UKBouldering.com
the shizzle => diet, training and injuries => Topic started by: i.munro on January 09, 2008, 05:33:26 pm
-
Having made the mistake of posting this elsewhere(I should have known better) I'm trying on here in the hope of getting some sense or ,at least, a better class of abuse.
IMO the current style of climbing walls (non-featured panels + bolt ons) was, in part, an attempt to create a tool for training strength by de-emphasising technique.
The next step is a campus board which attempts to remove technique from the equation altogether so you can measure gains in strength.
I'm now wondering if there's any mileage in the opposite (ie a tool designed to de-emphasise strength)?
I was thinking about something like connecting strain gauges to each hold on a board
with a limit set so a buzzer goes off if you exceed a pre-set load.
You could then repeat problems training yourself to put progressively less force through the hand holds, producing measurable improvements in technique.
Any thoughts?
-
Slabs.
-
agree'd. slabs. next topic!
-
The next step is a campus board which attempts to remove technique from the equation altogether so you can measure gains in strength.
I would say that a campus board does require technique. True, it isn't bouldering techinque, but there is a technique to campussing.
I can see where you are coming from. But there are other ways of improving technique at the wall, they just require discipline.
-
Percy has already sorted this out by not pinning holds on his new circuits until they have been up for several days. This causes them to spin if I place too much of my not inconsiderable mass on the wrong part of the hold causing me to fail to flash the problem ;)
-
or you could just go climbing.
-
[I can see where you are coming from. But there are other ways of improving technique at the wall, they just require discipline.
True, but they don't give measurable improvements.
-
one of the uni's I visited (possibly leeds?) had a section of moulded wall with strain gauges all over it in the civil engineering department, they also had some tool jumping around on it in socks.
-
[I can see where you are coming from. But there are other ways of improving technique at the wall, they just require discipline.
True, but they don't give measurable improvements.
They are quantifiable, but just on a binary scale, i.e. you can either do it, or you can't, whereas campusing and one-armers are perhaps a more quantitative scale if you see what I mean :shrug:
-
They are quantifiable, but just on a binary scale, i.e. you can either do it, or you can't, whereas campusing and one-armers are perhaps a more quantitative scale if you see what I mean :shrug:
So they can tell you whether your training has worked (after say several weeks) but not if it is working now, if you see what I mean. That's whats great about fingerboards & weights IMO you can monitor the gains you are making & adjust what you're doing if it isn't working.
-
whereas campusing and one-armers are perhaps a more quantitative scale if you see what I mean :shrug:
Not sure about that either. Yes, 1-4-7 is better than 1-4-6 but how do you know you're improving in between these steps? If you see my point.
-
Sounds like you're trying to quantify something that is not quantifiable. Technique certainly isn't all about pulling less.
-
whereas campusing and one-armers are perhaps a more quantitative scale if you see what I mean :shrug:
Not sure about that either. Yes, 1-4-7 is better than 1-4-6 but how do you know you're improving in between these steps? If you see my point.
I do see your point, but there's more categories on something such as a campus board (e.g. wimp 1-2-3-4-5, you've eaten some spinich 1-3-5, improving 1-4-7, beastly 1-5-9) than on something which requires pure technique, which is binary. Thus theres more quantification available to measure your improvement.
Sounds like you're trying to quantify something that is not quantifiable. Technique certainly isn't all about pulling less.
Aye, I agree its not about pulling less, and its a lot harder to quantify technique, but if its about being able to do a given problem that requires technique (which may itself require pulling, but without the technique is nigh on impossible), then you'll only be able to do that problem once you've got your technique down (with the pre-requisite strength), whereas some problems require less technique, but just brutal strength and you can quantify your strength through weights, campusing etc.
Anyway, I'm not sure I make sense to myself :shrug: and I've probably gone a bit :off:
-
There's always a balance between technique and power. Many (most?) moves can be done using technique. They can also be blasted with no technique but uber power. Power (up to a certain level) can mask poor technique. Therefore isolating one at the wall is impossible. That's my 5s 6d worth.
-
Sounds like you're trying to quantify something that is not quantifiable. Technique certainly isn't all about pulling less.
true, but imagine two identical climbers. One works with my machine for a couple of weeks & learns to habitually optimise hip position etc such that he puts a little bit less weight through his hands most of the time.
