[Doylo]

 

and will get pissed off when you say that anyone who trains is automatically a shit climber.

When have I ever said this? I have never said this because it is nonsense.

Those who climb can and those who can't train seems to me to be along those lines.

What I do find laughable are people for whom training becomes more important than climbing. Again its the same loop - get strong indoors, perform shit outdoors, get stronger indoors, no improvement outside. I don't see the point in this. Fair enough if you only want to climb indoors, but I don't see it as the same sport. There seem to be a lot of folk in Sheffield who have lost sight of what they are training for.

Agree with this. And agree that UKB isn't just serious climbing chat but the fact is you bang on the same drum so hard you're gonna need a new skin for it for xmas. If i went round jibing people for being weak in every other post (exageration i know) i'd expect a backlash. 

  I also find The School clique pretty funny - there seems to be this attitude that performing well in The School is some kind of international benchmark that is an end in itself. I don't subscribe to this view.

Me neither, if that were the case then Paul B would be the worlds greatest climber 

[Paul B]

I also find The School clique pretty funny - there seems to be this attitude that performing well in The School is some kind of international benchmark that is an end in itself. I don't subscribe to this view.

It may be perceived like this but I think really its more of a measure of where you are in terms of strength and power, you can tell if you have improved in those two areas easily from day to day, month to month or even year to year and hence can easily tell the progress of others, maybe this is what leads people to believe that performing up there is some kind of benchmark?
Are there that many people who have lost sight of their goals through training? I know of one who is definitely in the minority and his case is extreme, but thats it. I find it hard to believe that there are lots of people in Sheffield who have lost sight of what they are training for because if you don't have a goal where the hell does the motivation to train come from?

[Doylo]

I also find The School clique pretty funny - there seems to be this attitude that performing well in The School is some kind of international benchmark that is an end in itself. I don't subscribe to this view.

Are there that many people who have lost sight of their goals through training?

I think this is a myth Paul. Most school members only use the place in the winter when its too wet and windy to do ought else. In fact most school members are committed outdoor rock climbers who do it all (sport, bouldering, trad). I might even name a few, Jon Fullwood, Andy Cave, Rob Smith, Nic Sellars etc...............

[Johnny Brown]

Those who can, climb. Those who can't, train

I quickly realised in my career that i'm never going to be the most technical climber in the world, i just haven't got that natural ability. So from that point i concentrated on steeper climbing which involve more strength than technique

So what's your beef again?

Seriously, though, it was meant to be a flippant joke and most have taken it as such. There is clearly a kernel of truth, though, as it has spawned two pages of 'debate'. I didn't put that much thought into it and the original that I paraphrased - 'Those who can, do. Those who can't, teach' is, I think, more offensive. Later tonight I expect to be lynched by a School member with a PGCE.

[Doylo]

I quickly realised in my career that i'm never going to be the most technical climber in the world, i just haven't got that natural ability. So from that point i concentrated on steeper climbing which involve more strength than technique

So what's your beef again?

No beef, i'm a chicken man. Was just stating where i'm coming from.
Fair does, i shall take your attitude towards training, power, the school etc.. with a big pinch of salt from now on. I was gonna say we could continue this conversation in the Porter Cottage but i won't be back there for a while. Have a good xmas Adam.

[Johnny Brown]

It seems from the last few post ive read you seem to have major issues with anything training/power/school related...say it isnt so?

pay no attention to his constant criticising of people who climb inside/ train

I'll be honest these remarks did suprise me a bit. So much so, I've just re-read my last 150 posts to see when I made such repeated and constant criticisms. I'll be honest - they're not there. So I'll put it down to writing in a slightly abrasive style on a touchy subject. My apologies.

My point is simply this: I meet far more people who would benefit from putting more time into their technique than into strength. This has been true ever since I've climbed in the Peak District - however people seem to not take this seriously. Perhaps it actually takes more dedication to get outside (especially in this current weather) enough to really improve your technique, than it does to get stronger indoors. Plus the bonus is you're actually climbing.

[saltbeef]

My point is simply this: I meet far more people who would benefit from putting more time into their technique than into strength. This has been true ever since I've climbed in the Peak District - however people seem to not take this seriously. Perhaps it actually takes more dedication to get outside (especially in this current weather) enough to really improve your technique, than it does to get stronger indoors. Plus the bonus is you're actually climbing.

