UKBouldering.com
the shizzle => diet, training and injuries => Topic started by: Wellsy on July 15, 2021, 10:49:33 am
-
Generally speaking there are a huge amount of resources out there for how to fix your weaknesses in climbing, either informal advice, professional training, youtube videos etc. If your fingers are weak, fingerboard. If your footwork is bad, foot drills, etc etc etc.
Part of the problem, though, is identifying your weaknesses. That's actually quite hard to do, especially when you climb harder than maybe your usual climbing partners, or usually climb alone, or are somewhat inexperienced. It's all too common to hear "I am not strong enough" from new people and we know that actually what they mean is they aren't using their strength effectively (not that they don't need to get stronger, but it's not their immediate issue), but once you get past that a bit it starts to be really hard to know where should my training focus be?
I recently hung out with a friend who has a lot more experience than me who identified that I am actually pretty poor at generating power from just my forearms with bad feet, and that while I am good at keeping my feet on, I also need to focus on generating dynamic power where I cut as sometimes that is the best way to do a mood. The solution; campus boarding and doing dynamic moves on the beastmaker board. However that's probably been a weakness of mine for a while, and I never noticed! How do you guys identify your specific weaknesses (not "I could do with better technique" that's far too broad, I mean specifically an area which is trainable in your next cycle), or in fact is that just something that's really hard to do without having an experienced from or, for the billy no mates, forking out to the lattice boys and girls or somesuch?
-
Good question.
Advice I had years ago on this, to give a ballpark idea of your weakness, was - 'why, specifically, did you fail?'
You can pigeonhole why you failed into broad categories for the purpose of identifying weakness.
I couldn't do the move(s) because I was too pumped.
I couldn't do the move(s) because I wasn't strong enough in my fingers/shoulders/biceps.
I couldn't do the move(s) because my core/tension/chain couldn't hold my foot/hip/shoulder in the most efficient position required.
I couldn't do the move(s) because I wasn't flexible enough.
I couldn't do the move(s) because I was too nervous of committing due to fear (of falling, of failure, of injury)
Those are the most common five reasons for failing on any climb/boulder. Obvs there are different reasons within the categories, for e.g. you might be 'too pumped', but the reason might not actually be fitness it might be you're gripping too tightly and learning relaxation on every hold results in less pump. Or you might be weak in a chain of tension due to injury. Not flexible enough due to scar tissue build-up. Etc.
My biggest weakness is laziness.
-
Expensive option - get some coaching.
Cheap option - climb on a variety of different types of problems, spend time to work on ones that you find hard but should be able to do at that grade* and work out what holds you back from doing them.
If you can, climbing with other people as who are happy to look at what you do and give you feedback.
* except in Font, even easy stuff there is hard.
-
I find video feedback to be useful, film yourself on hard stuff or whatever and watch it back. Quite often I discover something that can be worked on. For example, I found in a lot of older videos I would readjust my grip position quite often, bouncing around on holds, which just wasted time and energy. Not something that's always obvious when you are climbing because you're rather involved, but very clear in video playback.
-
There was an old CragX article on this a while ago (written by Jerry I think?) which had a spider diagram on it, the idea being you printed it off and gave it to your mates (what you say, the people you climb with don't constantly point out your weaknesses anyway?) and they each scored you on a number of things allowing you to see what was your perceived weakness. I think it suggested you score yourself as a comparison. I can't find it on the Wayback machine but I'm sure it's there somewhere.
For me the easiest way to look at my weaknesses would be to admit what I don't like doing (stretching for instance :chair:).
-
I found in a lot of older videos I would readjust my grip position quite often, bouncing around on holds, which just wasted time and energy.
I've seen a strong local person who does that. Looks like a chameleon, quite strange.
-
Good question.
Advice I had years ago on this, to give a ballpark idea of your weakness, was - 'why, specifically, did you fail?'
You can pigeonhole why you failed into broad categories for the purpose of identifying weakness.
I couldn't do the move(s) because I was too pumped.
