you have the strength for one arm hangs (I don't!).
Quote from: Liamhutch89 on January 19, 2023, 11:09:28 am you have the strength for one arm hangs (I don't!). Citation needed! Surely you'd get a lot out of one armed hangs. Given your general level of strength surely you'd be able to hang 7 seconds with a somewhere between 5-10kg of assistance on a pulley?
at the end of summer I hit a 150% bodyweight half crimp on the Lattice edge.
I believe current thinking is that transferability to edge size is somewhat specific
Quote from: Liamhutch89 on January 19, 2023, 11:09:28 amI believe current thinking is that transferability to edge size is somewhat specificThis waxes and wanes so much. A few years ago it was all about keeping a bigger edge size and adding more weight. Before that it was reducing edge size. Now it's about doing it with pinky bent. The thing that hasn't changed is the need for consistency and progressive overload. The edge size matters far less than turning up week in, week out, doing the same session each time and gradually changing one or two of the volume / intensity / rest period dials. No need to overcomplicate it with loads of different edge sizes James.
I appreciate the idea of not getting too caught up in the details but considering edge size and the variety in adaptions as a result is a valid thing to consider. Strength is specific and gaining a base of maximal force production early in a training cycle on a larger edge and then learning to apply this force to a more specific context is a good strategy. This is similar to how gymnasts use basic weight training to improve maximal force production to then later apply this to the more specific strength and skills of a given movement. When getting into finger boarding for the first time the gains are likely more transferable and the need for a high-level specificity is less. To begin with, I agree that keeping things simple and then getting more specific later down the line is a good approach.
James, I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve by varying the angle at the elbow? You mention that you can't lock off on a jug, so this is going to be your limiting factor when performing one arm hangs with almost any degree of lock. If you want to train your lock off strength you'd be better off doing them on a bar (or better still, weighted pullups).
9 sets in half crimp would be a lot to start with! Since you've not done much fingerboarding before, you're going to respond to a lot less. Maybe start with 4 sets on each arm? Ideally, we always want the minimal effective dose of training to elicit gains. This gives us scope to increase volume when we inevitably plateau.
You could do a benchmarking session to test your max then work off percentages e.g. start at 80% of your max on week 1, do 4 sets on each arm (or both arms), then on week 2 you up the load to 82.5% and so on. Alternatively, each session you could just work up to your max (with 1-2 seconds in reserve), then back off the total load by 5-10% (bodyweight plus weight added or subtracted) and perform sets until you're back to only having 1s in reserve. This method means you'll tend not to overwork on weak/fatigued days and also take advantage of strong days. Eventually, you will plateau via any method and that's when you need to start devising more cunning plans, which might include increasing the volume, varying the hang time, frequency of training, etc.
With the second approach, do you mean work to the max each session - so reducing the assistance weight each hang - or use sessions to work out the max (avoiding the initial benchmark session) and then move to approach 1 after that?
James, I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve by varying the angle at the elbow? You mention that you can't lock off on a jug, so this is going to be your limiting factor when performing one arm hangs with almost any degree of lock. If you want to train your lock off strength you'd be better off doing them on a bar (or better still, weighted pullups). 9 sets in half crimp would be a lot to start with! Since you've not done much fingerboarding before, you're going to respond to a lot less. Maybe start with 4 sets on each arm? Ideally, we always want the minimal effective dose of training to elicit gains. This gives us scope to increase volume when we inevitably plateau. You could do a benchmarking session to test your max then work off percentages e.g. start at 80% of your max on week 1, do 4 sets on each arm (or both arms), then on week 2 you up the load to 82.5% and so on. Alternatively, each session you could just work up to your max (with 1-2 seconds in reserve), then back off the total load by 5-10% (bodyweight plus weight added or subtracted) and perform sets until you're back to only having 1s in reserve. This method means you'll tend not to overwork on weak/fatigued days and also take advantage of strong days. Eventually, you will plateau via any method and that's when you need to start devising more cunning plans, which might include increasing the volume, varying the hang time, frequency of training, etc.
James, I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve by varying the angle at the elbow?
Quote from: Liamhutch89 on January 19, 2023, 04:09:23 pmJames, I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve by varying the angle at the elbow? There seem to be three school of thought here:1. Do it at your strongest angle since this allows you to maximise the load. 2. Do it at all angles since the different angles subtly change the loading (e.g. bent arm allows you to weight back 3 more heavily than front 3, for me at least), and recruiting the fingers feels different at different angles... and you need to be strong in all positions not just one when it comes to real rock.3. Do it straight armed since this "isolates" the fingers more. For what it's worth, option 2 makes the most sense to me. Option 3 has never made sense since the forces all have to travel through your fingers in the end somehow, unless you're lat happens to be dabbing the edge you're hanging.
Ned also suggests that the vast majority of the time he does "long max hangs" of 20 seconds rather than the shorter ones which I've been doing for years of between 5 and 10 which I found interesting. Have been doing more long ones recently.
I don't disagree with your thinking, but since I was making recommendations specific to James' strengths and weaknesses, don't you think he'd be better off separating lock-offs and finger training for the time being if he can't lock off on a bar? Once he isn't limited by lock-off strength then it might make more sense to vary the angle? (although I'd still preferably train this on the wall myself).
