UKBouldering.com
the shizzle => diet, training and injuries => Topic started by: shark on May 10, 2021, 10:48:32 am
-
http://steve-mcclure.com/articles/154-how-to-improve-by-doing-no-training
Kickback against excessive focus on physical strength training
-
http://steve-mcclure.com/articles/154-how-to-improve-by-doing-no-training
Kickback against excessive focus on physical strength training (for old people)
Funny - I read it as "as you get older strength training has more limited returns - hence spend more time working on technique and other 'tricks'".
Personally, my second block of board and one arm training (Jan > April) has led to another jump in my climbing. The board in particular is continually improving my body position, footwork, dynamic movement and accuracy.
-
Conclusion: if you've already got to where you are by relying very much on cunning / knacks / tactics / technique / faff / etc etc to compensate for a lack of strength, as you get older you're probably fucked :-\
-
Two years back, I spent three months in a normal gym rather than the climbing centre before heading to Switzerland as normal for a month in the summer. Came back having ticked my hardest grade second go and feeling much more confident on things far above my pay grade.
52 and still silly weak. I had previously put in 1000s and 1000s of metres on Swiss granite tho.
Studies like that always seem dependant on too many different factors to be useful.
*fiend is right
-
n=1 but for me, bouldering performance has correlated almost precisely with max hangs over the last couple of years, such that from f7A+ to f7C+, a 10% increase in bodyweight hung has equalled 1 grade.
-
My view after 35 years of doing this and very recently climbing at a similar level to my best in the past, is the most important performance factor is confidence. You cannot train confidence, though you can help build it by being stronger. But the problem arises when performance then doesn’t match the increase in strength, and confidence is undermined. To build genuine confidence, you need to build a pyramid of success and that requires time on rock, getting up things. More true on trad than sport/bouldering, but still more important on the latter than absolute strength/power/endurance.
-
All I've done is climb outside in the last 7 months and do rehab for longstanding issues, gotta say I think time on rock trumps all. The amount you can learn is so much more important than anything else for meand if you pick right you can keep getting stronger.
Note I probably did trained too much for a long time before this long block outside, but I don't feel I've got weaker only stronger from outdoors, the only thing I feel I'm losing really is a little explosive power maybe
-
My view after 35 years of doing this and very recently climbing at a similar level to my best in the past, is the most important performance factor is confidence. You cannot train confidence, though you can help build it by being stronger. But the problem arises when performance then doesn’t match the increase in strength, and confidence is undermined. To build genuine confidence, you need to build a pyramid of success and that requires time on rock, getting up things. More true on trad than sport/bouldering, but still more important on the latter than absolute strength/power/endurance.
100% this.
All I've done is climb outside in the last 7 months and do rehab for longstanding issues, gotta say I think time on rock trumps all. The amount you can learn is so much more important than anything else for meand if you pick right you can keep getting stronger.
I agree with this too, but it relies a lot on a few factors;
- having the time to get out at least 4 times a week
- picking your battles well (you seem to have done this really well lately Dan); pick badly and my experience is that, as TB says, your well of confidence can quickly run dry
- being able to climb on rock types that support strength and power improvements (spend all your time on grit and you will get better, but weaker for sure)
-
Bear in mind that DMacs blog is about "the older climber" :)
-
My view after 35 years of doing this and very recently climbing at a similar level to my best in the past, is the most important performance factor is confidence. You cannot train confidence, though you can help build it by being stronger. But the problem arises when performance then doesn’t match the increase in strength, and confidence is undermined. To build genuine confidence, you need to build a pyramid of success and that requires time on rock, getting up things. More true on trad than sport/bouldering, but still more important on the latter than absolute strength/power/endurance.
While I agree that confidence is certainly very important I do think you can train it in a sense, or at least make conscious choices to do stuff that'll improve your confidence. For example, at the start of a trip I'll often spend the first day or two getting a couple of quick ticks in at a grade or two below my max just to get in that mindset of getting stuff done, remembering what it's like to move well over rock etc. That then helps fend off that redpointing trap of falling off the same move over and over again because you get used to falling off.
I guess it's just semantics about whether you call that training or not.