Then put these two, physically identical, climbers on a problem at their limit & this one looks like he's a bit stronger
-
There's always a balance between technique and power. Most moves can be done using POWER.
-
sounds like just too much hassle for too little in return, hammering some rungs to an overhanging board on the other hand....................
-
There's always a balance between technique and power. Most moves can be done using POWER.
Word, I think you got a little confused there GCW...
-
Bottom line is: power impresses chicks, while technique makes you look a bit effeminate.
-
Bottom line is: power impresses chicks, while technique makes you look a bit effeminate.
word to that man.
well thats what our macho brains would like to think.
power is no substitute for more power etc..
-
I'm now wondering if there's any mileage in the opposite (ie a tool designed to de-emphasise strength)?
I was thinking about something like connecting strain gauges to each hold on a board
with a limit set so a buzzer goes off if you exceed a pre-set load.
Sounds genius. We won't understand technique until peeps try more stuff like this. I think the main reason folk just train power is cos they don't know how to train technique.
Bottom line is: power impresses chicks, while technique makes you look a bit effeminate.
word to that man.
well thats what our macho brains would like to think.
power is no substitute for more power etc..
In my experience, what impresses chicks is topping out what others can't, not one armers.
-
In my experience, what impresses chicks is new shoes.
-
New shoes that are stood on the top.
-
There's always a balance between technique and power. Most moves can be done using POWER.
I'd like to see that applied to lay by arete at slipstones
-
There's always a balance between technique and power. Most moves can be done using POWER.
I'd like to see that applied to lay by arete at slipstones
Most
-
Sounds genius. We won't understand technique until peeps try more stuff like this. I think the main reason folk just train power is cos they don't know how to train technique.
Thanks Johhny. Bouyed up by your kind words I'm now going to go away & try & build a prototype.
In my experience what impresses chicks is being good-looking, rich & preferably not a climber.
-
Bottom line is: power impresses chicks, while technique makes you look a bit effeminate.
word to that man.
well thats what our macho brains would like to think.
power is no substitute for more power etc..
In my experience, what impresses chicks is topping out what others can't, not one armers.
Tongue firmly in cheek. I don't think girls are very impressed by climbing. certainly my girlfriend finds "it a bit embarrassing".
I've said it many times before, people train power because they have finite amounts of time and it enables them to achieve their goals, and they can make recognisable gains.
and to quote the famous once more "fuck it, I'm not topping out."
-
certainly my girlfriend finds "it a bit embarrassing".
we all find it embarrassing climbing with you ;D or is she talking about your choad?
-
she was talking to pencil, i think. my choad isn't embarassing, you love it.
-
Thanks Johhny. Bouyed up by your kind words I'm now going to go away & try & build a prototype.
Make sure the sensors measure outward pull as well.
I think the best non-rock method of technique training is ARCing on a Bendcrete wall. You can't learn technique in a high intensity, high stress situation. 90 minutes of ARCing gives you a massive volume of moves in a situation where you can evaluate how hard you're pulling and how efficiently you're moving, and then reinforce those movements with a decent volume of repetition.
Modern walls are rubbish, we should push for a Bendcrete renaissance.
-
I'm just glad you all agree with me.
-
There's always a balance between technique and power. Most moves can be done using POWER.
I'd like to see that applied to lay by arete at slipstones
::)
-
Brian Jacks doing dips in Adidas sweatpants?
-
Lots of chicks are impressed by Russell Brand and he looks like a complete cock. Go figure. Funny how every thread to do with any type of training ends up in a technique vs power girly slap fest. If you want to be good (actually good) you need both. That is all.
-
Lots of chicks are impressed by Russell Brand and he looks like a complete cock. Go figure. Funny how every thread to do with any type of training ends up in a technique vs power girly slap fest. If you want to be good (actually good) you need both. That is all.
and i thought I knew which side you were on! :'(
-
If you want to be good (actually good) you need both. That is all.
I think we can take that as a given. The problem is after thrity odd years of stamina then power training methods being developed, technique training still comes down to 'climb outdoors. on slabs.'
I've said it many times before, people train power because they have finite amounts of time and it enables them to achieve their goals, and they can make recognisable gains.
...and they don't know how to train technique in a similar manner.
think the best non-rock method of technique training is ARCing on a Bendcrete wall.
WTF is this? How does it work?