I couldn't do the move(s) because I wasn't strong enough in my fingers/shoulders/biceps.
I couldn't do the move(s) because my core/tension/chain couldn't hold my foot/hip/shoulder in the most efficient position required.
I couldn't do the move(s) because I wasn't flexible enough.
I couldn't do the move(s) because I was too nervous of committing due to fear (of falling, of failure, of injury)
Those are the most common five reasons for failing on any climb/boulder. Obvs there are different reasons within the categories, for e.g. you might be 'too pumped', but the reason might not actually be fitness it might be you're gripping too tightly and learning relaxation on every hold results in less pump. Or you might be weak in a chain of tension due to injury. Not flexible enough due to scar tissue build-up. Etc.
My biggest weakness is laziness.
I think that does make sense, but I do also think it's relatively tricky to actually know why you couldn't do the climb. Or rather; to correctly identify why, rather than misidentify. Are your fingers too weak? Or are you just bad at getting your weight on your toes? One may feel like the other. I think that's the hard part. Correctly working out what you are crap at.
-
I think that does make sense, but I do also think it's relatively tricky to actually know why you couldn't do the climb. Or rather; to correctly identify why, rather than misidentify. Are your fingers too weak? Or are you just bad at getting your weight on your toes? One may feel like the other. I think that's the hard part. Correctly working out what you are crap at.
In that example, the solution doesn't really require knowing which one is the weakness. Climb lots of stuff with small holds and it will train both.
-
I think that does make sense, but I do also think it's relatively tricky to actually know why you couldn't do the climb. Or rather; to correctly identify why, rather than misidentify. Are your fingers too weak? Or are you just bad at getting your weight on your toes? One may feel like the other. I think that's the hard part. Correctly working out what you are crap at.
In that example, the solution doesn't really require knowing which one is the weakness. Climb lots of stuff with small holds and it will train both.
Sure, but fingerboarding won't, for example. I just think it seems tricky to do in my (limited) experience, is all.
-
Sometimes it can also be that you can't do a move simply because you don't know how to do the move. Having a wide arsenal of move that you know can help you (dropping a knee, using a heel, twisting a shoulder into a move) are skills that take a long a time to acquire as the actual "physicality to do the harder moves, hence the recommendation for mileage across a variety of angles and grades, to acquire the "technical" movement skills, rather than prostrating yourself at the altar of power.
-
I suspect most weaknesses are addressed at least in part by climbing on a board with terrible footholds (fingers, core, power to varing degrees, depending on the board and problem setting). The weaknesses that aren't, seem to require far less fun activities such as 4x4s and laps on easy routes - basically tedious mileage and learning how to rest.
In terms of identifiying specific weaknesses, asking people who see you climb is probably the simplest means. I once did a "blind" Lattice assessment, essentially as part of a UKB "bet" about the power of the Lattice method. Tom Randall tested me, and also asked people who knew me for their opinions on my strengths (ha!) and weaknesses. He then did an assessment without Lattice's usual pre-knowledge of actual levels (although, I heard afterwards there were a few cheeky, informal enquiries).
His views based on just seeing me climb were more accurate than the ones after lots of number crunching, and the opinions of friends were probably even more to-the-point (verging on contempt!). Mind you, I was / am (wrist injury notwithstanding) a bit of a freak - and perhaps my defects are more visible (and yet less readily resolved by maths!).
-
I think that does make sense, but I do also think it's relatively tricky to actually know why you couldn't do the climb. Or rather; to correctly identify why, rather than misidentify. Are your fingers too weak? Or are you just bad at getting your weight on your toes? One may feel like the other. I think that's the hard part. Correctly working out what you are crap at.
In that example, the solution doesn't really require knowing which one is the weakness. Climb lots of stuff with small holds and it will train both.
Sure, but fingerboarding won't, for example. I just think it seems tricky to do in my (limited) experience, is all.
You're right, fingerboarding won't train both and that's why I specifically recommended lots of climbing on small holds. It trains more or less everything you need! (for bouldering at least).