The thing is if you work, how the hell do you get out more often? i took last week off. it rained a lot; i'll probably be berated for it but i went to stoney, cos it was dry, and was outdoors. If i didn't go to the wall i'd be struggling with 5c. yes i'd like to get out more often and get out climbing classic problems, but then i love my work and enjoy getting paid, so am limited  to geting out when i can, which when you work one weekend in 3, and have a non-climbing girlfriend is again limited.
Training is fun. its as near to climbing as you can get if its dark or raining. i like campusing. i also like tradding, i also like going to yoga, and running. its probably cos i enjoy physical activity.
lets hope the weather is good at the weekend and boxing day, cos then i'll hit the crag. if its raining or damp, i'll be at the wall. you coming johnny, dense'll show you how to dead hang?

[Paul B]

I'm sure part of the problem is that the training wall is currently a blank canvas. Those who are used to training on a wooden board with fifteen years worth of pre-set Ben and Jerry problems aren't used to using their imaginations. They want to just turn up and test themselves against an established benchmark that involves maximum power and minimum skill. There is far more potential on this one board than at the school, but it will take a while to unlock. Some folk just want it all on a plate.

you guys seem to do a lot of training. Makes me feel a bit useless

Those who can, climb. Those who can't, train.

It was these two posts that initially got me posting if you were wondering (which i'm sure you weren't).
Maybe your right about lots of people maybe benefiting more from concentrating on technique but as saltbeef says you've got to have the time, you can train even if its dark or wet.

[SA Chris]

My tuppence worth, I think anyone can learn to climb "technically" (whatever that may mean) if they decide to dedicate enough time and effort into it. This does not only mean having to climb outdoors all the time, it also means going to a suitable wall and seeking out problems that require something other than bearing down on small holds on a steep wall.

[(woz)]

I was just wondering if anyone else shared my philosophy on "Specific Climbing Related Strength Training" (as it shall now be known to avoid confusion):

I too realised, early in my climbing career, that technical climbing didn't suit me (partly due to lanky inflexibleness and partly due to being a white boy who couldn't jump). So I decided to concentrate on "SCRST" whilst I was still young with the growth hormones/enthusiasm/time for it. This was with the eventual plan of settling into a nice 9-5 three days a week and climbing outdoors as much as possible (This being the "Specific Climbing Related Technique Training Macrocycle"). Thus hopefully becoming a technically competant all round climbing machine.

Dan

[Ru]

The thing with training (or climbing more outside to get better technique - lets call that training too if you do it for that purpose) is specificity. If your goal is to climb deliverance and brad pit the Johnny is right - time on the rock is better than campussing or pull ups. If you want to go on holiday to the Frankenjura and climb 8b+ or whatever, then you can be a master of slick movement on grit but if you can't hang the monos you're in the shit. If, like most on here, you want to go on the grit and tick the classics AND pull down on holiday in the Jura, or wherever, then obviously you're going to have to do some training and also put the time in on the rock. JB's advice and viewpoint is valid, but it's predicated on the assumption that the best things to climb are grit lines in the best style. Buoux's view is also right if you want to climb 9a on limestone and consider grit routes to be something that stop you getting bored whilst directing your efforts elsewhere.

Also I have noticed two things about climbing over the years. One is how far technique can get you. A long way. Weak but good people can often get up stuff that strong shit people can't. The other is how far brute stength can get you. Many things that I thought were going to be impossible unless you had flawless technique I have either seen crushed by the truly strong, or I have come back myself, no better as a climber, but stronger, and walked up it. Climbing is so infinitely variable, with so many shapes of rock and factors necessary for success that it becomes very hard to tell which factor you need to change to progress your climbing the fastest. All you can really do is look at what you want to achieve and try and figure where you lack.

As for whether to train technique or strength whilst young, well, (presuming that injury is not a factor) it's true that the technically best climbers were weak whilst they were developing and developed good technique. However it's also true that the strongest climbers got their base level of strength whilst they were young too.

[Stu Littlefair]

It's also true that whilst the technically best climbers have done some hard things in good style, it's the very very strong (Malcom, Ben, etc) who have pushed things forward in this country. Looking at my ambitions and deciding wether to follow the path of JB or the path of the School, it's fairly obvious which has the most promise. Obviously this has a lot to do with my ambitions, but it's fair to say that whilst an excess of power and a sprinkling of technique will get me up most things on grit, all the technique in the world isn't going to help me tick Black Lung or True North.....

[Bonjoy]

What I do find laughable are people for whom training becomes more important than climbing. Again its the same loop - get strong indoors, perform shit outdoors, get stronger indoors, no improvement outside. I don't see the point in this. Fair enough if you only want to climb indoors, but I don't see it as the same sport. There seem to be a lot of folk in Sheffield who have lost sight of what they are training for.

