[honroid]

Anyone else using a moonboard regularly. It has been slammed on here by some people in the past but there must be a few people using it.

I've just started using it as Steve Maisch suggests in various podcasts. He has a couple of ideas for using it for strength based around the idea that when lifting weights for strength you work in an 80% - 85% effort zone, doing 5 reps rather than working at 100% effort and at 1 rep. 

He mentions that most V15 climbers will spend the majority of their time cruising around on V12 and V13 problems and working in the 80% - 85% zone.

Based on this idea then, he suggests doing a session of 5 problems three grades below your max, 5 problems at 2 Grades below max and then repeating the first 5 problems again.

Anyone out there trying this sort of thing?

[abarro81]

I like volume bouldering sessions like this. Exercises at the strengthy end of ancap are probably going to give many similar effects (especially if comparing to doing the session you mentioned on something like the wave - where problems are longer - rather than the moonboard). Anderson hangs also somewhat similar (high volume at something very roughly like 80%). I personally find I tend to get better gains from this style of training than top-end strength work (e.g. max hangs, or 1-2 move problems), but that may partly be because I'm mostly interested in whether I feel strong for routes, which is usually more about feeling strong at 80% than 95%.

Main downside for me is that I find anything like this quite intense on old injuries - if anything is going to make overuse injuries get angry again I find it's this kind of stuff.

[Bradders]

Doesn't have to be a Moonboard, most of my home board sessions are structured along these lines.

Currently I'm doing a general warm up of mobility, shoulder work and fingerboard, then a circuit of 5 easier problems that I should be able to do every time albeit not without some effort, then 4 or 5 problems I've done before but are hard and I'm at least as likely to fall off as complete them (best I've managed so far is doing 2/4 and dropping last moves of the other 2).

Then go into 2/3 projects albeit generally these are things where I'm at least stringing 2/3 moves together and I fall off on link goes.

And ideally finish by doing the original 5 problem circuit with a little added weight.

I'd like to think this gets a good level of stimulus at the right intensity, I.e. generally pretty intense whilst still completing a relatively high volume of moves. Personally I find I make much better gains with this approach than trying absolute limit moves for the session.

[yetix]

In terms of training for me, climbing on a moonboard for the last 2 or 3 months has been most of what I've done, with a little off the wall stuff.

Im doing something close to this at the moment on a moonboard I guess and have been since just before the start of the year (before then I'd been just working through new benchmarks each session) .

I have 5 problems I warm up on progressively followed by 10 problems around the hardest grade to 1 below the hardest grade I've done on a moonboard which I try to repeat in 3 goes with 3 mins rest between goes. (I imagine if I was to project on the MB more now that my max grade would have gone up, and these would be more like 1-3 grades off my max, but I've tried to keep limit sessions to rock recently, so it's hard to tell!)

All the problems are things I'd previously worked on the MB (and some originally took a few to many sessions to actually do!) and the aim for me is to tick all the problems in less than 3 goes during the session. (I'm currently at 13/15 problems with 2 of the problems falling off the last move at least once, and in the first session I think I did 8 problems (5 warmups followed by 3 from the session itself))

If I complete the full circuit I'll likely move some of the easier blocs from the 10 into my warmup and then add some harder things onto the end that I've worked since. Or possibly add a few former projects into the circuit and have 3 goes on each of them.

At first I felt ruined for days after this session but I imagine that's because before almost every climbing session I did involved trying one or two things tops (inside or outside). Now I feel okay after 1 day of rest after doing this session, and I'm noticing that my session capacity for other sessions is also already noticeably higher, particularly in terms of how long I can execute powerful movement (surprise surprise).

Unsurprisingly, I'm still shit at basic body tension on small feet though, I'm considering doing something similar on more tensiony problems in a future training bloc as a result though.

Also my warm up sounds almost the exact same as nicks

[jwi]

I've just started using it as Steve Maisch suggests in various podcasts. He has a couple of ideas for using it for strength based around the idea that when lifting weights for strength you work in an 80% - 85% effort zone, doing 5 reps rather than working at 100% effort and at 1 rep. 

He mentions that most V15 climbers will spend the majority of their time cruising around on V12 and V13 problems and working in the 80% - 85% zone.

I'm curious, how does he find the conversion between proportion of max effort and grade? According to some simple calculations that I just did based on various studies that relates max fingerstrength and grade I find that for someone whos fingers are taxed to 100% on individual moves on an 8C+ (i.e. "8C climbers"), their fingers would be taxed at around 80-85% at 8A-8A+.

What does he mean by effort?

[honroid]

Yeah, I guess my board sessions have always either focused on 4x4 type sessions, a session climbing a problem on the minute or pretty much as you describe Nick but probably more limit. So a progressive warm up followed by two or three limit problems. One of those three.

I think I've been working at both a higher intensity and a lower intensity but never quite hit this sweet spot as it's hard to find. Doing this session last night it felt like the problems were really hard but doable. Just. All new problems too rather than cycling though old ones which is fun. Like you say, it doesn't have to be on a moonboard, at all, but it does work really well as a tool for this sort of thing.

I agree that it also feels like you're skirting injury in this zone.

