UKBouldering.com
the shizzle => diet, training and injuries => Topic started by: shark on August 22, 2016, 09:29:21 pm
-
Tom Randall is kindly writing a series of training articles which I will add to this thread as they get published
First one is: I'm failing on my route! What is happening? (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-5dt8vvd2XfNGdfMkNyYklLUzg/view?usp=sharing)
-
Climb faster :p
-
Can you not change that to "Twop" ?
All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. Looking at you, here, Dense.
-
Part two: So what does Jane do? What are her options? (https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B-5dt8vvd2XfUkdvcl9YdDRtbWs/view?usp=sharing)
-
That sounds rather like a caption from a photo story in a 80's teen magazine.
-
That sounds rather like a caption from a photo story in a 80's teen magazine.
(https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/39/90/51/399051ce6dd5c317d567c513bcfe9256.jpg)
-
One of my pals at University was roped in to be in one of those photo stories (not Jackie). He earned endless mileage out of it...
-
Shark,
can you email/text/alert me when Tommy publishes the "one secret rule to getting stronger, fitter and lighter without trying" tip?
thanks
-
Shark,
can you email/text/alert me when Tommy publishes the "one secret rule to getting stronger, fitter and lighter without trying" tip?
thanks
Tommy is putting together a paper for this even as we speak. The working title is: "The Unified Field Theory"
-
Shark,
can you email/text/alert me when Tommy publishes the "one secret rule to getting stronger, fitter and lighter without trying" tip?
thanks
Tommy is putting together a paper for this even as we speak. The working title is: "The Unified Field Theory"
is an early draft?
(http://[img]http://jugglemum.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/The-Perfect-Couple.jpg)[/img]
-
Interesting articles. I find the Usain Bolt analogy misleading though. Running has little to do with 'strength' (I am sure all professional sprinters can leg press roughly similar). The ability to run very quickly is dependant on other variables. Medium or long distance running is therefore highly dependant on energy system conditioning and responds little to the 'get stronger' approach. The only professional competitive sport I can think of that has similar profiles to climbing would be something like worlds strongest man, where for instance guys with a measurable 1RM in deadlift attempt to crank out as many reps as they can deadlifting a car, which is a measurable % of their 1RM.
The interesting question for Tommy's approach would be:
Do these guys train for these events by increasing their 1RM or by training their 'energy systems' by higher rep sets conditioning work??
Also do the guys with the highest 1RM regularly beat the guys with a lesser 1RM in these 'max reps' tests (which is what Tommy's lattice test does as I understand it).
(As an aside I am surprised the lattice board isn't variable angle so you could set the individual moves of the lattice circuit at a certain grade to eliminate the strength factor by making them a fixed % of the climbers 1RM bouldering grade. Thus truly evaluating energy system efficiency)
-
Could someone stick these on the Wiki or is there an alternative link to Google drive? Can't seem to get it to work. Cheers
-
I saw the first on the Lattice Training FB page before it was added here, you could check there.
-
Could someone stick these on the Wiki or is there an alternative link to Google drive? Can't seem to get it to work. Cheers
Just added them to google docs temporarily until Toby gets back then he will embed them on UKB somehow as he did for previous training PDF docs
-
One Simple Trick To Climb 8B? You Won't Believe It!
-
Misleading. I 'd like a refund please. Bitterly disappointed that 'Lattice Training' does nothing to prepare for elite level pie consumption, despite its name.
(https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=lattice+pie+eating&rlz=1C9BKJA_enGB590GB590&hl=en-GB&prmd=visn&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwj9oLO0-9nOAhWlA8AKHeNlAJgQ_AUICCgC&biw=1024&bih=653#imgrc=kXa570ts1Ji2bM%3A)
-
does nothing to prepare for elite level pie consumption.
Pie? I thought it was Waffle.
-
Could someone stick these on the Wiki or is there an alternative link to Google drive? Can't seem to get it to work. Cheers
I can summarise: Your aerobic energy system is pathetic and you need to climb more easy routes.
£100 next time you see me.
-
I find the Usain Bolt analogy misleading though. Running has little to do with 'strength' (I am sure all professional sprinters can leg press roughly similar).
Sorry Marc but your post is completely out of place. The analogy just helps in comprehending that it's impossible to sustain a 100% max effort for a long time.
Also, sprinting has lots to do with strength, it only depends on which type of strength you refer to.