-
Is it not a reference to stone monkey?
-
think the best non-rock method of technique training is ARCing on a Bendcrete wall.
WTF is this? How does it work?
30 min+ sessions of easy climbing done primarily to improve forearm endurance by increasing capillarity, but has the side effect that so much low intensity movement on a heavily featured rock like surface (like on old school Bendcrete wall) is really good for improving technique.
-
Bottom line is: power impresses chicks, while technique makes you look a bit effeminate.
What they really like is trumpets and bookends
-
and i thought I knew which side you were on! :'(
Well you don't see me "training technique". ;)
-
I really don't see how climbing slabs is going to improve your technique for anything else apart from climbing slabs
-
30 min+ sessions of easy climbing done primarily to improve forearm endurance by increasing capillarity, but has the side effect that so much low intensity movement on a heavily featured rock like surface (like on old school Bendcrete wall) is really good for improving technique.
Jeez, so the best method of technique training we have is easy traversing? I can see how this might aid development of a flowing efficient movement style for long routes, but how will it help these school boys with 6a rockovers?
-
It's not about traversing, it's about movement in all planes.
If a 6a rockover is at your max grade, the best way to learn the movement skill is by submaximal repetitions of similar movements.
It's always been the case that people who do huge volumes of climbing get good at climbing. If all you do is try hard boulder problems (or hard redpoints) you limit the actual volume of novel moves you make.
-
There hadn't been a power vs. technique thread for far too long. Weeks, even!
Un-scientific, but I've found, say, some of the more dainty Works problems to have an aspect of training technique. Unfortunately that always seems to involve falling off tiny polished smears for me. And technique makes you weak anyway ???
-
There hadn't been a power vs. technique thread for far too long. Weeks, even!
Un-scientific, but I've found, say, some of the more dainty Works problems to have an aspect of training technique. Unfortunately that always seems to involve falling off tiny polished smears for me. And technique makes you weak anyway ???
i'd disagree, they're usually just 'trick' problems.
Johnny, don't you start again :spank: you know you're always welcome up the school so there's no need to get all arsey.
-
It's not about traversing, it's about movement in all planes.
If a 6a rockover is at your max grade, the best way to learn the movement skill is by submaximal repetitions of similar movements.
It's always been the case that people who do huge volumes of climbing get good at climbing. If all you do is try hard boulder problems (or hard redpoints) you limit the actual volume of novel moves you make.
I see, you've got a point there.
some of the more dainty Works problems to have an aspect of training technique. Unfortunately that always seems to involve falling off tiny polished smears for me.
Yeah, the works are good at setting problems with novel moves. Can't say I've done a single problme indoors that is really foot-friction limited though.
Johnny, don't you start again spank you know you're always welcome up the school so there's no need to get all arsey.
Just trying to help you all acheive your potential. If there was a method found for training technique, wouldn't you be interested?
-
YES completely, it is a massive weak side of my climbing and one that i can't fathom how to sort out. Getting out more would help but it currently isn't really an option.
-
Bottom line is: power impresses chicks, while technique makes you look a bit effeminate.
What they really like is trumpets and bookendsmarks?
Possible misquote there Bonjoy?
-
YES completely, it is a massive weak side of my climbing and one that i can't fathom how to sort out. Getting out more would help but it currently isn't really an option.
I think that's where the gadget I'm envisaging might fit in.
Not as the only way of training technique but a way to make measurable improvements in one aspect of it.
Serpico made a good point about having to measure force in more than one plane,
anyone else got anything constructive to add?
-
Pete Hurley claimed to develop his not inconsiderable finger strength by putting a load of jugs on his board at home, then traversing on them for hours at a time.
I should point out the word 'claimed' is fairly crucial in that sentence. His theory has since been rubbished by Smitton, who stripped the board of its jugs and is a beast on whatever rock type you stick him on.
-
Yeah, the works are good at setting problems with novel moves. Can't say I've done a single problme indoors that is really foot-friction limited though.
How would you know? You don't climb indoors remember.
-
Bottom line is: power impresses chicks, while technique makes you look a bit effeminate.
What they really like is trumpets and bookendsmarks?
Possible misquote there Bonjoy?
Aaaah, that must be where I was going wrong!