-
Bear in mind that DMacs blog is about "the older climber" :)
The youth always like to have an opinion 😉
-
Am I the only person reading that article and thinking that Steve did a big block of fingerboard training, went out a did a route that he had previously failed on, and then came home to write a blog trashing fingerboard training?
-
@bradders
I do have the luxary of alot more disposable time than most I still think this could be done with x3 sessions outside quite readily (appreciate not everyone has the time for this but the point of this post/article is training outside so let's assume people have that time?) just do longer sessions, Ive mostly been doing 2.5h sessions including warm ups really and 3-4 a week, if I knew I could only do 3 sessions I'd probabaly do longer sessions.
I think there's a few factors though really:
- most people go super hard on the days they go outside and fuck their skin rather than backing off or preemptively taping or pick sharp venues when they have bad skin
- I've picked choss mostly as its good training physically
- Ive definitely had as many bad sessions if not more than good ones this year, but I've tried to not go back to something more than once a week unless forced by the weather even when close as I want to make sure when going only on rock that I get a decent variety of moves in rather than just those of 1 problem
- when I do have a bad few sessions I try to go to something new and on my list that I think will suit me as many of my open projects are open because they're hard for me at the end of the day so bashing my head against them when my form drops doesn't seem ideal.
@tomtom you're right it is for the older climber, but I am 30 next year so it's approaching ;) but in more seriousness I just thought I'd comment on the outdoor for training generally, I do appreciate in an older climber there will be more variables for sure, I also think there will be many more experienced climbers than I who will probably have less to learn on rock so the gains I'm noticing are perhaps less useful to them, but who knows, learning movement on rock seems king to me now, I wish I'd stopped all the other stuff I was doing sooner really tbh, but who knows maybe I'll be weak as piss in 6 months and pyshced on training again as a result haha
-
Am I the only person reading that article and thinking that Steve did a big block of fingerboard training, went out a did a route that he had previously failed on, and then came home to write a blog trashing fingerboard training?
Train hard, plateau, rest phase, perform?
-
Yeah, weird isn’t it.
-
Am I the only person reading that article and thinking that Steve did a big block of fingerboard training, went out a did a route that he had previously failed on, and then came home to write a blog trashing fingerboard training?
Definitely! You could take the key events in this post and rearrange them into a post about how a big block of fingerboarding could be a great plateau breaker for someone who generally just climbs outside 😄
-
I've alternated in the past between
(a) thinking that people often spend far too much time focused on training and most people should just climb more, and
(b) thinking that a focused approach to training is the only reason I've ever done well on things
My current thinking is that climbing on rock most of the time, possibly with a small amount of focused top-up training, is ideal. However, you need to manipulate what you're climbing on in the same way you would manipulate training (thinking about goals, specificity, individuality etc.). To do that, you need a decent volume of the appropriate rock styles, route lengths, conditions, things-you've-not-done-before etc. Which is to say I strongly agree with this:
- being able to climb on rock types that support strength and power improvements (spend all your time on grit and you will get better, but weaker for sure)
and variations on it around fitness, style, not only lapping the same routes/problems etc. You also need to adjust for your individual needs/response (do you get weak easily or unfit easily? etc.)
Examples from my own experience:
- If you redpoint 15m routes down Chee Dale all summer then when you go to onsight 45m tufa-fests in Ramirole in September you will suck ass, no matter how dialled in to rock you are. If you're only climbing rock, you still need to do your fitness "training", just at the crag, and still need to approach preparing for goals/trips with the specificity of what you need to be good at in mind.
- Climbing grit will not make you good at steep lime sport. Nor the other way around.
- Going bouldering on rock all the time can make you the strongest you've ever been but you will suck at fitness.
- Going and onsighting 40m routes for 3 weeks will make you(me) weak as fuck. At some point (about 3-4 weeks of only doing stamina routes for me) you will even get worse at onsighting 40m routes because you(I) will be so weak.