Actually, fingerboarding might get you there anyway - i'm sure this will be an unpopular opinion, but as time goes on I further subscribe to the belief that hard bouldering is 90% finger strength and then the rest can share the remaining 10%... The correlation between my max hang score and max redpoint grade has been spookily strong over the last few years!
-
Actually, fingerboarding might get you there anyway - i'm sure this will be an unpopular opinion, but as time goes on I further subscribe to the belief that hard bouldering is 90% finger strength and then the rest can share the remaining 10%... The correlation between my max hang score and max redpoint grade has been spookily strong over the last few years!
This is your n=1 caused by (as iI understand) starting from a position of having a strong body and relatively weak fingers innit, your example of identifying your limiting factor.
You can easily imagine an alternative where someone’s starting position was strong fingers but weak arms, and their correlation between weighted pull up score and grade might become quite good!
-
Actually, fingerboarding might get you there anyway - i'm sure this will be an unpopular opinion, but as time goes on I further subscribe to the belief that hard bouldering is 90% finger strength and then the rest can share the remaining 10%... The correlation between my max hang score and max redpoint grade has been spookily strong over the last few years!
This is your n=1 caused by (as iI understand) starting from a position of having a strong body and relatively weak fingers innit, your example of identifying your limiting factor.
You can easily imagine an alternative where someone’s starting position was strong fingers but weak arms, and their correlation between weighted pull up score and grade might become quite good!
You're spot on for my case, but I think it holds true more often than not. Sure, there will be exceptions (in terms of individuals and specific boulder problems), but generally, finger strength appears to be the limiting factor, at least for climbers who I know. Those with stronger fingers than me usually climb harder, and those with weaker fingers usually climb less hard.
At the top level there's Giuliano Cameroni who bouldered 8C+ before he could do a one arm pullup. I bet every 8C+ ascensionist could hang an edge with one arm though! Consider an imaginary person who has never climbed before, and they have average athleticism, coordination, etc., but for some reason they can 1 arm a Lattice rung. I bet they could climb 8A within a year!
Maybe i'm way off on all this but i'm just saying what I see!
Note: i'm purposely sticking to bouldering here as I don't know anything about the territory that comes after 10 moves!
-
Actually, fingerboarding might get you there anyway - i'm sure this will be an unpopular opinion, but as time goes on I further subscribe to the belief that hard bouldering is 90% finger strength and then the rest can share the remaining 10%... The correlation between my max hang score and max redpoint grade has been spookily strong over the last few years!
This is your n=1 caused by (as iI understand) starting from a position of having a strong body and relatively weak fingers innit, your example of identifying your limiting factor.
You can easily imagine an alternative where someone’s starting position was strong fingers but weak arms, and their correlation between weighted pull up score and grade might become quite good!
You're spot on for my case, but I think it holds true more often than not. Sure, there will be exceptions (in terms of individuals and specific boulder problems), but generally, finger strength appears to be the limiting factor, at least for climbers who I know. Those with stronger fingers than me usually climb harder, and those with weaker fingers usually climb less hard.
At the top level there's Giuliano Cameroni who bouldered 8C+ before he could do a one arm pullup. I bet every 8C+ ascensionist could hang an edge with one arm though! Consider an imaginary person who has never climbed before, and they have average athleticism, coordination, etc., but for some reason they can 1 arm a Lattice rung. I bet they could climb 8A within a year!
Maybe i'm way off on all this but i'm just saying what I see!
Note: i'm purposely sticking to bouldering here as I don't know anything about the territory that comes after 10 moves!
Conversely, there are a lot of people who can hang tiny edges with big weights, yet they can only get up mid 7s :-\
-
You're spot on for my case, but I think it holds true more often than not. Sure, there will be exceptions (in terms of individuals and specific boulder problems), but generally, finger strength appears to be the limiting factor, at least for climbers who I know. Those with stronger fingers than me usually climb harder, and those with weaker fingers usually climb less hard.
