[Krank]

Afternoon all,
This year i have decided to make my training very basic (no twisting, no drop knees, no thumbs or anything which will make moves easier), i think it was on the Malc Smith pro tips, he suggested that this was a good way to train and will be good on the shoulders and make reachy moves easier.
However, i have just finished reading the Mcleod book which suggests this is not a good idea as it may lead to this becoming your predominant style.
During the winter i train much more than i climb and i dont really want to risk losing any of my hard earned craft (poor as it may be).
The questian is, should i stick with my open, basic, pull as hard as possible approach, or, set twisty, crafty problems?

[abarro81]

Both? How about setting problems where you have to stay open rather than forcing it?

[Krank]

The problems i am setting now are all open, there not forced, and they are still good problems to climb, there just set to allow them to be climbed open. both may be solutuion but i wondered which will be more effective.

[erm, sam]

Do both. Part of your training should include movement drills anyway, if you are to believe the more enlightened experts, or so I read.

http://onlineclimbingcoach.blogspot.com/2007/04/self-coached-climber-review.html

[Paul B]

I was once told that everyone from the school (back in the day) thought they were all really strong doing huge drop knees and holding onto tiny crimps . Then they went to see Mr.Sharpe who was climbing toe on and open and power wise he all gave them a bit of a spanking.

Just because you train open doesn't mean this will become your predominant style. First time you get on something I admit you might forget your feet are connected but this doesn't last all that long.

I've seen people from this forum training on boards on the most basic of problems who flash ridiculously tenuous font aretes and then do it again for the camera.

[Johnny Brown]

They're the exception rather than the rule though aren't they Paul?

[Paul B]

You certainly don't learn good footwork on boards...

I was merely pointing out that climbing on boards doesn't make you lose all your footwork. If like me you get sucked into training and didn't have footwork to begin with then there's where the issues begin IMO because you don't know any better.

[Krank]

I think i will try warming up with all the dropknee, flagging buisness to keep some movement then move on to good sitting of square on pulling, for the power. Not sure how much board craft will help the grit skills though, prob not much.

[Bonjoy]

I’ve always thought it sounded like a shit idea to deliberately use inefficient technique when training. It sounds like a great way to create and reinforce negative engrams. The idea of a weightlifter/gymnast deliberately using poor technique as a tool for improvement is clearly nonsense, so why do climbers persist with this idea? From my experience climbing indoors of any sort (useful as it may be) has a negative effect on outdoor friendly engrams (hence every wall monkey and his dog constantly scouring the globe for the elusive ‘basic’ problem), the last thing I’d want to do is climb in a way which accentuates the effect!
The idea that using technique when climbing on a board makes you weak bears no scrutiny if you ask me. Take the following very simplified example. Lets say you can climb 7c+ on a board using efficient technique or 7c by going basic. In both instances you are pulling as hard as you can ergo you are training your muscles. In the first instance you are training the muscles you need to climb efficiently, in the latter you are training the muscles you needs to climb inefficiently. Likewise your engrams/movement skills will develop in either of two directions. In both instances you will get stronger and more efficient at certain movement patterns. Personally I can’t see why you’d want to get better at doing something badly, rather than better at doing something well. A cynic might conclude that it has more to do with looking buff in front of your hommes rather than climbing harder/better outside.
I’m all ears if any training master wants to explain the flaws in this logic.

[nik at work]

I agree with Bonos de Joyos.

[Paul B]

Basic Ben, Basic Jez (as exampels of board problems) could both be overcome using drop knees, the fact of the matter is that in both of these cases it negates the need to be able to lock like a monster. Miss it out, don't improve on the lock.
Now locking certainly isn't a bad engram, nor irrelevant in the outside world.

[dave]

Common sense: There's a difference between doing a couple of problems in a prescriptive way that specifically work a weakness, and deliberatley climbing in a shit fashion longterm.

[Bonjoy]

For similar reasons I think training with a weight belt is a bad idea. As I see it when you are training you are trying your hardest (or thereabouts) and therefore sending a signal to the brain vis-à-vis development proportional to the effort put in (or thereabouts). Given this assumption you are not increasing ‘the signal’ by adding weight! Instead of trying 100% on a 6c move without weight you are trying 100% on a 6b move with weight. So no implicit gain in signal/improvement but a fair risk of developing bad engrams. Again please put me right if I’m missing something.

PS – Apologies for this being a generalised and slightly off-topic rant.

Basic Ben, Basic Jez (as exampels of board problems) could both be overcome using drop knees, the fact of the matter is that in both of these cases it negates the need to be able to lock like a monster. Miss it out, don't improve on the lock.
Now locking certainly isn't a bad engram, nor irrelevant in the outside world.

I disagree entirely. Lets say Basic Jez is at the limit for two climbers, with a drop knee and beyond the limit without. Lets also say their is a problem exactly the same outdoor. Climber A tries it with a dropknee climber B tries without? Who is more likely to succeed on the prob outside? And is climber A not also going to train his lock by just scraping up the prob with the drop knee more than B does failling without?