So yeah, overall, taking a focused "training"/"improvement" mindset and applying it to the medium of rock rather than plastic/wood, in a situation where you have the time, conditions, available rock and life-flexibility to do this is the ultimate in getting good at climbing. Funny that, who would have thought it. :lol:
Obviously, most people in the UK don't have enough time, flexibility, appropriate rock close to home, quantity of new-to-them climbing close to home, and conditions to make the "perfect" formula work, so it's a question of balancing indoor training with outdoor climbing as best possible. Steve, who's basically saying what Dave Mac said in 9 out of 10 climbers, is - in my opinion - right that most people should climb more, but wrong that people will get better vis this approach irrespective of what it is they're climbing (at least for those who aren't still on the steep upwards part of an improvement curve).
Also worth noting that some people trained a lot due to lockdowns and then went and crushed. This is easier to do after 1 lockdown than 3, because you're stacking some training on a period where you climbed lots rather than a period where you didn't. All a balance.
P.s. anyone who climbs easy routes for a month then improves their hang scores is a freak and so utterly different in their response to stimulus than me that I know I can safely ignore everything they say. Individuality innit...
-
I came here looking for the panacea but was left wanting.
My view after 35 years of doing this and very recently climbing at a similar level to my best in the past, is the most important performance factor is confidence. You cannot train confidence, though you can help build it by being stronger. But the problem arises when performance then doesn’t match the increase in strength, and confidence is undermined. To build genuine confidence, you need to build a pyramid of success and that requires time on rock, getting up things. More true on trad than sport/bouldering, but still more important on the latter than absolute strength/power/endurance.
Nice sentiments Tom.
-
Should I ever start improving with no training, 90% of the fun would be gone.
-
Should I ever start improving with no training, 90% of the fun would be gone.
No training seems to involve loads of fingerboarding and then climbing your trad project the next month so I reckon you won't be running out of fun any time soon.
-
the most important performance factor is confidence... To build genuine confidence, you need to build a pyramid of success and that requires time on rock, getting up things... More true on trad than sport/bouldering
This is exactly my experience. I find it easy to be confident in pretty much everything I do in life apart from climbing and I think that might be why I love climbing so much and also why I love trad so much.
-
The very last thing that I did before I did the thing was the thing that made me do the thing.
-
My view after 35 years of doing this and very recently climbing at a similar level to my best in the past, is the most important performance factor is confidence. You cannot train confidence, though you can help build it by being stronger. But the problem arises when performance then doesn’t match the increase in strength, and confidence is undermined. To build genuine confidence, you need to build a pyramid of success and that requires time on rock, getting up things. More true on trad than sport/bouldering, but still more important on the latter than absolute strength/power/endurance.
What he said, exactly :agree:
-
Conclusion: if you've already got to where you are by relying very much on cunning / knacks / tactics / technique / faff / etc etc to compensate for a lack of strength, as you get older you're probably fucked :-\
Well that's me truly fucked :'(
-
As it happens I just picked up my philosophy of bouldering book last night for a re-read.
In the foreword John Gill writes "Gymnastic judges treasure extreme difficulty so highly they are reluctant to deduct points for lack of form - whereas half a century ago gymnasts were required to do compulsary routines, simple exercises where form and grace were paramount"
-
Jeez, proper clickbait title that. I'll nibble anyhow.
Imo it's just different for everyone, Nick you say four sessions a week outdoors are needed, I'd wager I could improve my current state drastically by doing one outdoor session a week for the next couple of months. Dan you say rock trumps all, I'd like to see one of the young comp wads improve by just climbing on rock, the load they do would be impossible to do on rock. It's simply different for everyone, no one size fits all. Just my opinion.
TB you reckon confidence is the main factor, I'd rather be as strong as Megos and down in the dumps than as weak as Doyle and feeling top of the world.
-
Even on LH Red Wall?
-
TB you reckon confidence is the main factor, I'd rather be as strong as Megos and down in the dumps than as weak as Doyle and feeling top of the world.
Yeah, I remember spending a season in Santa Linya and seeing people on everything from 7a to 9a+. It felt like fitness, confidence, fluidity on rock and the like determined whether you did your project in 5 days or 15, but raw oomf was the biggest factor in whether your project was 8a or 9a...
-
TB you reckon confidence is the main factor, I'd rather be as strong as Megos and down in the dumps than as weak as Doyle and feeling top of the world.