I don’t think this can be dismissed as a myth. To a greater or lesser extent I think it’s fairly common. Self styled training guru Matt 'Smyth' Smith was the archetype. Most examples aren't as extreme as him but there are plenty of way strong boulderers who have achieved much less than far weaker counterparts. Strong climbers who would only need to actually concentrate on actually climbing more rather than projecting all their achievements onto a distant future, to actually make those grades outside.
 There is definitely a degree of self defeating pride at work too. Strong boy X cruises everything down the local wall but gets shut down on 7a at the crag, feels foolish in front of his peers so goes back inside. Strong boy X overtime learns to associate climbing indoors with having fun and feeling on top of his game and climbing outdoors with feeling crap and therefore not having fun. So despite strong boy X having started the indoor regime with a view to improving on rock he has ended up reducing the joy he gets from climbing outside and tends to do less of it and stick to working hard projects where he doesn't feel a fool for struggling. It might only take a few weeks or months of swallowing his pride and getting shut down learning to climb properly for strong boy X to become a more rounded climber and thus achieve his full potential. Over time he stops even trying the annoying easy probs, thus compounding his technical ineptitude, but bolstering his dented ego with the occasional hard tick. It becomes even more difficult for the barrier to be overcome because strong boy X ends up spending his time with climbers Y,Z,A,B and C who are all trapped in the same box. Of course they don’t think they are trapped, in the new circle of friends 1-5-9 has become the end in itself and the once held goal of outdoor prowess has become something to roll out if asked what all the training is for, but only half believed in. The means has effectively become the end.
 The above is a cartoon parody of the real situation obviously, but can anyone really say there is not a tiny grain of truth in it for some boulderers? It's more common to see obstructive imbalance in peoples climbing towards too little technique rather than too little power.

[unclesomebody]

Agreed bonjoy. There is a grain of truth amongst all that parody. So which am I, X,Y,Z,A,B or C?

I think Adam's points are fair and represent a way of thinking that was probably more prominent when he started climbing. A lot of the other climbers on here are more new school (myself included), although I definitely don't think that I dislike climbing outdoors, or cry when I get shut down on a 7A (not that it ever happens). I have respect for both points of view and although see them as somewhat mutually exclusive there is a wonderful combination of the two which is the balance I'm sure most people enjoy. Extreme's in any discipline or viewpoint are always flawed, and the true path lies in something that is inbetween. So, I'll see you in the school for more failure on 1-5-9, then I'll see you at Black Rocks to solo some routes and climb some slabs, then I'll see you at cloggy for a whole day of adventure. Anyone who professes that any of these individual paths is right is clearly insane.

Stu made a valid point that those pushing standards have been the strong (very strong!). But before them there was Ron (the technically gifted) and I'm sure this is also a valid perspective in any climbing culture around the world. Climbing is changing. It's not longer the technically gifted pushing the standards, nor is it the very strong, it's the VERY STRONG AND TECHNICALLY GIFTED that are really taking it to the next level. 8A is achieveable by pure strength as it is by pure technique. 8C is not. 8C requires both.

Weekend at the crag, weekday in the den. My happy medium. 

[Johnny Brown]

I don’t think this can be dismissed as a myth. To a greater or lesser extent I think it’s fairly common. Self styled training guru Matt 'Smyth' Smith was the archetype. Most examples aren't as extreme as him but there are plenty of way strong boulderers who have achieved much less than far weaker counterparts.... etc

That's exactly what I'm talking about. Despite what has been said above about the UK celebrating talent over application, in sheffield the cult of power is very strong. I think this has been illustrated throughout the thread, even suggesting that strength is not the only way to get better has been a bit of a emperor's new clothes scenario. I would never seriously suggest that training isn't worthwhile, just that in Sheffield its importance is over emphasised.

JB's advice and viewpoint is valid, but it's predicated on the assumption that the best things to climb are grit lines in the best style. Buoux's view is also right if you want to climb 9a on limestone and consider grit routes to be something that stop you getting bored whilst directing your efforts elsewhere.

Funny thing is Ru, in my world there are many other rock types. When I go on holiday, I want to be able to climb huge granite routes quickly and in good style, or climb tottering sea cliffs or desert towers where strength can be a positive handicap. This is another sheffield mindset; that there is only steep lime or grit, or occasionally steep granite boulders. Most of the great rock climbs of the world are actually big crack systems. I've never seen a worthwhile crack indoors yet.

I've made this point before, but the great advancements in world climbing at the moment are taking place on the big granite faces. The UK's top climbers are conspicuous by their absence save for BB guns and Leo. I haven't noticed them down the school much.

[SA Chris]

Which reminds me, what happened to FOAM?