I think this is somewhat confusing fingerstrength generally correlating well with bouldering grade, and fingerstrength being something being concentrated on above a lot of other things, which is more frequently leading to the situation Fultonius alludes to. You then end up in a feedback loop where people are like ‘well I still can’t climb X so my fingers must still be too weak’.
-
You can provide lattice with your data here: https://latticetraining.com/my-fingers/
Apparently I am much weaker than expected to be climbing 7b or V4 with my 116% bodyweight finger strength. Discussion amongst friends (not all grey power candidates) suggests this is a common report. I think the lattice sample population must be biased towards inexperienced training fanatics who are over-strong for their grade. Or peak lime denizens. Or perhaps it is commercially useful to overestimate the finger strength required as writing an "individualised" fingerboarding programme to address this weakness must take about 3 seconds! ( ;) )
-
Conversely, there are a lot of people who can hang tiny edges with big weights, yet they can only get up mid 7s :-\
If what you say is true then what i'm saying is clearly wrong, but i'm yet to see anyone 1 arm a lattice rung and then max out at 7B on rock. Are there really lots of people who can do this?
-
You can provide lattice with your data here: https://latticetraining.com/my-fingers/
Apparently I am much weaker than expected to be climbing 7b or V4 with my 116% bodyweight finger strength. Discussion amongst friends (not all grey power candidates) suggests this is a common report. I think the lattice sample population must be biased towards inexperienced training fanatics who are over-strong for their grade. Or peak lime denizens. Or perhaps it is commercially useful to overestimate the finger strength required as writing an "individualised" fingerboarding programme to address this weakness must take about 3 seconds! ( ;) )
I like the cynicism ;D. I also fall short in terms of finger strength according to Lattice, but that's kind of my point: it's seldom the other way round (at least i've not heard anyone admit to it...). With sufficient cunning you can usually trick your way up something harder than your fingers allow for (particularly on grit), but i've seen people with strong fingers campus up problems where I had to use every trick in the book!
-
I can definitely at least 20kgs added weight on my base weight of 75kgs on a 20mm edge for 7 seconds and 7A is my max outdoor bouldering grade. I dunno what that means at all though.
(The last time I was fingerboarding hard I got to 18kgs added weight on a 10mm edge for ten seconds as my max that I was comfortable going for, so like 95%, and got to eight reps of that in a session)
-
18kgs added weight on a 10mm edge for ten seconds
That's insanely strong for only font 7A.
-
As always, context needs to be applied though. IIRC wellsy has been climbing outside for ~1 year or something.
I find climbing a circuit of problems at the climbing wall, and paying attention to the things my ego tells me to avoid gives me some idea what my weaknesses are.
-
Yes about a year outdoors and two years in total.
Ah that's a good idea though, your weaknesses are probably involving problems you look at and don't really like the idea of. Although, I love steep power problems and never noticed my weakness in generating that forearm power, so not always maybe?
-
If what you say is true then what i'm saying is clearly wrong, but i'm yet to see anyone 1 arm a lattice rung and then max out at 7B on rock. Are there really lots of people who can do this?
I do have a friend who is *insanely* strong in metrics, but performs poorly on rock. He's hanging with weight one-armed on the Lattice edge (I think his predicted potential was ~8B/+ form fingers alone) and goodness knows how many one-arm pull-ups he can do/what weight he can pull, BUT has maxed out at 7B+ on rock. Technique is appalling, like it is painful to watch him climb. Like feet don't exist. Interestingly, this also applies to board climbing, he maxes out on the Moon board at about 7B I think.
-
I think trying to work efficiency once you're overly strong is particularly tricky; firstly it takes a toll mentally but if you're physically able, it's really hard to stop yourself 'over-powering' something etc.
I'm sure Dave Mac wrote something about potential bias in things such as the lattice dataset.
-
I can definitely at least 20kgs added weight on my base weight of 75kgs on a 20mm edge for 7 seconds and 7A is my max outdoor bouldering grade. I dunno what that means at all though.
