultonius]

I think we're in agreement there Fultonious.

I've noticed that as soon as I'm fatigued enough to apply enough extra force on the pulley handle to overcome friction and the m x g, as soon as the weight is moving, the assistance is much lower than I'd expect.

For Lore, I've added an interesting little article about the difference in the adaptive process between eccentric/concentric work, and the significance of different rates of raising/lowering. Didn't know this. Seems quite interesting.

https://sandcresearch.medium.com/why-does-lowering-tempo-affect-muscle-growth-but-lifting-tempo-does-not-32b322c6fdaf

Yeah, I should have said that really dave 

There's a lot of interesting stuff being looked into just now about the difference between "static" hangs and more "active" I.e. Just trying with all your might to do a 1 arm hang but not getting off the ground vs counterweight to allow you to settle in to a static 1arm hang.

[Nibile]

thank you Lore for exploring the reaction of 5kg* of iron to differing forces.
*just flattering you there of course

But really, nibs, you should have the weight in your hand, not via a pulley 

Jesuschrist guys give me a break, I'll be fifty in ten days...
 

[Fultonius]

thank you Lore for exploring the reaction of 5kg* of iron to differing forces.
*just flattering you there of course

But really, nibs, you should have the weight in your hand, not via a pulley 

Still 7.5kg stronger than me....   50, nice one!  What's your last hurrah before the halfway mark?

Jesuschrist guys give me a break, I'll be fifty in ten days...
 

[Dexter]

thank you Lore for exploring the reaction of 5kg* of iron to differing forces.
*just flattering you there of course

But really, nibs, you should have the weight in your hand, not via a pulley 

Jesuschrist guys give me a break, I'll be fifty in ten days...
 

From 5kg assist to 50kg added in ten days sounds like crazy improvement, what's your secret?

[Nibile]

Ahah cheers!
Sincerely I'd love to have a big party but it's not going to happen at least now with Covid still around. Hopefully in the Summer.
I'd also love to climb something on ze rocks, let's see...

OK, so friction aside (you lost me a bit there), I can assume that - MORE OR LESS - if during a hang I let the counterweight go down, I am increasing the load on my fingers; if I make the counterweight go up I am decreasing the load on my fingers.
This may vary according to acceleration and friction; if it stays put the load is constant. Right?

Now then.
As Dave said, it's an interesting thing because it can vary the stimulus even inside a single hang, with added benefit.
I've played with this as of late on my board: I've set a few problems with a very shitty first move, in which you have to move very very fast - usually because the starting holds are very slopey - and in doing so you basically fall on the next hold - wich is positive - at full speed. This speed gives the fingers a very high stimulus that's not even close to the one they'd have by getting the hold static.
And then you have to climb the problem.

After all these years, I still love this shit.

[Nibile]

thank you Lore for exploring the reaction of 5kg* of iron to differing forces.
*just flattering you there of course

But really, nibs, you should have the weight in your hand, not via a pulley 

Jesuschrist guys give me a break, I'll be fifty in ten days...
 

From 5kg assist to 50kg added in ten days sounds like crazy improvement, what's your secret?

As if I'd tell...

Anyway that's 10 kg assist... but let's drop this part of the topic.

[tomtom]

Can OMM hook up his tindeq (strain gauge) in between the handle and rope and measure in these three scenarios? 😁

[DAVETHOMAS90]

thank you Lore for exploring the reaction of 5kg* of iron to differing forces.
*just flattering you there of course

But really, nibs, you should have the weight in your hand, not via a pulley 

Jesuschrist guys give me a break, I'll be fifty in ten days...
 

From 5kg assist to 50kg added in ten days sounds like crazy improvement, what's your secret?

As if I'd tell...

Anyway that's 10 kg assist... but let's drop this part of the topic.

Hopefully not on your toe!

The easiest way to think about it is that in any system - whether on the fingerboard or getting power to the back wheel, work is required to overcome friction. That friction is really significant. When you're lowering the weight, it's gravity acting on the weight that does this work, whereas pushing down on the handle to raise the weight, you're doing the extra work.