[honroid]

I've just started using it as Steve Maisch suggests in various podcasts. He has a couple of ideas for using it for strength based around the idea that when lifting weights for strength you work in an 80% - 85% effort zone, doing 5 reps rather than working at 100% effort and at 1 rep. 

He mentions that most V15 climbers will spend the majority of their time cruising around on V12 and V13 problems and working in the 80% - 85% zone.

I'm curious, how does he find the conversion between proportion of max effort and grade? According to some simple calculations that I just did based on various studies that relates max fingerstrength and grade I find that for someone whos fingers are taxed to 100% on individual moves on an 8C+ (i.e. "8C climbers"), their fingers would be taxed at around 80-85% at 8A-8A+.

What does he mean by effort?

It's a funny one isn't it. So if you were running or doing something aerobic, max effort is you max heart rate and then you can work in heart rate zones. Weight lifting, one rep max then work in a percentage of that.

The thing here is we are talking about the moonboard, not climbing in general. In climbing a moon board, climbing the hardest problem you can will be your max effort. Your max grade is tough to measure. You may find an 8A+ that fits you well and get lucky.

It's a way of dialing in on that 80% zone used in weight lifting. Not scientific but something that tension / moon / kilter makes acheiveable rather than relying on perceived max effort or endlessly cycling through the same problems.

[webbo]

Generally when doing aerobics stuff you don’t go to max heart rate. Knowing what it is gives you the zones to work in.

[User deactivated.]

In the context of climbing board problems, using RPE to gauge effort makes much more sense than calculating percentages of your max.

RPE is subjective, and that is a positive thing not a negative. To me, the session that Bradders describes sounds like 5 problems at an RPE of 6-7 to warm up (still challenging), 5 problems at RPE 9-9.5 (almost maximal), a few projects at RPE 10, then weighted problems likely around RPE 8-9.

Interestingly it's those final weighted problems that might be in the sweet spot where you can achieve a lot of volume at sufficient intensity.

I do something similar myself but I prefer to do the maximal stuff straight after the challenging warm ups, then my volume work afterwards. During a peak phase I'd keep the volume work lower, but around RPE 9-9.5 (30-50% likely to do it). During a base phase where I want to build strength and i dont care as much about fatigue, volume is king, so I'll aim for RPE 8-9 (perhaps 70-100% success rate) so that I can do more work in the session thats still at adequate intensity for strength gains.

[abarro81]

RPE 9-9.5 (30-50% likely to do it).

 RPE 8-9 (perhaps 70-100% success rate)

Surely anything below RPE 10 means not falling off apart from by an error? E.g. RPE of 8 you wouldn't fall off apart from by making a mistake... Unless you mean the individual moves having RPE of 8 (making a 5 move problem a 10, for example)? Or an imaginary RPE when fresh but you're not fresh at the end of a session? This kind of stuff is why RPE is as often a terrible measure as it is a great measure!

[Paul B]

I've just started using it as Steve Maisch suggests in various podcasts.

Lost all faith in what he has to say based on Trainingbeta Podcast where he was reading things for Eva Lopez's work that just weren't demonstrated.

[mrjonathanr]

RPE 9-9.5 (30-50% likely to do it).

 RPE 8-9 (perhaps 70-100% success rate)

Surely anything below RPE 10 means not falling off apart from by an error?

 RPE is a measure of effort, not performance, so that only follows if you are giving it absolutely everything; hard to do that every go.

[User deactivated.]

RPE 9-9.5 (30-50% likely to do it).

 RPE 8-9 (perhaps 70-100% success rate)

Surely anything below RPE 10 means not falling off apart from by an error? E.g. RPE of 8 you wouldn't fall off apart from by making a mistake... Unless you mean the individual moves having RPE of 8 (making a 5 move problem a 10, for example)? Or an imaginary RPE when fresh but you're not fresh at the end of a session? This kind of stuff is why RPE is as often a terrible measure as it is a great measure!

RPE is a subjective measure of effort. Each individuals reading of it will be slightly different, and it's also a learned skill. The classic example being when beginner lifters are told to stop when they think they have 2 reps in reserve (RPE 8 ). When repeating the set to absolute failure with a coach screaming at them, they perform many more reps than anticipated. Experienced lifters carrying out the same test are usually bang on.

To your question, I wouldn't always rate my level of effort as RPE 10 when I fall off, and you hit the nail on the head mentioning mistakes. Climbing is skill based afterall, so it's going to be very common for a foot to pop, to hit a hold incorrectly,  etc. or maybe you just weren't fully fired up for that attempt.

Fatigue is accounted for. A warm up problem could be RPE 10 after a repeaters session! Of course, completing a session of RPE10 efforts in this state would be poor programming and it won't achieve the results you'd hope to gain from training at high RPE.


Edit - it might all seem a bit pointless when you can just go by feel, but I find that writing down my perceived RPE for each attempt focuses my thinking a little better. If at the end of the board session, I look back and the RPE's were all 7's or 10's, I know something was wrong. It's just a useful tool really.

[honroid]

Generally when doing aerobics stuff you don’t go to max heart rate. Knowing what it is gives you the zones to work in.