-
Training means doing specific activities to achieve specific goals, surely. Climbing a lot is fine, but if you really want to improve on specific techniques, there must be more effective ways of working on them. Serpico suggested practicing easier versions of the move you want to do, which is probably good enough for most things. But it is strange that this is about as far as technique training has got. All the principles of isolating muscles and movements, and building tendon strength, power and endurance could easily be applied to legs, footwork, balance etc.
I don't buy into this wishy washy technique is an artform stuff. Some people may have more of a natural aptitude, but that's the same with everything. It doesn't mean other people can't achieve similar levels of proficiency. Balance, for instance, isn't just a knack. As well as the neurological stuff, there are lots of muscles at work. Train the muscles and you'll get better. Like all those bloody yoga people who stand there serenely on one leg whilst I hop backwards and forwards just because I couldn't resist having a go.
Niks at Work's slab board was a step towards technique specific training. I'm sure people have also built mantel devices, crack panels and so on in the past. All these things mean you can isolate one type of movement, then gradually make it harder.
I built a slab panel once, but only used it for two weeks. Unfortunately although I'm sure all this training would work, I enjoy climbing too much, so like most people I'll just carry on with strengths and weaknesses similar to most people, I won't become a technical master and there won't be any problems I find stupidly easily compared to everyone else. Oh well.
Now what I really want to train is having fun. It should be a given that you have fun while climbing, but on any day at the crag there will be a significant amount of people not having fun. Annoying though they are, the American Psyche! Psyche! brigade have got the right idea. You have to be keen. If you turn up feeling pessimistic about your chances of achieving, or doubtful you will enjoy the venue, you are already losing. I have concluded that the fun muscle is located on top of the big toe. Mine bulges. Of course, it may be a bunion.
-
Annoying though they are, the American Psyche! Psyche! brigade have got the right idea. You have to be keen. If you turn up feeling pessimistic about your chances of achieving, or doubtful you will enjoy the venue, you are already losing.
Totally agree. I'm out in Canada at the mo and the atmosphere at the wall is great. Everyone seems to be willing you up everything. Took a while to get used to but I"m totally "down" with all the "Send it dude" and fist touching.
-
YES completely, it is a massive weak side of my climbing and one that i can't fathom how to sort out. Getting out more would help but it currently isn't really an option.
I think it is the only way.
IMHO there is no way to train technique specifically apart from climbing as many different problems and types of problem as you can.
-
Now what I really want to train is having fun. It should be a given that you have fun while climbing, but on any day at the crag there will be a significant amount of people not having fun. Annoying though they are, the American Psyche! Psyche! brigade have got the right idea. You have to be keen. If you turn up feeling pessimistic about your chances of achieving, or doubtful you will enjoy the venue, you are already losing. I have concluded that the fun muscle is located on top of the big toe. Mine bulges. Of course, it may be a bunion.
You are coming dangerously close to that "The best climber is the one having the most fun" cliché with that paragraph. I warn you now an instant punter point awaits anybody repeating that bollocks here.
-
I think you misread. The best climber is the one with the biggest bunion.
-
Now what I really want to train is having fun. It should be a given that you have fun while climbing, but on any day at the crag there will be a significant amount of people not having fun. Annoying though they are, the American Psyche! Psyche! brigade have got the right idea. You have to be keen. If you turn up feeling pessimistic about your chances of achieving, or doubtful you will enjoy the venue, you are already losing. I have concluded that the fun muscle is located on top of the big toe. Mine bulges. Of course, it may be a bunion.
You are coming dangerously close to that "The best climber is the one having the most fun" cliché with that paragraph. I warn you now an instant punter point awaits anybody repeating that bollocks here.
Agreed. Too much optomism has a stench of Noel Edmonds about it.
-
Un-scientific, but I've found, say, some of the more dainty Works problems to have an aspect of training technique. Unfortunately that always seems to involve falling off tiny polished smears for me. And technique makes you weak anyway ???
i'd disagree, they're usually just 'trick' problems.
That's cos you're too strong and not technical enough :P
(Okay, I am both weak and un-technical, hurrah!)
I think some of them are tricks yes (i.e. the ones that have something specific to unlock), but some of them are quite good at encouraging you to feel your body position and use the holds in the "right" way, rather than just bearing down.
There needs to be more with holds dangling off pieces of string, that's for sure ::)
-
Un-scientific, but I've found, say, some of the more dainty Works problems to have an aspect of training technique. Unfortunately that always seems to involve falling off tiny polished smears for me. And technique makes you weak anyway ???
i'd disagree, they're usually just 'trick' problems.