Taking friction out of the equation, once the weight is moving, regardless of whether it's moving up or down, if it's moving at a constant rate, the force applied is the same - and the same as when the weight is static - i.e. zero acceleration in all three examples. However, in practice, we're not very good at controlling the rate/velocity, and the greater/lesser/equal benefit we experience is down to whether we are accelerating the weight - applying greater force - keeping things the same, or reducing force and letting gravity accelerate the weight.

I think some sort of friction wheel would be a good alternative to using a weight - or a cord that goes through something with variable degrees of friction applied, some sort of breaking system. I'll think about it. I've just found that as soon as the weight is moving, it's really difficult to get any more assistance. Hope all this makes some sense!

[DAVETHOMAS90]

I think we're in agreement there Fultonious.

I've noticed that as soon as I'm fatigued enough to apply enough extra force on the pulley handle to overcome friction and the m x g, as soon as the weight is moving, the assistance is much lower than I'd expect.

For Lore, I've added an interesting little article about the difference in the adaptive process between eccentric/concentric work, and the significance of different rates of raising/lowering. Didn't know this. Seems quite interesting.

https://sandcresearch.medium.com/why-does-lowering-tempo-affect-muscle-growth-but-lifting-tempo-does-not-32b322c6fdaf

Yeah, I should have said that really dave 

There's a lot of interesting stuff being looked into just now about the difference between "static" hangs and more "active" I.e. Just trying with all your might to do a 1 arm hang but not getting off the ground vs counterweight to allow you to settle in to a static 1arm hang.

Yes, I do a lot of that sort of thing, for the same reasons that it's the acceleration/deceleration that's important.

Ahah cheers!
Sincerely I'd love to have a big party 

I'd also love to climb something on ze rocks, let's see...

OK, so friction aside (you lost me a bit there), I can assume that - MORE OR LESS - if .. I let the counterweight go down, I am increasing the load on my fingers; if I make the counterweight go up I am decreasing the load on my fingers.
This may vary according to acceleration and friction; if it stays put the load is constant. Right?

After all these years, I still love this shit.

Sorry, Lore, yes .. more or less  When the weight is static though, you'll still be able to vary the load, because of the friction.

My approach to this is to combine the pulley with what Fultonius is describing, getting just enough assistance to pull off the deck.

Can you let us know if we have to bring our own booze 

[DAVETHOMAS90]

As ever Lore, thanks for the inspiration 

I have 5kg set up on a pulley, for an edge that I can sometimes hang. Try this:

Set up some bathroom scales underneath your board, and use the weight/pulley to graduate the degree of assistance required to bring the reading on the scales as close to zero as you can get. Pull as hard as you can; concentrate on that, not getting your feet off the ground.

Here's the interesting bit - regarding the above.
Holding the hang, feet off/unassisted, can feel easier sometimes than transitioning from one foot down, to no feet. I think that's because there's effectively an acceleration at that point. When we're climbing, it's the small additional requirement to  accelerate - rather than just maintaining the position which is critical.

[Nibile]

Hey thanks guys for the feedback, of which I can get only some parts, but I understand that it's complex.
Dave, I'll try your suggestion, the neighbours won't be much surprised in watching me bringing a scale in the garage...
I brought this up because I started doing sub-max hangs for volume, and I noticed all the above, so I was curious.
Cheers!

[DAVETHOMAS90]

Good to have some psyche from you, back on the channel 

[Nibile]

Cheers Dave, I don't post much, you're right.
But I'm glad if I provided some psyche! After all, in this mad world of 9a boulders and 9c routes, what's better than thinking about the subtleties of deadhanging?
Unfortunately I got an injury just yesterday, so I think it will be a while before I post a video about dangling from a small piece of wood with lots of weights (added, this time)!

[DAVETHOMAS90]

That's crap news Lore.
Sorry to hear about that. Anything serious? Usual finger tweaks, or worse?