Yeah, I remember spending a season in Santa Linya and seeing people on everything from 7a to 9a+. It felt like fitness, confidence, fluidity on rock and the like determined whether you did your project in 5 days or 15, but raw oomf was the biggest factor in whether your project was 8a or 9a...
Conversely, if one were on North Stack Wall, you could have as much oomf as you friggin well like, but it'd still be all about how big your balls are. (Figuratively, of course, I fully appreciate that any gender can be extremely good at terrifying trad routes)
-
But, can you tell the difference between a British or Spanish 9a climber, or a male or a female 9a climber by the way that they move?
-
Jeez, proper clickbait title that. I'll nibble anyhow.
Imo it's just different for everyone, Nick you say four sessions a week outdoors are needed, I'd wager I could improve my current state drastically by doing one outdoor session a week for the next couple of months.
Yes completely agree. My underlying point was that most people just can't climb on rock that often, so really for the majority getting on rock should always be the priority.
Then once you're on rock, if you want to improve at climbing you need to bring that attitude to your rock sessions. I think one of Steve's points, which I agree with and am guilty of, is that many don't.
TB you reckon confidence is the main factor, I'd rather be as strong as Megos and down in the dumps than as weak as Doyle and feeling top of the world.
Each to their own, and I've definitely felt like this myself before, but this sounds like a pretty unhealthy attitude to have towards climbing to me. After all, it really doesn't matter whether your project is 7a, 8a or 9a. Or it shouldn't anyway. It's all a personal journey. no one wants to be as weak as Doyle.
-
But, can you tell the difference between a British or Spanish 9a climber, or a male or a female 9a climber by the way that they move?
I'm not quite sure I understand the point, but you can often tell the difference in style preference (which may be driven by where you live, but probably not nationality). E.g. back in 2010 watching Ste Mac and Tom Bolger it became apparent to me that Steve moves in a way very appropriate for vert/slightly overhung climbing based around smaller, precise movements... while Tom moves in a more flicky, aggressive and momentum-orientated way that's more suitable for steeper climbing. Not to say one has "better" movement or technique than the other - Tom's is better on certain terrains and Steve's on other terrains..
-
if one were on North Stack Wall, you could have as much oomf as you friggin well like, but it'd still be all about how big your balls are. (Figuratively, of course, I fully appreciate that any gender can be extremely good at terrifying trad routes)
No doubt. I'm pretty sure if I went tradding now for the whole summer I'd be climbing the same level as back when my hardest ever sport route was 7c and hardest boulder 7A...
-
To engage with Steve's point a little more seriously, we all know people who have relentlessly chased ever decreasing gains in a particular aspect of strength, whilst ignoring potentially bigger gains that could be had in, for example, flexibility or movement efficiency. :guilty:
Of course it's a balance. Spend all of your time on rock, or all of your time on a 20mm edge and neither approach will be optimal. Alex is right too that what you do on the rock matters. You could spend all summer outside sieging a single project and learn zero movement skills. And the balance is personal; if you've not trained your whole life you're going to get more out of a month on the fingerboard than another month on rock. And the balance is time-specific. One of my best year's climbing came after spending the summer climbing large numbers of mid-high 7s because I was going to crags my partner had projects at. The other came after spending the whole summer ignoring outdoors to train at the Foundry.
I dunno, I would have thought this stuff was obvious?
One of the ways Steve is shooting at an imaginary target is that he makes the mistake that what people post on social media is what they spend their time doing. If I had a training session that was one hour of stretching, followed by two hours of playing on boulders for movement skills, followed by a FB session in which I one-armed the Lattice Edge holding a small dog in my arms, which one do you think is going to make it onto instagram?
-
Jeez, proper clickbait title that. I'll nibble anyhow.
Imo it's just different for everyone, Nick you say four sessions a week outdoors are needed, I'd wager I could improve my current state drastically by doing one outdoor session a week for the next couple of months. Dan you say rock trumps all, I'd like to see one of the young comp wads improve by just climbing on rock, the load they do would be impossible to do on rock. It's simply different for everyone, no one size fits all. Just my opinion.