[Bonjoy]

Uncle - I think you're B, but you might be Z. Seriously i'm pointing no fingers, there's a bit of X in most of us. Besides, since your Angels Share revelation I don't think anyone could accuse you of being all crimps, pockets and 1-5-9.

[Johnny Brown]

In my experience, Uncle is Y all over.

[Paul B]

The UK's top climbers are conspicuous by their absence save for BB guns and Leo. I haven't noticed them down the school much.

Don't make me list Britains top climbers that do or have once used the school as a training facility.

I've made this point before, but the great advancements in world climbing at the moment are taking place on the big granite faces. The UK's top climbers are conspicuous by their absence save for BB guns and Leo. I haven't noticed them down the school much.

And I believe last time you made this point you came up on a bit of opposition?

[unclesomebody]

The things you don't know....

But there is another point I want to make, and it is about the percieved levels of strength and technique. People very wrongly assume that a strong climber has very little technique. I'm sure I am viewed as stronger than I am technical, but it would be unfair to say I have no technique. Infact, most strong climbers I have met do have very good technique, but because they are so damn strong people neglect to see how technical they are. This is something I've really noticed when climbing with strong people. I would also suggest that if you took 2 people, one viewed as strong, the other as technical, and compared their abilities (using some infallible testing machinery), you would find that the difference in strength between the "strong" guy and the "technical" guy would be large, but the difference in technical ability would be smaller. Clearly it would depend on the subjects in question, but I'm sure this is true in a lot of cases. Don't hate a man for being strong, love him for being more technical than you thought. 

[Johnny Brown]

I've made this point before, but the great advancements in world climbing at the moment are taking place on the big granite faces. The UK's top climbers are conspicuous by their absence save for BB guns and Leo. I haven't noticed them down the school much.

And I believe last time you made this point you came up on a bit of opposition?

I presume you mean Leo and Ben once competed indoors? Well they may have done but that's not where they learnt to climb hard outdoors.

Don't make me list Britains top climbers that do or have once used the school as a training facility.

And of those, how many have never climbed at, say, Burbage? So would it be useful? I'm not suggesting walking in thier infects you with some kind of anti-technical virus. The point remains that indoor walls are of little use for learning to climb cracks, big routes, technical slabs or loose rock, all of which are essential skills for climbing world-wide.

but because they are so damn strong people neglect to see how technical they are

Actually, when you see a really technically able climber it smacks you in the face just as raw power does. I have never seen a british climber move as well on grit as Marc le Menestrel did on his first visit. Do you think Marc flounders on the red problems back home?

[Houdini]

I could name one successfull UK boulderer who since he started training in earnest has (of course) become way stronger than before (significantly so), but has also technically speaking come on in leaps and bounds.  Astonishingly so.

The notion that strong = poor or poorer technical ability is, frankly, a crock.  Watch where you swipe that dirty brush.

[Johnny Brown]

The fact that I have never suggested that more strength = less technical abilty doesn't seem to stop folk assuming thats what I'm think. I'm don't, and never have done.

I just think the 'cult of power' in sheffield is misguided and isn't producing climbers with all-round ability.

[Stubbs]

Do you think it's important to have climbers with all round ability?

I think you're right about the advancements in big wall climbing recently, but I'm not sure how relevant that is to UK climbers whose nearest big walls (granite anyway) are thousands of miles away.

Do you think that everyone would still be power obsessed in Sheffield if El Cap stood where stoney does now?

[Ru]

Funny thing is Ru, in my world there are many other rock types. When I go on holiday, I want to be able to climb huge granite routes quickly and in good style, or climb tottering sea cliffs or desert towers where strength can be a positive handicap. This is another sheffield mindset; that there is only steep lime or grit, or occasionally steep granite boulders. Most of the great rock climbs of the world are actually big crack systems. I've never seen a worthwhile crack indoors yet.

I've made this point before, but the great advancements in world climbing at the moment are taking place on the big granite faces. The UK's top climbers are conspicuous by their absence save for BB guns and Leo. I haven't noticed them down the school much.

I'm well aware that you do lots of other styles of climbing aswell as grit, it was a bit lazy of me not to point that out. What I'm saying is that for the popular styles, ie hard steep bouldering, steep sport routes, strength counts for an awful lot. As for it being a sheffield centric way of thinking that climbing = bouldering and limestone sport routes, well I think this is world-wide. I know there are lots of people doing other stuff, but check out 8a.nu to get an idea of the world many people seem to live in.

I think the opposition point that Paul B was making was with reference to the great advancements being in big granite faces and so on. I see where you're coming from, but without going back over that discussion there are lots of people that think that the great advancements recently are in steep bouldering and sport.