I hope you don't get too demoralised.
x

[Nibile]

Hey Dave!
Yeah I know, I'm really pi***d... it's in my back, right side mid height.
I has an eco scan yesterday, my ribs are fine, probably something either muscle related or the vertebral facet joint...
And I don't even know how I got it...
Slightly better now but Sunday evening I could barely stand and walk... it was like being stabbed repeatedly (never been stabbed luckily but I imagine it can't be that different...).
Training was going well and climbing was fun, I think I'll have to change a few things even after the pain has subsided.
Cheers for asking!

[DAVETHOMAS90]

I hope things are improving. This sounds like the sort of annoying injury that you can pick up when you've avoided the fingerboard for a while, and then jump back on it - particularly with asymmetric hangs. I had something similar which resulted in spasms down one side, after I'd stopped to pick up my chalk bag. A case of the dust that broke the donkey's back.

As this is the Diet, Training, and Injuries channel, can we have some insight into your comfort food of choice Lore? 
I loved the link to your Tuscan friends.

[Nibile]

Hey cheers for the message.
Yes, luckily things are improving. So far I managed not to skip a single day, trying to do something easy... Antiinflammatories are helping with supplements as well.
If I remember correctly, I probably rushed my theraband warm up, and I remember that I was feeling quite tired from riding in the cold that day (it was 2 degrees when I got home). As I moved to the weights I felt a slight niggle in my back, and instead of stopping right away I did a couple of sets of - very light - deadlifts and cleans. Then I realized I could barely stand and breathe due to the pain...
As I said, I'm really pi**** because I was really enjoying my board climbing at the moment. Will try again on Monday, hopefully I'll be able to do something. Surely I'll have to take it easy on the heavy iron stuff, maybe it's the chance to get some more climbing done, who knows.

As for the food, I could open a new topic but I don't know if people are interested in sharing, so I'll reply here and then mods can split if needed?

So, if by comfort food we mean some food that I indulge in when feeling a bit down, I sincerely don't have any.
I basically eat the same food all year long, I don't do any sort of diet, I don't weigh food, so I don't feel any cravings. I skip the very greasy stuff, and I don't want to drink too much wine, but other than that I eat a lot of everything.

On the other hand, if by comfort food we mean some food that I particularly like, for instance when I (used to) go out for dinner, that's another story...
I love cured meats a lot but I rarely eat them (see above about the greasy stuff).
I also love all sorts of bowels and entrails: tripes, lungs, heart, kidneys, brain, the full monty. You wanna have a laugh? My nickname in high school was Hannibal...
I also love egg pasta, and indeed it's basically the only kind of pasta that I eat (I basically don't eat normal, white pasta).
Still on the meat side, I love all the long-cooked stuff: braised, boiled, etc.
And of course vegetables, raw or cooked (there are so many recipes), soups, etc. but I have to avoid big leafy stuff like lettuce...
I like also all sorts of fish.

Of course, 6 days a week I eat very simple stuff, and none of the above: egg pasta or brown rice for lunch, with extra virgin olive oil and some parmesan; soup, white meat or fish and veggies for dinner, with a glass of wine or two. Lots of Greek yoghurt during the day, lots of honey in it.

Now I feel sincerely hungry.

This is the place I call home: https://osteriailvinaio.it/

[DAVETHOMAS90]

"..other than that I eat a lot of everything."

 

This is good Lore.
Other than the meat, I'd say pretty much, very similar to me.

More celebration of great food would be a good alternative to the science of supplementation - unless the drugs are really good - BID's the guy to go to for that shit.

Interesting, I noticed the dish with tripe on the other site. I was looking at a can of it in Tesco the other night, before realising it was for dogs There were always bags of it hanging up in the butchers when I was sent out shopping as a kid. Apparently it's good with a generous splash of Henderson's Relish 

I try to moderate things to some extent, but the whole purpose of exercise, training and running, is simply to be able to eat more.

As the late, great Woflgang Gullich once said "Sometimes I eat so much I cannot breathe".

Re injuries, I've had a bit of a strain in my right Lat for a week or so, but fingers are recovering from various splits.
Glad to hear that you're current ailments are likely nothing longer term.