Quote from: Liamhutch89 on February 24, 2023, 09:23:18 amI don't disagree with your thinking, but since I was making recommendations specific to James' strengths and weaknesses, don't you think he'd be better off separating lock-offs and finger training for the time being if he can't lock off on a bar? Once he isn't limited by lock-off strength then it might make more sense to vary the angle? (although I'd still preferably train this on the wall myself).Yeah, I can definitely see the logic for that, though maybe it depends on how far off a lock he is and how strong the fingers are.. if he can lock with 2kg assist and is doing 1-arm hangs with 10kg assist I think probably you'd be far enough enough from arm failure to make it worth doing the different angles. If it's 10kg assist to lock a jug and 10kg assist on an edge then probably not such a good idea!
One thing I don't buy is that hypertrophy of the finger flexors is anywhere near as important as neuromuscular recruitment for finger strength. If this were the case, I might expect to have stronger fingers than Will Bosi and Allison Vest, but I do not! Long hangs for capacity makes more sense.
Quote from: Liamhutch89 on February 24, 2023, 09:33:22 amOne thing I don't buy is that hypertrophy of the finger flexors is anywhere near as important as neuromuscular recruitment for finger strength. If this were the case, I might expect to have stronger fingers than Will Bosi and Allison Vest, but I do not! Long hangs for capacity makes more sense.Trying to figure out what you mean here Liam! Are you saying you've done loads of hypertrophy type fingerboarding and it hasn't made much difference to your absolute strength?
What Barrows says At least they're bigger than Allison Vest's forearms and even on a bad day, I assume she warms up with my PB's!
Quote from: Yossarian on February 24, 2023, 10:30:02 amQuote from: Liamhutch89 on February 24, 2023, 09:33:22 amOne thing I don't buy is that hypertrophy of the finger flexors is anywhere near as important as neuromuscular recruitment for finger strength. If this were the case, I might expect to have stronger fingers than Will Bosi and Allison Vest, but I do not! Long hangs for capacity makes more sense.Trying to figure out what you mean here Liam! Are you saying you've done loads of hypertrophy type fingerboarding and it hasn't made much difference to your absolute strength?What Barrows says At least they're bigger than Allison Vest's forearms and even on a bad day, I assume she warms up with my PB's! But I've had success with so-called hypertrophy fingerboarding in the past, it's just that I don't think hypertrophy is the reason (actually I have significantly smaller forearms now than when I started climbing). Most likely, they work via increasing work capacity and improving energy systems which can then be translated into higher peak force output via climbing on small holds, board climbing, max hangs, etc.
Quote from: Liamhutch89 on February 24, 2023, 10:47:50 amWhat Barrows says At least they're bigger than Allison Vest's forearms and even on a bad day, I assume she warms up with my PB's! I suspect you weigh about 25-30kg more than she does though!
Quote from: Liamhutch89 on February 24, 2023, 10:47:50 amQuote from: Yossarian on February 24, 2023, 10:30:02 amQuote from: Liamhutch89 on February 24, 2023, 09:33:22 amOne thing I don't buy is that hypertrophy of the finger flexors is anywhere near as important as neuromuscular recruitment for finger strength. If this were the case, I might expect to have stronger fingers than Will Bosi and Allison Vest, but I do not! Long hangs for capacity makes more sense.Trying to figure out what you mean here Liam! Are you saying you've done loads of hypertrophy type fingerboarding and it hasn't made much difference to your absolute strength?What Barrows says At least they're bigger than Allison Vest's forearms and even on a bad day, I assume she warms up with my PB's! But I've had success with so-called hypertrophy fingerboarding in the past, it's just that I don't think hypertrophy is the reason (actually I have significantly smaller forearms now than when I started climbing). Most likely, they work via increasing work capacity and improving energy systems which can then be translated into higher peak force output via climbing on small holds, board climbing, max hangs, etc.Slight segway but I'm steadily more convinced that hand anatomy also plays a big role in finger strength on a given edge size. I think the reason I've been happily adding weight to bodyweight one-armed for years (since I climbed sport 7c and with barely any previous fingerboard training) is because my fingers are symmetrical (pinky/index pair and ring/middle pair are each the same length) which makes chisel and half crimp extremely anatomically strong because way less flexion is required for significant load to be taken through the pinky. It also explains why I'm almost the same on monos with index/pinky as I am with ring and middle - the two middle fingers almost never end up in an open handed position unless in two finger sloping pockets. I'm actually significantly stronger in middle two half crimp than I am in middle two drag. All of this was pre-determined by genetics and won't change unless I very consciously train isolated grip types like middle two single pad drag. Another fun thing that couples with this is that because I have mild hyperflexibility (thumb touches forearm etc) and chisel is my 'automatic' grip type i.e. the most anatomically available strong grip, a recent switch to drag and closed crimp grips resulted in unhappy TFCC's whilst they got used to be loaded in this way (an ongoing process to a given extent) because these grip positions offer much more wrist mobility than chisel. Again, all defined by genetics and something that would be great to have been aware of 10 years ago I think there is SO much depth to grip strength which is yet to be mined. It's going to be really interesting to see where the sport science progresses on this. Sorry for the essay but I find this topic really interesting.