Indeed. There should be a big asterisk at the end of it with 2 pages of caveats
Does not apply if you are weakness is your weakness
Does not apply if you are a grade 9 climbing wad with a massive baseline
Does not apply if you are time or location limited with very little opportunity to actually get on rock.
etc
etc
You'd swear that an Insect Overlord was posting links to spurious claims to generate conversation.
-
Each to their own, and I've definitely felt like this myself before, but this sounds like a pretty unhealthy attitude to have towards climbing to me. After all, it really doesn't matter whether your project is 7a, 8a or 9a. Or it shouldn't anyway. It's all a personal journey. no one wants to be as weak as Doyle.
[/quote]
Ah yeah it does sound bad now I've read it from another point of view. I just meant in terms of chances of success on a climb, so I'd rather be an out of confidence Megos on an 8C boulder than a confident Doyle. I definitely wouldn't wish to be down on the dumps etc. Also I'm not sorry for using you as an example Chris!
-
You'd swear that an Insect Overlord was posting links to spurious claims to generate conversation.
:whistle:
-
You'd swear that an Insect Overlord was posting links to spurious claims to generate conversation.
:whistle:
I just wish I could comment on the 'Want to know who is best in the UK?' article.
New title needed.
-
I just wish I could comment on the 'Want to know who is best in the UK?' article.
New title needed.
Britains top crushers 🙌 🇬🇧
-
Sharkbait
-
I’m wondering how someone who has previously red pointed 9b can be said to have improved because they managed a quick red/head point of an 8a+
-
I’m wondering how someone who has previously red pointed 9b can be said to have improved because they managed a quick red/head point of an 8a+
Because grades are an irrelevance and it's all about working through things that challenge you regardless of someone else's perceived level of difficulty?
-
But given a huge volume of difficult climbing under his belt, he must have a pretty high baseline of fitness and a huge technical arsenal compared to the average 8a punter.
Same as I could go out tomorrow and do just about any route 4 or so letter grades below my hardest redpoint, even though that was over 20 years ago, and I've sport climbed once in the last 5 years.
-
The trick is in knowing, which climbs to climb...
https://youtu.be/_JTN7YnM72A
-
To be fair most of the people posting in here have probably been rock climbing for decades and relative to the global climber populace have immaculate technique. So getting stronger is the low hanging fruit.
The gym I've been climbing at this year is full of bright eyed, psyched 20 somethings who've typically been climbing for a year or two, largely indoors, and have simply shocking technique. Its common for these kids to ask me if they would be better off campusing, fingerboarding or working on their cores in their quest for improvement.
For them the low hanging fruit is basic muscle co-ordination, simple footwork, hip movements etc. They just need do a bunch of different moves a bunch of times until their bodies know how to move properly without thinking about it.
They would all be infinitely better off doing a bunch of 5.10/.11's than mucking about on a fingerboard. Some of them employ coaches who they see through zoom and who design 'personalized' training regimens for them... It's a farce really, and that seems to be what Mclure is railing against.
-
As a reminder his opening paragraph in the article is:
There is no doubt that training is required to reach your true potential as a rock climber. But we are quicly forgetting that there is more to rock climbing than pulling hard on stick screwed above the doorframe.
He then goes on to illustrate the above with examples of why the training aspect is not as overarchingly important as social media (and purveyors of training programmes) might lead you to believe and also stress that technique, tactics and time on rock are each as important to performance on rock.
In the nugget podcast he expands on this a bit with his model that the three equally important facets of performance are physical, mental and technique. Therefore by focusing on strength and achieving a 10% improvement here you might only achieve a 3.3% improvement to your overall performance and that’s assuming that your focus on strength hasn’t led to a decline in the other areas (which it might very well have done).
-
He then goes on to illustrate the above with examples of why the training aspect is not as overarchingly important as social media (and purveyors of training programmes) might lead you to believe and also stress that technique, tactics and time on rock are each as important to performance on rock.
I think the issue is that many people (understandably) take the narrow view that training == fingerboarding. I think it's much more useful to think of training as 'stuff I do to get better at climbing', which can and should include lots of time on terrain similar to the stuff you want to improve on.