It means you've great basic finger strength and can look forward to climbing much harder than 7A in the future. Current training emphasis could be elsewhere: flexibility; movement skills, especially on rock? Climb with people better than you.
I'm sure Dave Mac wrote something about potential bias in things such as the lattice dataset.
I'm sure Lattice are aware of it. It's just an indication that people interested in training tend to be good at training exercises. You can't put 'from a database of obsessive training nerds, 140% of bodyweight for 7 seconds on a 20mm edge is typical of 8a route climbers' in your marketing material though.
-
Murph who used to post on here was terrifyingly strong on a fingerboard but any 7th grade boulder problems apart from Trackside required a protracted soul-searching siege. His climbing and training seemed to be 95% climbing “murples” at the Works, fingerboarding, lapping Trackside and doing a few easy problems while herding his kids around Robin Hood’s Stride. You only get good at what you do.
Bear in mind that any advice you get about your weaknesses is going to be heavily coloured by who you ask. People who love training are going to tell you you don’t train enough, people who’ve got good without ever going to the climbing wall will tell you to do loads of mileage on rock. People who think they’ve mastered climbing but just need to be stronger in some way will tell you that you need to be stronger in that way too etc.
I don’t think it’s controversial to say that with only one year of rock climbing and two years of climbing total under your belt campus strength isn’t your biggest weakness- you’re still at an early stage of learning and the time you put into strength training that’s abstracted from climbing is time you could be learning.
-
Without wanting to get too far into the weeds, I think asking 'what am I crap at?' is the wrong question, because it's trying to define the wrong problem.
Assuming the goal is 'to successfully climb route y or boulder x'*, then the problem isn't 'being crap' at something. The problem is 'failing on route y or boulder x'.
This is because you can be crap, relative to peers and according to the wisdom of a benchmarking model, while still being skin-of-your teeth good enough to get up your goal routes and boulders.
I say this because of the truth staring us in the face of the many outliers to the received wisdom of models, some of them mentioned on here.. It's clearly true that you don't need to be getting PBs on training goals or achieve someone else's training benchmark to climb well enough to achieve goal climbs. There are endless examples in climbing of people whose finger strength isn't as high as it could be but who climb much harder than they 'should' according to a model, and endless examples of people with very good finger strength who don't achieve success on the routes they 'should' according to a model.
I do think part of the appeal of a model - Lattice is a well known one - is it enables a game of peer comparison like social media (which appeals to most of us) where you can compare your finger strength, fitness etc. to other people and against standard benchmarks. You also get the little badge of achievement thing of getting a 'rating' of what grade you're theoretically capable of. We all love a test to see how we compare to others. But it isn't especially meaningful for the goal of getting up climbs.
Whereas focussing on the immediate reason why you failed on the goal route/boulder can, if you're honest and analytical, and have some experience of seeing other climbers doing similar routes, be black and white. With a bit of experience it's not as hard as you think to understand why you failed.
Also, trying to work out 'what am I crap at' is always going to be a nebulous, relative concept - who are you comparing to, and where on the scale does 'crap' become 'good'? It doesn't really work. We're all 'crap' compared to some and good compared to others. Which is why people came up with supposed objective models..
I notice you're only talking about bouldering. I think perhaps with bouldering getting really strong fingers will overcome a lot of other possible reasons for failure, and having strong finger will mask other potential reasons for failure more than in route climbing. I think routes overall require more overall ingredients for success, and steely fingers won't get you as far before some other reason rears it's head to make you fail.
* It's a good question to ask if the end goal is to have good all-round balanced levels of strength, fitness and flexibility. What you then do with that potential is more difficult to predict.
-
I like the cynicism ;D. I also fall short in terms of finger strength according to Lattice, but that's kind of my point: it's seldom the other way round (at least i've not heard anyone admit to it...). With sufficient cunning you can usually trick your way up something harder than your fingers allow for (particularly on grit), but i've seen people with strong fingers campus up problems where I had to use every trick in the book!