Edited because of misreading.
-
I agree. What we need is a proper, objectively quantifiable training resource.
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-t6GJv7dCqtI/TlbyumT7oUI/AAAAAAAABYU/EtKfK9lE5gQ/s1600/2011_07_14_0793.JPG)
-
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160824/23574554c8ec493f77dbda2fd5da3b6b.jpg)
I love Tapatalk's algorithms for selecting advertising...
All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. Looking at you, here, Dense.
-
To Nibile: 'your post is completely out of place' What? i'll ignore that condescending comment.
of course I get the point of the analogy, and it works on that level, my point was a little more subtle. Climbers refer to 'strength' usually as pure static 'grunt'. ie how much added weight can you dead hang an edge. Any speed element, plyometric ability etc is referred to as 'power'. I only meant to make the observation that in sprinting I don't suppose this type of static strength is particularly correlative with performance.
(I am a big fan by the way!!!)
-
Sorry Marc, but do you think I can read your mind? Where in your first post did you explain that subtlety as per your second post?
You just referred to strength, and I pointed out that sprinting has lots to do with it, depending on which kind of strength you mean. As you see, I was close to reading your mind. Power is based on strength and speed.
In my opinion you're still putting too much into the analogy. It's not a training analogy, or even a functional analogy, it's not even sprint specific: it just means that it's impossible to sustain a max effort for long. Nothing more. He could have said that it's impossible to yell at max volume all day long, or to fuck at max intensity all night, or to eat at max capacity all day, if you get what I mean.
There's no specific reference to training power, or speed or strength, and the likes. Your considerations are not related to the original meaning of the analogy, that is very very simple: max intensity, minimal time. It's just how energy systems work.
Then, another thing is your question: how one could best apply the different kinds of strength to an optimal climbing training. That's a legitimate and interesting question, but one that goes far beyond Tommy's example.
And with regards to your question, you seem to proceed by taking things for granted while in fact they are not. You imply that all professional sprinters leg press the same, you imply that climbers refer to "strength" as static fingers strength, then you draw your conclusions, but your premises are just personal assumptions. In this way, the discussion becomes very difficult, because your premises could be different from mine and both could be absolutely not proven.
Anyway, maybe split into another topic?
-
Fair enough mate! My post was a bit brief and presumptive! your points are well made. Btw had a play on the Foundry lattice board today and its bloody ace. These boys have thought this shit thru!!!
-
Absolutely! They do apply their knowledge on rock pretty well!
;D
-
Fair enough mate! My post was a bit brief and presumptive! your points are well made. Btw had a play on the Foundry lattice board today and its bloody ace. These boys have thought this shit thru!!!
Sorry to hijack this thread. But could someone explain why the lattice board is designed the way it is? (other than to give the brand its name)
Is the aim just to get you pumped?
-
Tom's original board was made out of criss-crossing banister rails so I guess that's were it came from. There's a set way of going around it following numbered holds and you just keep going until failure. I don't think I've ever been more pumped than I was on that board at my assessment.
-
So it wasn't named after a pie then?
I feel robbed.
-
Maybe it was, maybe I'm making 2+2=5?
Big question though, if the Lattice board was a pie, what flavour would it be?
-
Maybe it was, maybe I'm making 2+2=5?
Big question though, if the Lattice board was a pie, what flavour would it be?
Nothing tastes as good as success...
-
Big question though, if the Lattice board was a pie, what flavour would it be?
Clear winner. (http://www.googlefight.com/pork-vs-cherry.php)
-
Big question though, if the Lattice board was a pie, what flavour would it be?
Sorry typo
-
Big question though, if the Lattice board was a pie, what flavour would it be?
Pump-kin pie surely??
-
Sorry to hijack this thread. But could someone explain why the lattice board is designed the way it is? (other than to give the brand its name)
Is the aim just to get you pumped?
[/quote]
I came up with the concept quite a few years back when I was coaching with the GB Team as essentially I was frustrated with not having a method for assessing whether training plans were effective or not. It seemed to be hard to eliminate the factors of confidence, technique, route reading, footwork, reach, style of holds etc. I did know of things like "foot-on campus" but I wanted something that was as close as possible to real climbing (hand and foot moves) but dealt with the above factors as described.
The Lattice Board was my best effort at trying to get these factors down to a minimal influence and therefore I could start a process of analysis of physical performance. All holds are all exactly the same size and because of the diagonal nature of the layout, it climbs quite naturally and is reasonably independent of reach (exceptions always possible!).