That's cos you're too strong and not technical enough :P
(Okay, I am both weak and un-technical, hurrah!)
I think some of them are tricks yes (i.e. the ones that have something specific to unlock), but some of them are quite good at encouraging you to feel your body position and use the holds in the "right" way, rather than just bearing down.
There needs to be more with holds dangling off pieces of string, that's for sure ::)
I don't agree because if something IS technical i will get properly shot down by it.
-
The first step to learning technique (i.e. movement rather than "techniques" e.g. kneebars, bicycle feet etc.) is probably learning to control your centre of gravity. Standard wisdom is to think about your points of contact, usually hands and feet. Your CofG is roughly in your pelvis. Johnny Brown has a handle on this, he's always thrusting at the rock like a rutting terrier. I give you the "suck your navel up" method of matching the Blind Fig sloper.
The best place I think for coming to terms with this is the School, or boards in general. I reckon its because you've lost a dimension and can see what's going on more clearly. Last night me and Bonjoy were deconstructing moves at the School into so many component parts that you'd think we were discussing aiding El Cap not doing one hand movement.
-
Couple that with your legendary article on campusing and you have the makings of a mythical underground text on the rudiments of hard cranking. A wise man indeed.
-
Get in, Ron's arrived. But hmm, what's he on about, which is the lost dimension? Time? Quality?
I can understand overhanging boards allowing you to deconstruct moves. I'm not sure I understand them helping to control your CofG. Well I can, but not in a way that's useful.
The most useful advice I can offer is to worry about the motion between the holds as being the moves, not the start and end positions.
-
control your CofG.
will you guys stop bringing me into this? i think nige has a point about boards and deconstructing movement. i think the difficult part is transferring this from a 2D articifial environment into the big wide 3D real world out there. man.
-
Manipulation of COG happen in 3D. This is sometimes more apparent on a steep board as it easier to see the body sagging away from tension. Studies have been done (biomechanics) to plot this movement, but no conclusions have been attempted. So many moves and problems have variable solutions and on top of this there are various body types, strength and weaknesses that it becomes a minefield to quantify.
I spent a while in a lab looking at the fatigue effects of a one leg squat. This took place on a force plate (in the floor) with eight camera angles. The data was then bust into a super computer and we spent ages looking for deterioration of movement. It was tres boring to say the least. It was also very hard despite the fact that the movement was very simply and also made much harder by the fact he knocked out 35 one leg squats :jaw:
-
Paul, I know, I'm joking.
You never know, JB might be strong too.
-
Gobsmacked this thread's still breathing.
-
You never know, JB might be strong too.
He's a lot stronger than he likes people to think
-
Just not on the crimp ;)
-
I think you'd be very suprised
-
nothing to see here, wrong thread
-
The only time I've seen him shut down was on crimps. In fact at the tor. So yes I would be suprised as most of the crimps on grit you can open hand
-
regarde monsieur a font sur le petit gratons
-
So yes I would be suprised as most of the crimps on grit you can open hand
now that's one of the funniest things i've ever read
-
les petit grattons avec mon weight on mon pieds monsieur.
-
This thread is a fucking disgrace.
-
& it's gratin - as in one thin slice of potato, thus,
#Bonez-vous le gratin micro?
*Oui, je suis une crimpeur radge, mangez?
#Magnifique!
-
How did I miss this thread? Have I been working or something. Far from being a disgrace Houdini - this thread is legend. It should be bookmarked and saved for all eternity. Mostly for what I'm about to say. I think Johnny is right.
There. That felt good. It's a disgrace that after all these years we don't have standard "exercises", in the same sense as campussing, for improving technique. And i mean all technique, included standing on tiny footholds and using balance (which is what I reductively like to think Johnny considers technique), to the appropriate use of core strength to get power on footholds on steep rock, which is the kind of technique you can only learn at somewhere like school, or (dare I say it) the Tor of all goodness.
Some suggestions. There are some things that I've learnt from over the years. Controlling my CoG I picked up from climbing one-handed, and hands-free on font slabs (twatty as it makes you look). I learnt a lot about steep rock and the importance of a strong back from choosing a small foothold
on steep board and pushing as hard as I can on it until my foot pops (obviously you'll need to have your hands on undercuts). Now - try the same thing but pull your hips "up and in"....