-
One of the ways Steve is shooting at an imaginary target is that he makes the mistake that what people post on social media is what they spend their time doing. If I had a training session that was one hour of stretching, followed by two hours of playing on boulders for movement skills, followed by a FB session in which I one-armed the Lattice Edge holding a small dog in my arms, which one do you think is going to make it onto instagram?
I suspect it isn’t Steve who is confused as he knows what other ‘names’ get up to in terms of their on-rock/in-the-gym activity.
However, the audience who are less in the know seeing a massive bias in content featuring feats of strength from top athletes might draw poor conclusions on how to improve.
I think it’s good that Steve has stuck his head above the parapet in an attempt to redress the balance and ‘start a conversation’ as politicians say.
-
I think it's much more useful to think of training as 'stuff I do to get better at climbing', which can and should include lots of time on terrain similar to the stuff you want to improve on.
I don't think that's useful at all. In response to the fact that the best training for climbing is climbing you're just reframing training to include climbing. Where does that leave climbing? Is the only 'proper' climbing then what you do on your project?
The useful distinction to me is between praxis and practise. if you have limited opportunities to get out on rock, or have specific weaknesses you want to work, then training is useful. But doing the thing (praxis) will pretty much always trump doing an abstract reduction of the thing (practise).
-
However, the audience who are less in the know seeing a massive bias in content featuring feats of strength from top athletes might draw poor conclusions on how to improve.
I think it’s good that Steve has stuck his head above the parapet in an attempt to redress the balance and ‘start a conversation’ as politicians say.
A random glance at any particular days social media feed shows me a series of posts from the best climbers in the world. Mostly they are trying crazy moves indoors, or climbing outdoors.
There are also a series of posts from internet celebrities who climb 4-5 grades below the cutting edge performing feats of strength.
If Steve feels the need to step in to avoid impressionable youths getting the wrong idea then that’s taking a pretty dim view of people’s intelligence.
There’ll always be misguided people spending all their time and energy on getting stronger, but I’ve seen no indication that this is getting worse. If anything it’s much much less prevalent than it was in the 90’s and 00’s.
-
I think it's much more useful to think of training as 'stuff I do to get better at climbing', which can and should include lots of time on terrain similar to the stuff you want to improve on.
I don't think that's useful at all. In response to the fact that the best training for climbing is climbing you're just reframing training to include climbing. Where does that leave climbing? Is the only 'proper' climbing then what you do on your project?
The useful distinction to me is between praxis and practise. if you have limited opportunities to get out on rock, or have specific weaknesses you want to work, then training is useful. But doing the thing (praxis) will pretty much always trump doing an abstract reduction of the thing (practise).
Your distinction (and most distinctions) doesn't work either, because this is a spectrum (or a variety of spectra) not two distinct things. Timed intervals on a campus board with the goal of improving for outdoor routes is clearly "training". Trying to RP your proj is clearly "climbing". But what's running laps outdoors at the end of the day to build fitness? Or choosing to boulder outside as a strategic choice to build strength for your proj? What about if I do my timed an cap at the tor? What about if I'm a comp climber doing comp problems indoors in a non-comp setting? What about if I'm just messing around on a campus board or fingerboard for fun but with no real target of improving for "climbing"? I'd say it's pretty clear that any attempt to break these things into two distinct categories is doomed to fail miserably.
-
I think it's much more useful to think of training as 'stuff I do to get better at climbing', which can and should include lots of time on terrain similar to the stuff you want to improve on.
I don't think that's useful at all. In response to the fact that the best training for climbing is climbing you're just reframing training to include climbing. Where does that leave climbing? Is the only 'proper' climbing then what you do on your project?
The useful distinction to me is between praxis and practise. if you have limited opportunities to get out on rock, or have specific weaknesses you want to work, then training is useful. But doing the thing (praxis) will pretty much always trump doing an abstract reduction of the thing (practise).
So what would you call doing laps (with our without timed rests) on a route outdoors?
-
The useful distinction to me is between praxis and practise.
So what would you call doing laps (with our without timed rests) on a route outdoors?
Show ponying
-
fair enough
-
I suspect it isn’t Steve who is confused as he knows what other ‘names’ get up to in terms of their on-rock/in-the-gym activity.