I'm not a complete cynic, I think what Lattice are trying to do is very interesting. I do think they are very over-optimistic in public about the usefulness of their models and I have a low tolerance of Bad Science in marketing (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23928715/).
-
I think trying to work efficiency once you're overly strong is particularly tricky; firstly it takes a toll mentally but if you're physically able, it's really hard to stop yourself 'over-powering' something etc.
I'm sure Dave Mac wrote something about potential bias in things such as the lattice dataset.
I like the fun game of take a problem you can do laps on, and carefully work out the easiest way to do it. Experiment with the sequence and moves, find the best way up. Quite a fun way to spend time IMO
-
If what you say is true then what i'm saying is clearly wrong, but i'm yet to see anyone 1 arm a lattice rung and then max out at 7B on rock. Are there really lots of people who can do this?
I do have a friend who is *insanely* strong in metrics, but performs poorly on rock. He's hanging with weight one-armed on the Lattice edge (I think his predicted potential was ~8B/+ form fingers alone) and goodness knows how many one-arm pull-ups he can do/what weight he can pull, BUT has maxed out at 7B+ on rock. Technique is appalling, like it is painful to watch him climb. Like feet don't exist. Interestingly, this also applies to board climbing, he maxes out on the Moon board at about 7B I think.
Fair enough. Basically everything i've said in this thread is nonsense then. Wellsy, please just ignore me ;D
-
I think your points are very relevant to someone whose limiting factor is their fingers! I don't think mine are though, it's clearly some elements of technique (and again that's a tricky question, it's all very well saying "climb better" but how? Where's my technique bad?) And therefore for me just fingerboarding wouldn't be mega helpful. Though I probably should. I did for about a couple of months and then stopped when I could climb again lol
-
I like the fun game of take a problem you can do laps on, and carefully work out the easiest way to do it. Experiment with the sequence and moves, find the best way up. Quite a fun way to spend time IMO
I spent a sport season climbing a lot with a UKB exile who was significantly weaker than me yet day to day he was getting up the same stuff I was, probably with a little less fuss (we were probably equal on minor tantrums). He was also seeing continued improvement throughout the grades whereas I've spent ages (yrs) working out how not climb like a total dunce. To me it made me question where I direct (or have directed) my time a little and I've had to spend quite a lot of time getting to that point.
I'm quite interested to read Ned's book because to me, he's someone that's both very strong and very good.
I'm not a complete cynic...
Me neither (I think). I struggle with FB group posts where plans are being used to attain things that IMO (elitism) don't require them (/elitism).
-
it's all very well saying "climb better" but how? Where's my technique bad?
See my original post?
-
it's all very well saying "climb better" but how? Where's my technique bad?
See my original post?
Oh aye I'm more saying that the hypothetical climber asks that question and it's not the easiest to work out. You're not wrong though.
-
You could buy John Kettle's "rock climbing technique" book and work through the exercises. There are lots of different drills that cover lots of different aspects of momement technique. By the time you had tried them all you would know which felt natural and which took some work, giving you a number of things to work on.
https://www.johnkettle.com/technique-book
-
it's all very well saying "climb better" but how? Where's my technique bad?
See my original post?
Oh aye I'm more saying that the hypothetical climber asks that question and it's not the easiest to work out. You're not wrong though.
there is no panacea
-
‘Work your weaknesses’ is the most bollocks saying in climbing. Unless you’re full time etc just do what you like/ are good at. Actually it’s the second most bollocks saying. The first is ‘injuries make you stronger in the long run’ - in reality they make you miserable, you lose years of hard Work if a long one and time you’ll never get back.
#BollocksSayings
-
The first is ‘injuries make you stronger in the long run’ - in reality they make you miserable, you lose years of hard Work if a long one and time you’ll never get back.
#BollocksSayings
It's funny, I remember many years ago seeing some bullshit "injuries make you stronger/better in the long run"/"every cloud has a sliver lining" type post from Shauna when she got injured. Like the miserable dick I am, I thought to myself "let's see you spout that shit when you've been injured for multiple years in a row"... bet she doesn't do many posts like that now.