[i.munro]

On a related note of not getting into bad habits. What does the panel reckon on the "no matching" rule on walls?

[slackline]

Basic Ben, Basic Jez (as exampels of board problems) could both be overcome using drop knees, the fact of the matter is that in both of these cases it negates the need to be able to lock like a monster. Miss it out, don't improve on the lock.
Now locking certainly isn't a bad engram, nor irrelevant in the outside world.

I disagree entirely. Lets say Basic Jez is at the limit for two climbers, with a drop knee and beyond the limit without. Lets also say their is a problem exactly the same outdoor. Climber A tries it with a dropknee climber B tries without? Who is more likely to succeed on the prob outside? And is climber A not also going to train his lock by just scraping up the prob with the drop knee more than B does failling without?

But what about when they A and B encounter a problem outside that requires a lock and can't be overcome with a drop-knee?  Surely B will be in the better position to succeed? 

B can also learn to use the drop knee as well as training open.  Unless of course they've erased the technique from their repertoire/memory/engrams completely.

[Paul B]

I should have probably stated (before getting involved) that these days I have very mixed feelings about training and indoor climbing.

Jon: you're missing the point slightly, the idea of ignoring the drop knee is to target something specific, a specific weakness like a lock. As the drop knee isn't always available. It isn't Fatman, nobody has built a model of it on a board its simply a lock thing.
Your climber A, B thing doesn't work. Why would B try it without a drop knee outside? because thats what he does inside? ah, wasn't that the question at the start?

[cofe]

Common sense: There's a difference between doing a couple of problems in a prescriptive way that specifically work a weakness, and deliberatley climbing in a shit fashion longterm.

[Bonjoy]

The last post was rushed as leaving work so pretty poorly written. The point being that if both A and B had a specified number of attempts at Basic Jez (a bad example as the basic way is easier than the drop knee if you ask me, but that's by the by) A would have got up the problem and done the outdoor equivalent, then moved on to doing something else, gaining more strength and skill, while A will have sacrificed all round benefit and not got up the problem either inside or out.

[Paul B]

you still miss the point if you think B won't get up the outside... why not? has he/she forgotten that drop knees exist? Or because he didn't have the required strength in his buttocks (from all that drop knee training that he missed out upon) to get up said basic jez en rock.

[Bonjoy]

Assuming they are starting from the same level of strength and that the problem is easier with a drop knee (even though it isn't), and that they have both had the same limited number of goes on the indoor version (just enough for A to get up it via the most efficient sequence), B will succeed on the prob quicker and be spending his time making other gains. Over time if they take their respective paradigms to the extreme A will get more problems done and gain a broader range both within their physical strength and range of skills while A will get very good and strong at a narrow indoor focused set of (basic/easily identified/isolated) movements.

[Paul B]

but... 

What dave said.

[jwi]

For similar reasons I think training with a weight belt is a bad idea. As I see it when you are training you are trying your hardest (or thereabouts) and therefore sending a signal to the brain vis-à-vis development proportional to the effort put in (or thereabouts). Given this assumption you are not increasing ‘the signal’ by adding weight! Instead of trying 100% on a 6c move without weight you are trying 100% on a 6b move with weight. So no implicit gain in signal/improvement but a fair risk of developing bad engrams. Again please put me right if I’m missing something.

PS – Apologies for this being a generalised and slightly off-topic rant.

For people who only boulders I think you're right.  For climbers who wants to prepare (using only a board) for doing cruxes 25 m out on the pitch where the rope, a harness, and two extra quickdraws will pull down and additional 2-3 kg I think practising moves with a 2-3 kg weight west is mandatory. (For the very reasons you give)

[Bonjoy]

As time moves on A will develop further, traveling the world, pushing standards, developing new areas. Eventually he'll learn the art of speaking to animals and maybe set up a school teaching deprived children to tame and ride dragons. He'll then find the power of human free flight and dispense with climbing altogether casting off the shackles of this tired earth to explore new worlds.
Meanwhile poor old B will have developed into a hideously pale and withered robotic gollum creature. No longer able to exist in daylight he will roam darkened alleys at night looking for children to drink the blood from, in the vain hope that their blood will release the knowledge of the drop knee into his twisted crippled mind. And all because you told himhow to climb Basic Jez....

[Ru]

I'd try it out for a bit. If it doesn't work and your technique goes to shit, stop doing it.

[saltbeef]

Is B Paul?

I think the premise that malc was on about was gaining strength for when there are no footholds to do a big gippo on and you can't hide from the front on position.

Adam rightly alludes that climbing on a board will not gain you the technical ability to aretes, however it will give you strength, and if you are not in the envious position he has of getting out all the time its not going to hurt and will help if you like climbing steep stuff.

Mix it all up is the gist of Dave Mac's book. As a caveat to that he also says focus on your weaknesses, and if you are able to drop knee like Edlinger and get shut down on front on moves with no footholds then some practice may benefit.