However, the audience who are less in the know seeing a massive bias in content featuring feats of strength from top athletes might draw poor conclusions on how to improve.
I think it’s good that Steve has stuck his head above the parapet in an attempt to redress the balance and ‘start a conversation’ as politicians say.
Steve's pretty confused about his own on-rock/in-the-gym activity. Apparently by the 8th May he'd spent three months this year fingerboarding and months (plural!) since around Easter (4th April) climbing outside on rock. Where's he getting the extra month(s) from? If he wants to show you can improve without training (specifically on a fingerboard) I wouldn't use an example of doing a route using two small holds previously discounted/overlooked as unusable after having done a 3 month block of fingerboarding.
-
If Steve feels the need to step in to avoid impressionable youths getting the wrong idea then that’s taking a pretty dim view of people’s intelligence.
Not sure why you have to drag intelligence into it. If you are new to climbing and your role models all seem to be focussing on strength training it would be natural to follow suit.
As Tom J observed:
The gym I've been climbing at this year is full of bright eyed, psyched 20 somethings who've typically been climbing for a year or two, largely indoors, and have simply shocking technique. Its common for these kids to ask me if they would be better off campusing, fingerboarding or working on their cores in their quest for improvement.
-
The useful distinction to me is between praxis and practise.
So what would you call doing laps (with our without timed rests) on a route outdoors?
Show ponying
🤣
-
Your distinction (and most distinctions) doesn't work either, because this is a spectrum (or a variety of spectra) not two distinct things. Timed intervals on a campus board with the goal of improving for outdoor routes is clearly "training". YES
Trying to RP your proj is clearly "climbing". YES
But what's running laps outdoors at the end of the day to build fitness? CLIMBING
Or choosing to boulder outside as a strategic choice to build strength for your proj? CLIMBING
What about if I do my timed an cap at the tor? CLIMBING
What about if I'm a comp climber doing comp problems indoors in a non-comp setting? INDOOR CLIMBING
What about if I'm just messing around on a campus board or fingerboard for fun but with no real target of improving for "climbing"? NOT CLIMBING
-
I think the answer for the last one should be c) None of the Above :)
-
I've been climbing for about 18 months including lockdown, mostly indoors, and my technique is probably shocking, but I do think that indoor climbing does help. The timing moves, deadpointing, ability to generate power while your body is in a weird position, balance, precision of feet... that's all stuff I am improving at, is directly relevant to outdoor climbing, and came from indoor climbing. The first time I ever went outdoors I did a 6B... and before I started climbing I 100% wouldn't have fucking touched it. At all. So it must mean something.
-
All about transference.
Fingerboarding makes you better at fingerboarding - and as a side effect might help you hold smaller holes outside for longer. Etc…
-
I've had a few of the old
Steve: "I've not climbed or trained for a month"
Me: "hmm, thought I saw you at the tor last week and the foundry the week before that"
interactions in the past. I think Steve is definitely prone to using artistic licence with his lack of climbing and/or training at times.
JB: so training is only training if it's fundamentally different to the core activity. I.e. marathon runners aren't training when they go running, and road cyclists aren't training if they're on a bike. Only when they go swimming or to the gym. I certainly wouldn't use the term in that way, because I don't think it's actually instructive of, well, anything. If indoor climbing can't be training then I must have done those hour long ARC sessions for the pure joy of it. Even I've not got that high a boredom threshold :lol:
-
If indoor climbing can't be training then I must have done those hour long ARC sessions for the pure joy of it. Even I've not got that high a boredom threshold :lol:
Looking back now, would you do them again? And if not, why not?
-
Yeah, I'd do them if I could. Nowadays I just juggle and powerball my way to fitness.
-
On a unicycle for Olympic levels of core stability I hope.
-
Back to the seriousness. Surely outdoor climbing is something that you do when having a rest day from foot on campussing?
-
Back to the seriousness. Surely outdoor climbing is something that you do when having a rest day from foot on campussing?
I thought it was something you did when your other half has blocked access to your board with furniture so they can decorate.
-
I've had a few of the old
Steve: "I've not climbed or trained for a month"
Me: "hmm, thought I saw you at the tor last week and the foundry the week before that"
interactions in the past. I think Steve is definitely prone to using artistic licence with his lack of climbing and/or training at times.