-
It’s a fallacy of the highest order. :shit:
But in the next breath they say consistency is the most important thing for gains , so both statements can’t be fuckin right ?!
-
Surely getting injured easily is a weakness in itself?
-
Surely getting injured easily is a weakness in itself?
NFL coaches like to say "the best ability is availability"
-
‘Work your weaknesses’ is the most bollocks saying in climbing. Unless you’re full time etc just do what you like/ are good at. Actually it’s the second most bollocks saying. The first is ‘injuries make you stronger in the long run’ - in reality they make you miserable, you lose years of hard Work if a long one and time you’ll never get back.
#BollocksSayings
What I like is getting better and climbing harder though so in a sense I like learning what I am not good at and getting good at it. But yeah have fun and don't get injured is fair.
-
The contrast between the sunny enthusiasm of aspirant hard boulderer Wellsy and the jaded misery of 8B Doylo and 8B+ Barrows is quite something. Careful what you wish for Wellsy. :lol:
-
The contrast between the sunny enthusiasm of aspirant hard boulderer Wellsy and the jaded misery of 8B Doylo and 8B+ Barrows is quite something. Careful what you wish for Wellsy. :lol:
I watched Fear and Loathing in Llandudno, I'm well aware ;D Snubbed at the BAFTAS imo
Well what are early days for if not psychotic focus and enthusiasm, anyway
-
Like with most things in life , you soon learn that all that glistens isn’t gold..
-
nah, fresh shit glistens too.
-
The first is ‘injuries make you stronger in the long run’ - in reality they make you miserable, you lose years of hard Work if a long one and time you’ll never get back.
#BollocksSayings
It's funny, I remember many years ago seeing some bullshit "injuries make you stronger/better in the long run"/"every cloud has a sliver lining" type post from Shauna when she got injured. Like the miserable dick I am, I thought to myself "let's see you spout that shit when you've been injured for multiple years in a row"... bet she doesn't do many posts like that now.
Yup. I bet you don't hear Chris Froome saying how glad he is that he had a horrible crash, and I've not noticed a leap in his performance in this year's TDF.
I think Pete's argument that identifying a specific reason for failure is probably the best way to identify a weakness. I wonder how many of the people who are objectively very strong but underperform actually have a failure to commit on rock?
-
You can pigeonhole why you failed into broad categories for the purpose of identifying weakness.
I couldn't do the move(s) because I was too pumped.
I couldn't do the move(s) because I wasn't strong enough in my fingers/shoulders/biceps.
I couldn't do the move(s) because my core/tension/chain couldn't hold my foot/hip/shoulder in the most efficient position required.
I couldn't do the move(s) because I wasn't flexible enough.
I couldn't do the move(s) because I was too nervous of committing due to fear (of falling, of failure, of injury)
Mostly:
Reach.
Conditions.
(Good answer to a good question btw)
-
Part of the problem, though, is identifying your weaknesses.
Don't know if you're interested in such things but I developed an app to help with exactly this. It's available for android devices, is free, doesn't have any ads, and won't definitely install ransomware.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=online.adventureapps.csaw2&hl=en_US&gl=US
-
You can pigeonhole why you failed into broad categories for the purpose of identifying weakness.
I couldn't do the move(s) because I was too pumped.
I couldn't do the move(s) because I wasn't strong enough in my fingers/shoulders/biceps.
I couldn't do the move(s) because my core/tension/chain couldn't hold my foot/hip/shoulder in the most efficient position required.
I couldn't do the move(s) because I wasn't flexible enough.
I couldn't do the move(s) because I was too nervous of committing due to fear (of falling, of failure, of injury)
Mostly:
Reach.
Conditions.
(Good answer to a good question btw)
Shit beta! Please don't forget about those of us who can't see a sequence to save our lives. For just £2 a month you can sponsor a boulderer with shit beta and send someone to heckle them as they fall of their project again.