Obviously. 220 minus age and all that

[webbo]

I  really hope you are taking the piss with the 220 minus your age for max heart rate.

[honroid]

So in effect, the answer is yes people are doing this sort of work in the 80% zone for strength. But not just on the moonboard. Some folk going with problems that they know are a certain level that they've sent before to find that sweet spot. Some using RPE.

I'll stick with this in this base phase then and see how it goes and be mindful of the potential for niggles and injuries.

Cheers guys.

[abarro81]

RPE is a measure of effort,

Did you write that to be patronising or genuinely think I didn't know what it means 

With respect to the example of being able to do more when amped or with someone shouting at you - I guess this is a perfect example of a challenge with RPE, namely that it's perception. If you don't know you have that extra 10% you'll rate your 90% effort as a 10. Of course using RPE has advantages too, like accounting for good/bad days rather than using a fixed weight or accounting for conditions or erratic grades.


"When you can just go by feel" - RPE literally and explicitly is going by feel, just quantifying the feeling! I'm unconvinced it's better or more relatable than any other description such as "do some problems that are hard but not max" or the example of "do some hard problems where you'll get up, say, 70+ percent of them". For me that final one is probably most descriptive and least open to user error, but each to their own

Re RPE 10 efforts when tired - sounds like aero pow training not bad programming!

[mrjonathanr]

RPE is a measure of effort,

Did you write that to be patronising or genuinely think I didn't know what it means 

Surely anything below RPE 10 means not falling off apart from by an error? E.g. RPE of 8 you wouldn't fall off apart from by making a mistake... Unless you mean the individual moves having RPE of 8 (making a 5 move problem a 10, for example)? Or an imaginary RPE when fresh but you're not fresh at the end of a session? This kind of stuff is why RPE is as often a terrible measure as it is a great measure!

RPE is a subjective measure of effort.

Seems like I'm not the only one whom you prompted to state the obvious? Hopefully, you found it useful 

[Fiend]

I've just started using it as Steve Maisch suggests in various podcasts. He has a couple of ideas for using it for strength based around the idea that when lifting weights for strength you work in an 80% - 85% effort zone, doing 5 reps rather than working at 100% effort and at 1 rep. 

He mentions that most V15 climbers will spend the majority of their time cruising around on V12 and V13 problems and working in the 80% - 85% zone.

I can confirm from decades long experience, albeit at 8 grades lower, that this got me (relatively) pretty good at working in the 80%-85% zone and seemed to make absolutely no progress whatsoever in pushing the 100% / 1RM zone (except that when I try, I get injured). Not sure what the science is behind that though.

[Wellsy]

I personally only use the board for max effort on the day and I found that pushed my capability in the area I was working on very effectively. I doubt I've pulled out RPE 10 very often at all, maybe on on the hardest things I've tried and done, and I think probably for a lot of people RPE 10 doesn't happen in training if at all. But I'll definitely be trying the hardest moves I can.

Six months ago my max real board grade was creeping into 7A, now its creeping into 7B, and I don't think I'd have got that from doing 6C/+ all session.

[yetix]

I think you're missing the point a little, you wouldn't just do 6c/+s for 6 months. You'd do the 6c/+s for a period of time and eventually the 7as would feel easier, then the 7a+s would also feel easier/possible and you could do 6c+/7a until 7a+ felt easier and so on. But rather than trying 1 or 2 things and bashing your head against it until you do it, you could try that thing, then lower the intensity to an achievable intensity so you can do reps rather than a single rep and then once those reps feel easier to achieve you can retest your 1 rep max, in this case being harder board problems.

Given you said it was 6 months if you just did a session like this once a week that would be 26 sessions, you don't think you'd make gains on a board doing 26 sessions of 10-15 problems 1-3 grades below your max?

Given how strong your max hangs have been in the past I'm not suprised you managed to go from 7A to 7B on a board, regardless of how you approached it! More gains to come I'm sure for you Wellsey!

[teestub]

I personally only use the board for max effort on the day and I found that pushed my capability in the area I was working on very effectively.

It’s interesting that people seem keen to think about board climbing differently from weights or fingerboarding for example, where a lot of time is spent sub max, probably in a similar 80% effort level to gain strength.

[Bradders]

I personally only use the board for max effort on the day and I found that pushed my capability in the area I was working on very effectively.

It’s interesting that people seem keen to think about board climbing differently from weights or fingerboarding for example, where a lot of time is spent sub max, probably in a similar 80% effort level to gain strength.

I guess it's that difficulty of defining what actually is 80% effort in a sport that's so technical. Not that it's any easier to define 100% effort either!

[teestub]

From about 33 mins here https://thenuggetclimbing.com/episodes/steve-maisch
He’s basically talking a couple of grades below max grade, definitely not an exact measure of anything!

[mrjonathanr]

Thinking about the outcome of intensity and volume is interesting. My non-expert assumption is that training over a variety of sub-maximal intensities is the way, without knowing how to pin that down more precisely. I doubt there’s  one ideal combination. One thing I’m confident of however; established power sports like Olympic lifting don’t just train by attempting a small number of 1RMs each week.