If you're near Sheffield or Loughborough, they've got a board you can try for the price of wall entry. I won't bang on it about it too much - just go and have a go and see what you think :-)
-
Where in sheffield is the board Tom apart from your cellar ? and what exercises am I meant to do on it is there any benchmarks ?
-
Where in sheffield is the board Tom apart from your cellar ? and what exercises am I meant to do on it is there any benchmarks ?
There's one at the foundry.
Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk
-
At the risk of asking a stupid question, what is the point of a climbing wall having a lattice board? I mean this sincerely, because as Tommy says it is an assessment tool (the merits of which are neither here nor there for my silly question), so are people supposed to train and periodically use it to assess their progress, which seems a pretty niche and expensive use of a climbing walls space
or is it suppose to transform into a training tool but surely all that will happen is that people will get good at doing the one movement involved in navigating this wooden board and not developing the range of skills that might be acquired by actually climbing?
-
The one at Loughborough is at 10deg - I really don't get how you can compare that with the steeper ones, even with some fancy algorithm. I've read the explanation but it still makes no sense to me. It's meant to be geared for 6a+ climbers upwards and the temptation with it being in a climbing center, would be to hop on it every time you go, even if it was just for a warm down and get good at it. Which misses the point. The assessment report from the Lattice team is pretty thorough but you're not going to get that without paying for a session on it.
I got a little bit addicted to foot on campussing and got pretty good at it but it didn't help my climbing in the slightest. Just gave me blood blisters on my pinkies.
:slap:
-
At the risk of asking a stupid question, what is the point of a climbing wall having a lattice board?
Bandwagon effect?
-
I think it will be a good for training AeroCap but suggest that any walls have a rota system on a blackboard or some sort of pool table etiquette to book (20 min?) slots for assessments and individuals during the evenings
-
AeroCap? You must be fit!
Good call on the blackboard/timeslots though. Be very hard for more than one person to work out on it at a time without one or both being frustrated.
At the risk of asking a stupid question, what is the point of a climbing wall having a lattice board?
Just another tool like having a campus board. If you want to blow your forearms to bits it's an effective way without the need for a partner. Perfect for the Foundry where the circuits are a bit sub standard (and hard).
-
AeroCap? You must be fit!
Thought it would be perfect for 2o/10s
Maybe not.
Good call on the blackboard/timeslots though. Be very hard for more than one person to work out on it at a time without one or both being frustrated.
Winner stays on.
-
AeroCap? You must be fit!
Thought it would be perfect for 2o/10s
Maybe not.
Good call on the blackboard/timeslots though. Be very hard for more than one person to work out on it at a time without one or both being frustrated.
Winner stays on.
True HI possible, not 10 minute laps though
AeroCap? You must be fit!
Thought it would be perfect for 2o/10s
Maybe not.
Good call on the blackboard/timeslots though. Be very hard for more than one person to work out on it at a time without one or both being frustrated.
Winner stays on.
True
Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk
-
At the risk of asking a stupid question, what is the point of a climbing wall having a lattice board?
Bandwagon effect?
Wagonwheel factor?
-
I think the major thing that the l'board and the campus board share are the fact 99% of people would be better off using the climbing wall rather than the training tool. Plus I think the campus board really just gets you good on a campus board after a point and I think that will be much more marked with this contraption.
Also is Tommy not introducing a massive confounded into his amassed training data (again the quality of which is not relevant to the question) because now he is going to have people how are actually training on his assessment tool and will have massive abilities on it, far more than people who can climb well.
-
So your concern is Random Climber A will associate a lattice score of 100 (as an example) and link that with being able to achieve a set grade whilst not taking account of all of the other things required to be a good climber?
Much like I (and others) did watching Ben and Jerry climb on steep boards, ignoring their history?
-
I am not sure I would phrase it like that but I suppose I can't understand the logic in making it available in climbing walls (other than making money), I am not being wilfully obtuse, my initial question: is this an assessment thing or a training thing is sincere because….
it is designed as an assessment tool as it fairly basic and non height dependent and reasonably technique-less, ok sort of makes sense, it creates a fairly even playing field for people the first couple of times they use it.
But once it becomes a training tool/available on demand which some can access regularly you can learn how to do it more efficiently (just as people get good at campus boarding (even thought it is fair more basic than using the l'board) without getting any stronger) and you learn the tricks.
