For it to truly blind you have to get someone else to do the test and provide you with only the numbers. Or it there a judgement element to the assessment?
Quote from: highrepute on July 18, 2018, 08:05:19 amFor it to truly blind you have to get someone else to do the test and provide you with only the numbers. Or it there a judgement element to the assessment?(For context, I look after the numbers at Lattice which includes putting together the models we use.)For the test Tom's talking about there'll be some judgement involved. The model's don't include any 'fudge factors' and there's obviously a big technique/tactics element to climbing (that we're still working on measuring). What the models do help with is giving you an objective view of your physical ability, so there's no hiding behind the old 'weak fingers' excuse if we measure you as being really strong!
I'm betting the current data show a range of 6 months>Infinity.
Quote from: teestub on July 18, 2018, 12:42:58 pmI'm betting the current data show a range of 6 months>Infinity.Pretty much. Measuring the effectiveness of training interventions is really hard because there's a huge raft of confounding factors (sleep, diet, age, training history and so on).It reminds me a bit of testing new medical interventions. The question is pretty simple on the surface (do people who get treatment A respond better than people who get treatment B?) but despite being an industry with plenty of cash to spend on research it's still really hard to do a properly run trial that answers the question with a suitably large degree of certainty.
With that being said, why sell this product as a research driven method when you dont have evidence that it works to improve even the narrow parameters of the tests, let alone the far more complex area of actual climbing?
For the test Tom's talking about there'll be some judgement involved. The model's don't include any 'fudge factors' and there's obviously a big technique/tactics element to climbing (that we're still working on measuring). What the models do help with is giving you an objective view of your physical ability, so there's no hiding behind the old 'weak fingers' excuse if we measure you as being really strong!
It reminds me a bit of testing new medical interventions. The question is pretty simple on the surface (do people who get treatment A respond better than people who get treatment B?) but despite being an industry with plenty of cash to spend on research it's still really hard to do a properly run trial that answers the question with a suitably large degree of certainty.
...you mainly need enough people in your study. Logistically it can be a bit of a challenge, but that's a project management problem.
I suppose conventionally trials don't ask the participants to pay, so I guess that might have something to do with it
Quote from: tim palmer on July 18, 2018, 10:54:57 pmI suppose conventionally trials don't ask the participants to pay, so I guess that might have something to do with itIt's actually got nothing to do with it. We've been running a study with Dave Giles (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Dave_Giles2) this summer looking at whether Critical Force protocols can be implemented in climbing (and what we can learn from them) and whether it's a single day or multi-day study, you'll find it's very hard to get applicants who are suitable. It's completely free on both of those events. ......... I'm 99% certain, that not a single coaching outfit ploughs as much of their income back into research as we do.
But does increasing the number of laps you do on a lattice show an increase in grade in individuals.Ie if I start on trial 1 doing 20 moves then follow your training plan, 6 months later I can do 40 moves, can I climb harder routes?
Quote from: duncan on July 18, 2018, 05:54:38 pm...you mainly need enough people in your study. Logistically it can be a bit of a challenge, but that's a project management problem.Yeah, that's the problem. Lots of variables means you need lots of people to have confidence in your result, and getting lots of people to follow a strict training protocol for an extended period of time is hard. Saying it's just a project management problem is a bit disingenuous, if the practicalities of the study mean it can't be done then it's a pretty poor study!