I know a few people like this. Every single time I belay them they are climbing so well and making it looks so easy I think 'they're going to piss this' and then inexplicably they seem to fall off/let go!
An exact plan depends on what volume of training you are used to, and what time you’ve got available, but if you’re balanced, the idea would be to get a balanced amount of training in each area.For example, I might make myself a plan where I do strength work on Tue and Thursday mornings and an ancap session and aerocap session on both Tue/Thur evening. That might be too much or too little for some, and you might not be able to split the day up… But you could start with Alex’s sport climbing training PDF and balance the amounts in each area and not go far wrong.When I asked about the specificity of the boulder problem its because it’s quite possible to be able to smash in blobby steep 7B indoors quite easily, but struggle on more vertical techy 7Bs outdoors, and the latter are more similar to UK route cruxes, so you need to think about whether you lack strength in a specific style
A reflection on what's been said so far is that I'm surprised there isn't more information readily available on performance benchmarks. It seems such a basic / obvious thing i.e. if a climber is aiming to climb grade x then they probably need to attain the following levels across strength, power, aerobic capacity, anaerobic capacity or whatever.
Or maybe performance in climbing is such a multi-faceted thing that what I'm advocating is an over-simplification. Yes, it might be useful but it's actually a only small part of what contributes to progress?
Or maybe performance in climbing is such a multi-faceted thing that what I'm advocating is an over-simplification.
Perhaps precise measures like fingerboard tests appeal to those from a hard science background (Stu) whereas messier but more functional tests appeal to quasi-/applied-/hardly at all- scientists like me.
Quote from: KeithScarlett on December 01, 2021, 07:07:37 pm2. It may be more mental than physical and seeking to ensure I consciously engage aggression / fight and tolerate sketching through something could be a big step forward (and one that I think can be trained).This is an excellent thread.Re point 2. I'm always thinking about this and was last night, trying to focus on output doing campus pulls on the fingerboard.
2. It may be more mental than physical and seeking to ensure I consciously engage aggression / fight and tolerate sketching through something could be a big step forward (and one that I think can be trained).
A model of bouldering performance might be a better bet for a starter model than one of route performance, given Alex's points above, and it would be interesting to hear if Lattice or their clients find their data driven approach works better for bouldering.
I always get the impression that climbers with a surfeit of "killer instinct" have it from the get go. Has anyone had this as a weakness and then cultivated it in their training?
it would be interesting to hear if Lattice or their clients find their data driven approach works better for bouldering.
For me it was more about letting go of the outcome and just thinking about getting through the next move or two.
I wanted to post the Self-Coached Climber table here (in case it's of interest / helps discussion) but it doesn't seem straightforward to insert / attach an image - assistance?
That said, the predictive power of metric based models does go up quite a lot if you include things like 'how many years have you been climbing obsessively?', or 'what grade do you boulder in the style of the route you want to do?'. 'What grade of homogenous plastic route can you do laps on?' totally fits into that style of metric imo!
Quote from: seankenny on December 02, 2021, 01:20:36 pmI always get the impression that climbers with a surfeit of "killer instinct" have it from the get go. Has anyone had this as a weakness and then cultivated it in their training?My hunch is if you got a load of climbers to self-report on their perceived 'killer instinct scoreTM' and got a climbing partner to do likewise, the results would show an association with free testosterone levels. Easy blood test to take. Research idea for someone?
Are you sure it is not the other way around, that the predictive power of various suggested explanatory variables goes down when you control for "time spent training"? At least that was what I found.
Maybe it would be possible to train the mindset by signing for a beginner's boxing club and learning how to continue performing a difficult athletic activity requiring co-ordination while getting punched in the face.
I think we're both right - if you include years of experience, the overall predictive power of a multi-factor model goes up (quantified by adjusted r^2 or something comparable, depending on what method you're using), but each individual metric like max hang or box splits or whatnot has less weight attached to it in the final model, so less predictive power.
Quote from: jwi on December 02, 2021, 10:00:35 pmAre you sure it is not the other way around, that the predictive power of various suggested explanatory variables goes down when you control for "time spent training"? At least that was what I found.Interested to hear more about what you were doing there!
Quote from: Stu Littlefair on November 29, 2021, 10:28:24 amAlthough, as a follow up I should note that it won't answer the question posed by the OP; which was along the lines of "what marks do I need to hit, if I want to do grade X". In that case, JWI's benchmarks are much more useful than anything you can do on a fingerboard. It does rather beg the question though, since it would take a few days to do all those tests, why not try an 8a instead and see if you can do it?I guess the idea is, that it's easy to go and fail on an 8a - but why?Doing the tests might help tease out which aspect is problematic. Like most have said, you'd think by the 8a stage you knew what your weaknesses were, but I suppose these change over time and you might not be that honest with yourself? For me, I'd guess I'm off the "8a in 5 or so tries" mark, more like 7c, and 7c+ would be 10-15 tries I'd guess.I would, at a guess, manage this:1. (Lactate treshold test/Endurance) Climb a 7a of 30 moves 10 times with 1 minute rest between the laps 2. (Anaerobic capacity at 80% of max/Strength endurance) Climb a 7b of 30 moves 6 times with 8 min rest between the laps3. (Anaerobic power at 85% of max/Strength endurance) Climb an 7c of 30 moves 2 times with 30 min rest between the laps. More likely at 7b+4. (Strength) Do a technically basic 7B of about 5-6 moves in five tries 7A+ deffo, 7B would be pushing it.I might be wrong on the first one....
Although, as a follow up I should note that it won't answer the question posed by the OP; which was along the lines of "what marks do I need to hit, if I want to do grade X". In that case, JWI's benchmarks are much more useful than anything you can do on a fingerboard. It does rather beg the question though, since it would take a few days to do all those tests, why not try an 8a instead and see if you can do it?