So, it loses it's use a tool for assessment/comparison as you have some people with access to it so learn it and others who do not (or don't see the point in it) won't but may train just as hard but won't score as high on the l'board so comparison is invalid and any data gathered before people could practice becomes meaningless.
I think as a training tool it will be fairly limited because, as the creator says, it is just one move so (in my opinion) you don't get the variety which is required to climb well and as you get good at the move the efficacy of it as a training tool will plummet.
Ok if you have unlimited time it might be useful to supplement other training (but this still scuppers it's use as an assessment tool) but most people are time limited and I can't see this being method being superior than lapping boulder problems or climbing a lot of routes.
-
I think Tommy trains on his.
One significant advantage over a circuit boards would be skin. For me this is a real problem training aerobically - my skin just can't take the volume.
-
I think these are good points. Raises the thought of what a tool would look like, that took a truly objective measure of climbing-specific 'energy systems'. Some sort of small force measurement device that could be strapped to fingers to measure repeated contractile strength on a fixed on/off repetition against a predetermined percentage of client's body-weight over time, at, say, 4 different joint angles. Able to be used sitting down with no other involvement of the arms/body, to eliminate 'technique' noise.
Combined with resting heart rate, VO2 max, other general CV parameters.
Get to it boffins.
-
I think Tommy trains on his.
At my assessment Ollie told me Tommy on his original board which is a bit steeper than the ones in walls, 35ish degrees at a guess.
One significant advantage over a circuit boards would be skin. For me this is a real problem training aerobically - my skin just can't take the volume.
Yep really skin friendly and non cruxy, I don't see what the problem is. Every circuit I've ever tried has a move that becomes my failure point on 8/10 reps (yes even If I start in a different place). This will hopefully eliminate that issue.
You're not using it to learn to climb well, you're using it to get pumped and for that it's perfect*, an advanced form of foot on campussing.
*Obviously use in moderation at certain points of a training cycle and with a greater volume of other training completed doing actual rock climbing.
-
I am not sure I would phrase it like that but I suppose I can't understand the logic in making it available in climbing walls (other than making money), I am not being wilfully obtuse, my initial question: is this an assessment thing or a training thing is sincere because….
it is designed as an assessment tool as it fairly basic and non height dependent and reasonably technique-less, ok sort of makes sense, it creates a fairly even playing field for people the first couple of times they use it.
But once it becomes a training tool/available on demand which some can access regularly you can learn how to do it more efficiently (just as people get good at campus boarding (even thought it is fair more basic than using the l'board) without getting any stronger) and you learn the tricks.
So, it loses it's use a tool for assessment/comparison as you have some people with access to it so learn it and others who do not (or don't see the point in it) won't but may train just as hard but won't score as high on the l'board so comparison is invalid and any data gathered before people could practice becomes meaningless.
I think as a training tool it will be fairly limited because, as the creator says, it is just one move so (in my opinion) you don't get the variety which is required to climb well and as you get good at the move the efficacy of it as a training tool will plummet.
Ok if you have unlimited time it might be useful to supplement other training (but this still scuppers it's use as an assessment tool) but most people are time limited and I can't see this being method being superior than lapping boulder problems or climbing a lot of routes.
I work at the Foundry, which now has a lattice board and am under the impression that we got it because Tommy wanted to outsource his assessments. A couple staff members have been trained to carry out the assessments. So we get some money and Tommy get's some more clients (hopefully) and even more exposure. I also have little doubt that some people will come in to have a play around on it because it's new and interesting.
I think it's use as a training tool is little different to foot-on-campussing. It's continuous pretty easy moves and doesn't really have a crux, so you can easily measure/force improvement by increasing the work-rest ratio. Other than that, there are few options to increase the difficulty incrementally and that is quite limiting for many types of session IMO. For example, I think a typical aeropow sesh (sets of ~30 move circuits) would soon lose its training stimulus for many people on the 27 deg board we have at the Foundry. Though if Tommy uses it, then maybe I'm wrong!
It's perhaps a bit more skin friendly than FoC, but you're still pulling on the same hold repeatedly, often nestling your pinky into the V, and probably far more skin friendly than most circuits.