And, even more surprisingly r-man is right too. It's easy to think that technique is only something that can be learnt, barefoot, from wise monks who live in a polished temple of grit. But technique uses muscles, and these muscles need to be strong to usefully apply the skills you can learn on the rock (and indeed to learn them in the first place). So I think the first step towards learning technique should be general body conditioning. We're talking strong shoulders, calves, lower back and ankles here. I like swiss balls and wobble boards, but each to their own.
What other "technique exercises" have helped people learn to climb? Or failing that - what routes or problems have taught people lessons we all should learn?
-
Slabs.
Post #2
-
I am amazed that
a) a question of mine has provoked this much discussion &
b) how little of that discussion has anything to do with my original question.
Ian
-
b) how little of that discussion has anything to do with my original question.
I've dick-all experience in making bouldering/training facilities, but I'd imagine that to build a wall (or even a small training facility) with strain-gauges on all holds in all required planes on which force may be exerted upon them would be horrendously complicated and hideously expensive.
But then I know nothing about these things so am likely to be wrong.
-
b) how little of that discussion has anything to do with my original question.
:thumbsup:
Stu - I've thought that a wobble board would be pretty damn good for general leg / ankle / core conditioning and balance (obviously as a purely muscular etc exercise rather than a climbing specific one).
-
I've dick-all experience in making bouldering/training facilities, but I'd imagine that to build a wall (or even a small training facility) with strain-gauges on all holds in all required planes on which force may be exerted upon them would be horrendously complicated and hideously expensive.
You could well be right that that's where the whole idea will fall down. I'll let you know as soon as I work it out. Just wanted to see if peeps thought it was worth making the effort.
-
what routes or problems have taught people lessons we all should learn?
Pigswill taught me to rock over properly, demon wall roof taught me to use my feet (and legs) in better ways, and I know I've got many more lessons to come.
-
Bring on the SCIENCE.
1) I have installed a complicated system of sensors all over my skin, including those parts of my hands and feet which are used to complete boulder problems - these provide feedback to the central processing unit in my head and allow me to perform constant qualitative assessments on the amount of force being transferred to the rock via the parts of my body making that contact (indirectly through my footwear in some rare cases).
2) I also have similar sensors providing feedback from my muscles to let me know how hard they are trying relative to the amount of work they have already done and the maximum amount of work/force that they are capable of doing.
3) I have also developed a system whereby certain neurotransmitters within my central processing unit cause me to feel rewarded and sometimes satisfied (relative to the amount of effort I have put in) when I have completed boulder problems.
The three feedback systems listed above provide a crude basis for improving my technique.
Unfortunately there are a number of other activities which also trigger the neurotransmitters associated with my reward system and the interference from these is blocking the expected refinements and developments that I have previously planned for my technique. I am forced to reach the conclusion that it is the relationships between these activities and their position in the hierarchy of rewards that has the most effect on improving my technique.
I am also hoping to use the data from (3) to determine whether or not the best climber is the one having the most fun.
-
Good thread.
What some people have mentioned in passing but not specifically written about is that "technique" covers an incredibly broad range of different things - the techniques which will get you to the top of Right Eliminate are different to those required to climb Archangel, and different again from Sardine (for example). The priority when sport climbing is often the conservation of energy, for which the strain-gauged board might be helpful, but what if climbing in the way that loads the hands least slows you down too much?
Control of your CoG is something which is common to pretty much all climbing I can think of, but again there are many different things you want to achieve, such as maintaining balance on poor footholds on a slab, on vertical rock leaning out to make your feet stick, setting yourself to the side of sidepulls, minimising hand loading and (most obviously when bouldering) setting up a deadpoint with momentum in the hips. All very different, and tricky to train in one way. I think the emphasis on strength training is understandable, given how diverse "technique training" would be whilst most climbing involves pulling down.
It might be easier to train the enablers for some aspects of good technique. A much neglected area which I would certainly benefit from is having stronger, more flexible hips to make better use of poor footholds in awkward positions (any advice useful). Other obvious enablers are a strong core and legs, and the accurate foot placement, all of which could be trained on a standard wall or board.
-
Good thread.
Why thankyou. I'm happy to take the credit, even if that isn't what you intended.