-
The first is ‘injuries make you stronger in the long run’ - in reality they make you miserable, you lose years of hard Work if a long one and time you’ll never get back.
#BollocksSayings
It's funny, I remember many years ago seeing some bullshit "injuries make you stronger/better in the long run"/"every cloud has a sliver lining" type post from Shauna when she got injured. Like the miserable dick I am, I thought to myself "let's see you spout that shit when you've been injured for multiple years in a row"... bet she doesn't do many posts like that now.
“If you think a weakness can be turned into a strength, I hate to tell you this, but that's another weakness.”
The legend that is Jack Handy.
-
The contrast between the sunny enthusiasm of aspirant hard boulderer Wellsy and the jaded misery of 8B Doylo and 8B+ Barrows is quite something. Careful what you wish for Wellsy. :lol:
Fucking LOL :lol:
Just read through this thread. Interesting stuff. I like Pete's in-depth post. I don't have much to add. I suspect a lot of your struggle to identify stuff is just relative newness, Wellsy. You'll get used to self analysis in time, especially if you practice it - and try to be ruthlessly honest doing so, even if you don't like what you see.
-
This is all bollocks.
Stick with your strengths if you going to be shit, be a little less shit at something. What’s the point of trying to work your weaknesses to be still shit at them.
I remember having a conversation with Boring Chris about losing weight. He said “ what if you lose a stone in weight and you are still weak”
-
Then either your power-to-weight will be better, or if it isn't, you've fucked up somewhere like losing a stone of muscle from back shoulders and arms ::)
-
Then either your power-to-weight will be better, or if it isn't, you've fucked up somewhere like losing a stone of muscle from back shoulders and arms ::)
No despite better to power to weight you are still climbing shit.
-
Well then there's a clearly a weakness you haven't identified that you need to find and address....
-
Yet here you are umpteen years in to trying address over grading and it’s still affecting your climbing.
-
I sometimes wonder if the best training is the training you can be fucked doing.
I mean, obviously, if we all had infinite time, energy, and psyche for doing dull-as-shit circuits/repeaters/board sessions, campussing,.... [insert whatever thing you don't like here].... then, doing precisely the correct training will give you the optimum performance improvement trajectory.
And if you have weaknesses, working them might bring about some quick, slow, slower, incremental gainz. But, you'll probably be spending even more time doing shit you don't like....
Conversely, you might have some as yet unknown flaw that could be relatively easily addressed, and potentially by doing things you don't hate. If so, you're in luck - have at it!
If, like the rest of us, your weaknesses are your weaknesses cos you can't be fucked with X, Y or Z. then...well...how much do you want it?!?!?
Unsurprisingly, my biggest weakness is my dislike for structured training. Luckily, my biggest strength is off the couch ability and a propensity not to lose much fitness during time off....
-
The contrast between the sunny enthusiasm of aspirant hard boulderer Wellsy and the jaded misery of 8B Doylo and 8B+ Barrows is quite something. Careful what you wish for Wellsy. :lol:
Fucking LOL :lol:
Just read through this thread. Interesting stuff. I like Pete's in-depth post. I don't have much to add. I suspect a lot of your struggle to identify stuff is just relative newness, Wellsy. You'll get used to self analysis in time, especially if you practice it - and try to be ruthlessly honest doing so, even if you don't like what you see.
I think so too! It's always worth asking for the opinion of the more experienced though, in case you're missing something. As it happened I have found that working on my weaknesses has made a difference in the past.
I do agree that the routine you will do is the best routine, though. Lattice could probably build me a plan to make me better faster but I probably would struggle to follow it (although in all fairness if I paid for it I probably would as then there's an incentive to get money's worth, regular catch-ups which would make me want to do a good job etc)
-
I sometimes wonder if the best training is the training you can be fucked doing.
I've been saying exactly this for years. 50% effective training that you do 100% of your training time is better than 80% effective training you do 40% of your training time. That doesn't preclude working your weaknesses but it can be useful to try to find less effective but fun ways to do so that you'll actually stick with.