I'm not sure if training on it would reduce it's use as an assessment tool. I don't agree that you could improve much just by becoming more efficient; the circuit is really simple - I went round it once or twice in full and once in two halves to learn it before doing the test to failure, and that felt like enough. But, I suspect you will adapt to the pace and hold type etc on the board, and that could artificially improve your score.
-
I work at the Foundry, which now has a lattice board and am under the impression that we got it because Tommy wanted to outsource his assessments. A couple staff members have been trained to carry out the assessments. So we get some money and Tommy get's some more clients (hopefully) and even more exposure. I also have little doubt that some people will come in to have a play around on it because it's new and interesting.
I think it's use as a training tool is little different to foot-on-campussing. It's continuous pretty easy moves and doesn't really have a crux, so you can easily measure/force improvement by increasing the work-rest ratio. Other than that, there are few options to increase the difficulty incrementally and that is quite limiting for many types of session IMO. For example, I think a typical aeropow sesh (sets of ~30 move circuits) would soon lose its training stimulus for many people on the 27 deg board we have at the Foundry. Though if Tommy uses it, then maybe I'm wrong!
It's perhaps a bit more skin friendly than FoC, but you're still pulling on the same hold repeatedly, often nestling your pinky into the V, and probably far more skin friendly than most circuits.
I'm not sure if training on it would reduce it's use as an assessment tool. I don't agree that you could improve much just by becoming more efficient; the circuit is really simple - I went round it once or twice in full and once in two halves to learn it before doing the test to failure, and that felt like enough. But, I suspect you will adapt to the pace and hold type etc on the board, and that could artificially improve your score.
Ah cool, that is all I wanted to know (i.e. what was the point).
On the learnt movement thing i disagree, but it doesn't matter at the end of the day.
-
The main problem with the thing I imagine is that for 95% of climbers in this country, the things that hold people back are all the Dave Mac stuff - fear of falling, being shit at movement, not trying very hard, not going climbing enough etc. training on a lattice board/training which is too preoccupied with the physical, will mean that these more important things are neglected. I climbed on Monday with a friend who said 'take' whilst in a rest, nearly at the top of his current redpoint project. He then declared he needed to work on endurance. What he actually needed to do was grow a pair and give himself a chance of getting up the thing. Reminded me of climbing with Shark.
-
The main problem with the thing I imagine is that for 95% of climbers in this country, the things that hold people back are all the Dave Mac stuff - fear of falling, being shit at movement, not trying very hard, not going climbing enough etc. training on a lattice board/training which is too preoccupied with the physical, will mean that these more important things are neglected. I climbed on Monday with a friend who said 'take' whilst in a rest, nearly at the top of his current redpoint project. He then declared he needed to work on endurance. What he actually needed to do was grow a pair and give himself a chance of getting up the thing. Reminded me of climbing with Shark.
In a stunning upset to form, I could not agree more.
-
The main problem with the thing I imagine is that for 95% of climbers in this country, the things that hold people back are all the Dave Mac stuff - fear of falling, being shit at movement, not trying very hard, not going climbing enough etc. not moving house so you can build a large training board in your garage...
Fixed that
-
That too. Doesn't need to be large for aerocrap. I aerocrap on a 45degree 8x8 board with big jugs on. Boring as hell but works.
-
Humble flavour...
-
The main problem with the thing I imagine is that for 95% of climbers in this country, the things that hold people back are all the Dave Mac stuff - fear of falling, being shit at movement, not trying very hard, not going climbing enough etc. training on a lattice board/training which is too preoccupied with the physical, will mean that these more important things are neglected.
I don't disagree but don't think it's an important factor in putting one up or not. The v8-9 circuit at the wall won't be useful for ≥95% of climbers either. Ditto a campus board, steep woodie or moonboard.
If you've got some space and some people think they would benefit, them I say it's a good idea. Climbing wall training facilities should be as varied and flexible as possible without compromising the actual climbing wall.
-
The main problem with the thing I imagine is that for 95% of climbers in this country, the things that hold people back are all the Dave Mac stuff - fear of falling, being shit at movement, not trying very hard, not going climbing enough etc. training on a lattice board/training which is too preoccupied with the physical, will mean that these more important things are neglected.
If you've got some space and some people think they would benefit, them I say it's a good idea. Climbing wall training facilities should be as varied and flexible as possible without compromising the actual climbing wall.
Take Loughborough - two circuit boards, a 10deg and the steeper one. The lattice board has replaced half of the 10deg one and whilst it's true that it's aimed at 6a+ climbers and upwards, surely having the 10deg circuit board would benefit them/me more?
