onceahardman
Feb 1, 2008, 12:13 AM
Views: 7213
Registered: Aug 3, 2007
Posts: 2493
|
In reply to: I'm no expert at it, but I believe it could be more fundamental to start with the building blocks: first, you need a lot more analysis of actual kinematics in climbing, and then, you have to define which kinematics you want to examine--i.e. what kind of moves or series of moves. Motion analysis software can be used for these types of investigations. It's straight forward but doesn't give you any idea why things are happening the way they are happening; you only get a description of motion.
Hey Aerili...
I'm familiar with this type of analysis too, The biomechanics lab at the university I graduated from got several interesting contracts, analyzing various "ab-crunchers" and such...(and used poor grad students as slave labor to actually do the grunt work)
I agree that would be the best study to do, if you were trying to optimize kinetic-type workouts, and then compare those to climbing achievement.
My thoughts, though, were really more in line with this thread, which degenerated into which high-level climbers could do OAPs, and how this suggested it was an effective measure of climbing ability. I was trying to find a relatively quick, cheap way of assessing that suggestion.
Wouldn't it be nice if the climbers on this site would consider working together, and furthering the science in a very raw area, full of unsupported, but vigorously defended opinions...
wish in one hand... p in the other...thanks for your valued input, as usual. Stay in touch.
(This post was edited by onceahardman on Feb 1, 2008, 12:26 AM)
|