Haha yes I noticed that, for example watching the video about the new 8c+ he did with Buster Martin in which he claims never to have climbed on a board, yet there are photos of him doing exactly that from very early in his career!
Generally he seems to be extremely self-deprecating, which he has acknowledged can be quite annoying just as over-confidence and an inflated sense of self-importance can be.
Lots of people are like this though, I can think of quite a few where if you asked them what training they did they'd say "not a lot", despite climbing on a board 3/4 times a week.
-
He probably used to say he never revised for exams... but had complex, colour-coded revision planners on the wall months in advance and ring-binders of indexed notes.
-
They would all be infinitely better off doing a bunch of 5.10/.11's than mucking about on a fingerboard. Some of them employ coaches who they see through zoom and who design 'personalized' training regimens for them... It's a farce really, and that seems to be what Mclure is railing against.
I can't recall where I first heard the phrase "technically dense" but it seems to apply here.
For an online coach, it's easy to copy and paste "personalised" regimes to dozens of climbers, and monitor quantified gainz. Reviewing and critiquing movement and technique less so.
-
JB: so training is only training if it's fundamentally different to the core activity. I.e. marathon runners aren't training when they go running, and road cyclists aren't training if they're on a bike. Only when they go swimming or to the gym. I certainly wouldn't use the term in that way, because I don't think it's actually instructive of, well, anything. If indoor climbing can't be training
That's not the point, and I didn't say or imply that climbing can't be training, but that it remains climbing first and foremost whether or not you treat it as training. Your comp climber for example, wouldn't you need to ask her if she is training or not? Or does the fact they compete sometimes require that all other activity be classed only as training? It doesn't matter though; either way they both are climbing. The point of Steve's article is basically the old line that climbing is the best training for climbing, and this remains true whether or not you treat it as training or just climbing. Perhaps a better way of looking at a definition would be whether an onlooker would be justified in saying 'that's not climbing'. The vast majority of punters Steve is targeting would be better doing something that resembles climbing than something that doesn't.
then I must have done those hour long ARC sessions for the pure joy of it. Even I've not got that high a boredom threshold
This is the nub of it isn't it? Anyone that has sacrificed time and energy into long boring training sessions need to believe that that time could not have been spent just as productively doing more enjoyable activity, so you're desperate to class other people's activity as training even if it isn't. I've had this loads of times - 'he doesn't train', 'bollocks, all those laps of x or y are definitely training'. They definitely weren't, I just do them because I enjoy it. Any training benefit is an unintended side effect. Of course someone could do the exact same laps as intentional training (for what, I've no idea), but that still doesn't make my laps training. They are both climbing though. Is ARC climbing? (I've genuinely no idea if it's traversing or weights or burpees or some other onanism).
But the bigger point is that Steve's article was probably not aimed at people climbing 9a despite career-ending injuries forcing them to seek out a whole new hobby. Kilnsey's gain is psychogeography's loss.
-
JB, the way I see it you've been training all these years but just can't stand to admit it to yourself. Just because you're having fun doesn't mean you're not training :lol:
-
I'd disagree. JB's activities certainly have their benefit but you can't claim any form of structure or goal (or certainly one I've ever heard him articulate)
I remember reading this from Mark Rippetoe, the context being why he lost interest in Crossfit.
Exercise and training are two different things. Exercise is physical activity for its own sake, a workout done for the effect it produces today, during the workout or right after you’re through. Training is physical activity done with a longer-term goal in mind, the constituent workouts of which are specifically designed to produce that goal. If a program of physical activity is not designed to get you stronger or faster or better conditioned by producing a specific stress to which a specific desirable adaptation can occur, you don’t get to call it training. It is just exercise. For most people, exercise is perfectly adequate – it’s certainly better than sitting on your ass.
-
I'd disagree. JB's activities certainly have their benefit but you can't claim any form of structure or goal (or certainly one I've ever heard him articulate)
Sorry, my post was a joke, not a serious point!
I agree with what you're saying though, I think training is more about the intent of improving your technique/fitness/whatever with a goal in mind than whatever form that training might take.