-
Loughborough's Tom's wall (at least partly) isn't it...
How much use did the 10 degree get?
Kind of agree with you but (and maybe this is why nobody should listen to my training advice) I'd suggest a 6a+ climber boulder to get stronger and do loads of route mileage to improve movement, rather than circuits.
And of course get a new job and move closer to rocks, etc.
-
Ah cool, that is all I wanted to know (i.e. what was the point).
On the learnt movement thing i disagree, but it doesn't matter at the end of the day.
I completely agree Tim - you will get an effect of learning on the board and more and more time on it will increase the economy of movement. I think all of us who've climbed for long enough know that this is one of our best weapons to use when approaching a hard project.... although it's a bit of sliding scale as some people take a very long time to properly learn things!
I'm not overly concerned at present (although we'll keep checking data) on the above effect altering the data hugely, mainly because you have to spend a considerable amount of time on the board and be almost obsessive about it to start making big differences. These people will be relatively few in number compared to the total number in the data set and also (I suspect) less likely to be the ones who will pay for full assessments and therefore cause their scores to affect the data.
We've agreed to put a board in the two TCA walls, so if you're near either of them then go and have a go... you might be a bit strong for it though eh? ;D
-
The main problem with the thing I imagine is that for 95% of climbers in this country, the things that hold people back are all the Dave Mac stuff - fear of falling, being shit at movement, not trying very hard, not going climbing enough etc. training on a lattice board/training which is too preoccupied with the physical, will mean that these more important things are neglected. I climbed on Monday with a friend who said 'take' whilst in a rest, nearly at the top of his current redpoint project. He then declared he needed to work on endurance. What he actually needed to do was grow a pair and give himself a chance of getting up the thing. Reminded me of climbing with Shark.
This is spot on. I'm not sure what's going on this year but I seem completely comfortable to be lobbing off things (skipping QDs, extending things a long way etc.) left right and centre (how do I make sure this remains?) and it makes such a difference. I've watched a number of people at Kilnsey this year who are all capable of easily waltzing up their project but shout take, often linked to a prior "bad experience" falling off something.
-
The main problem with the thing I imagine is that for 95% of climbers in this country, the things that hold people back are all the Dave Mac stuff - fear of falling, being shit at movement, not trying very hard, not going climbing enough etc. training on a lattice board/training which is too preoccupied with the physical, will mean that these more important things are neglected. I climbed on Monday with a friend who said 'take' whilst in a rest, nearly at the top of his current redpoint project. He then declared he needed to work on endurance. What he actually needed to do was grow a pair and give himself a chance of getting up the thing. Reminded me of climbing with Shark.
This is spot on. I'm not sure what's going on this year but I seem completely comfortable to be lobbing off things (skipping QDs, extending things a long way etc.) left right and centre (how do I make sure this remains?) and it makes such a difference. I've watched a number of people at Kilnsey this year who are all capable of easily waltzing up their project but shout take, often linked to a prior "bad experience" falling off something.
I think belayer trust (or lack thereof) is a large factor in this.
As with most things in climbing maintaining volume will stop the fear creeping back. That said even if you take a long break you wont entirely loose the benefit of current confidence, you'll just have to go through a relatively short relearn at the start of the next season.
More on topic. After years of not doing any structured training and doing lots of climbing on rock I've decided I'm one of those climbers who'd get a real boost from doing the sort of training that isolates movement and have just built a training board in my garden. Like Tommy's board it's kind of a new design and could also be used a measuring tool.
-
Ah cool, that is all I wanted to know (i.e. what was the point).
On the learnt movement thing i disagree, but it doesn't matter at the end of the day.
I completely agree Tim - you will get an effect of learning on the board and more and more time on it will increase the economy of movement. I think all of us who've climbed for long enough know that this is one of our best weapons to use when approaching a hard project.... although it's a bit of sliding scale as some people take a very long time to properly learn things!
I'm not overly concerned at present (although we'll keep checking data) on the above effect altering the data hugely, mainly because you have to spend a considerable amount of time on the board and be almost obsessive about it to start making big differences. These people will be relatively few in number compared to the total number in the data set and also (I suspect) less likely to be the ones who will pay for full assessments and therefore cause their scores to affect the data.
We've agreed to put a board in the two TCA walls, so if you're near either of them then go and have a go... you might be a bit strong for it though eh? ;D
thanks for the reply, i don't really know much about this sort of thing, if you think the movement thing won't make a difference I am sure you are right. to be honest it is something I would be highly unlikely to use, as I don't use the campus board much (I think campus-ing problems is much better training) as I find I plateau extremely quickly and get injured in the process of trying to improve doing highly repetitive movements of that sort.
Just to ask one more silly question, if you were to train someone would this the use of this board be a key part of the training I.e. Something that would be done every session? Assuming you were trying to get someone fit obvs
-
I think belayer trust (or lack thereof) is a large factor in this.
As with most things in climbing maintaining volume will stop the fear creeping back. That said even if you take a long break you wont entirely loose the benefit of current confidence, you'll just have to go through a relatively short relearn at the start of the next season.
Interesting. I think 3 years ago, falling on gear a fair amount and even aiding on what appears to be relatively poor placements really improves your confidence in what gear can really do. Therefore, a massive 12mm bolt might as well be welded to the earth's core. I'm definitely one that could easily fall into the 'strong' and scared category in the past and as Three Nine has pointed out a LOT of people are the same.
Sorry less :offtopic: I've got some redpointing questions attached to the above that possibly warrant their own thread.
-
I think belayer trust (or lack thereof) is a large factor in this.
As with most things in climbing maintaining volume will stop the fear creeping back. That said even if you take a long break you wont entirely loose the benefit of current confidence, you'll just have to go through a relatively short relearn at the start of the next season.
Interesting. I think 3 years ago, falling on gear a fair amount and even aiding on what appears to be relatively poor placements really improves your confidence in what gear can really do. Therefore, a massive 12mm bolt might as well be welded to the earth's core.
It does help that you are light.. ;). The same lobs wearing a 40kg backpack might be interesting :)
(I'm being facetious.. Sorry).
-
I climbed on Monday with a friend who said 'take' whilst in a rest, nearly at the top of his current redpoint project. He then declared he needed to work on endurance. What he actually needed to do was grow a pair and give himself a chance of getting up the thing.
Reminds me of watching Lee Proctor trying his life goal , the FA of Grand Canyon extension. His dream route at his local crag. A 3 star first ascent which would have been the highlight of his climbing life. You would have thought with all this in mind he would have been balls out on the last moves, trying as hard as he could until he was literally off the wall but it was the opposite when I saw him. Minimal effort, minimal fight and commitment. I guess it's quite common. Incomprehensible to me.
-
For some it might feel better to fail not trying than to fail trying hard. At least then you can say I didn't really try. Some people don't even set out based on this I'm sure.
-
I climbed on Monday with a friend who said 'take' whilst in a rest, nearly at the top of his current redpoint project. He then declared he needed to work on endurance. What he actually needed to do was grow a pair and give himself a chance of getting up the thing.
Reminds me of watching Lee Proctor trying his life goal , the FA of Grand Canyon extension. His dream route at his local crag. A 3 star first ascent which would have been the highlight of his climbing life. You would have thought with all this in mind he would have been balls out on the last moves, trying as hard as he could until he was literally off the wall but it was the opposite when I saw him. Minimal effort, minimal fight and commitment. I guess it's quite common. Incomprehensible to me.
He did the FA though didn't he...! :worms: :alky:
(https://s12.postimg.org/kok6k52kd/14191359_10154513821747156_1632551180_o.jpg)
-
He did the FA though didn't he...! :worms: :alky:
(https://s12.postimg.org/kok6k52kd/14191359_10154513821747156_1632551180_o.jpg)
Must stand for '1 Protracted Travail'.
-
My small version of Tommy's board. Boredom and suffering and mind tricks taken to another level. Just pure physical improvements will take you further.
https://youtu.be/B4-VFw-OcJI
-
More on topic. After years of not doing any structured training and doing lots of climbing on rock I've decided I'm one of those climbers who'd get a real boost from doing the sort of training that isolates movement and have just built a training board in my garden. Like Tommy's board it's kind of a new design and could also be used a measuring tool.
I would be interested to see what your board looks like Jon
-
All the holds made from sawn-up wooden rulers?
-
All the holds made from sawn-up wooden rulers?
Pah!
Old Bic razors.
All posts either sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek or mildly mocking-in-a-friendly-way unless otherwise stated. Looking at you, here, Dense.