Forums: Climbing Information: Technique & Training:
Getting Better Without Training
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Technique & Training

Premier Sponsor:

 
First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All


redlude97


Dec 1, 2011, 9:30 AM
Post #76 of 94 (2147 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990

Re: [sungam] Getting Better Without Training [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

sungam wrote:
redlude97 wrote:
flesh wrote:
Ya, I think there are two different types, one is more endurance oriented and one more anaerobic like climbing.
All their products are just dextrose(glucose) and whey protein.
Actually a glance at their website tells me that they unfortunately use sucrose instead of glucose/dextrose. Too bad, really.
You are right the accelerade uses sucrose(table sugar). The Endurox uses dextrose and/or sucrose and maltodextrin depending on the flavor. Wasn't careful checking the ingredients. Why do you consider the use of sucrose a bad thing?


sungam


Dec 1, 2011, 10:48 AM
Post #77 of 94 (2131 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26618

Re: [redlude97] Getting Better Without Training [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

redlude97 wrote:
sungam wrote:
redlude97 wrote:
flesh wrote:
Ya, I think there are two different types, one is more endurance oriented and one more anaerobic like climbing.
All their products are just dextrose(glucose) and whey protein.
Actually a glance at their website tells me that they unfortunately use sucrose instead of glucose/dextrose. Too bad, really.
You are right the accelerade uses sucrose(table sugar). The Endurox uses dextrose and/or sucrose and maltodextrin depending on the flavor. Wasn't careful checking the ingredients. Why do you consider the use of sucrose a bad thing?
Firslty if I am drinking a sports drink during sport I want an obscenely high GI - I am exercising at that point and I want the glucose in my bloodstream as soon as possible.

Secondly sucrose is half fructose, and your body can't deal with fructose nearly as well as it deals with glucose. Our diets just didn't contain that much fructose compared to glucose, so our bodies are dialed in to work primarily on glucose.


redlude97


Dec 1, 2011, 11:10 AM
Post #78 of 94 (2123 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990

Re: [sungam] Getting Better Without Training [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

sungam wrote:
redlude97 wrote:
sungam wrote:
redlude97 wrote:
flesh wrote:
Ya, I think there are two different types, one is more endurance oriented and one more anaerobic like climbing.
All their products are just dextrose(glucose) and whey protein.
Actually a glance at their website tells me that they unfortunately use sucrose instead of glucose/dextrose. Too bad, really.
You are right the accelerade uses sucrose(table sugar). The Endurox uses dextrose and/or sucrose and maltodextrin depending on the flavor. Wasn't careful checking the ingredients. Why do you consider the use of sucrose a bad thing?
Firslty if I am drinking a sports drink during sport I want an obscenely high GI - I am exercising at that point and I want the glucose in my bloodstream as soon as possible.

Secondly sucrose is half fructose, and your body can't deal with fructose nearly as well as it deals with glucose. Our diets just didn't contain that much fructose compared to glucose, so our bodies are dialed in to work primarily on glucose.
The problem is that your body can only process so much glucose(or any simple sugar) at one time, and that research has proven that multiple simple sugar sources are better at restoring or maintaining glycogen levels. This article http://jap.physiology.org/...t/96/4/1277.abstract and many others provide very convincing evidence that multiple sugar sources are optimal. It is widely accepted in the cycling community. let me know if you don't have access and I can email the pdf


sungam


Dec 1, 2011, 11:20 AM
Post #79 of 94 (2119 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26618

Re: [redlude97] Getting Better Without Training [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

redlude97 wrote:
sungam wrote:
redlude97 wrote:
sungam wrote:
redlude97 wrote:
flesh wrote:
Ya, I think there are two different types, one is more endurance oriented and one more anaerobic like climbing.
All their products are just dextrose(glucose) and whey protein.
Actually a glance at their website tells me that they unfortunately use sucrose instead of glucose/dextrose. Too bad, really.
You are right the accelerade uses sucrose(table sugar). The Endurox uses dextrose and/or sucrose and maltodextrin depending on the flavor. Wasn't careful checking the ingredients. Why do you consider the use of sucrose a bad thing?
Firslty if I am drinking a sports drink during sport I want an obscenely high GI - I am exercising at that point and I want the glucose in my bloodstream as soon as possible.

Secondly sucrose is half fructose, and your body can't deal with fructose nearly as well as it deals with glucose. Our diets just didn't contain that much fructose compared to glucose, so our bodies are dialed in to work primarily on glucose.
The problem is that your body can only process so much glucose(or any simple sugar) at one time, and that research has proven that multiple simple sugar sources are better at restoring or maintaining glycogen levels. This article http://jap.physiology.org/...t/96/4/1277.abstract and many others provide very convincing evidence that multiple sugar sources are optimal. It is widely accepted in the cycling community. let me know if you don't have access and I can email the pdf
Cool. Well, my post definitely looks like hippy science 101, and while I can definitely believe that multiple sources are optimal, I'll read into it more before deciding sucrose is the ideal source (I am curious as to whether 50/50 is the ideal ratio). Thanks for the link, though Wink


flesh


Dec 1, 2011, 12:10 PM
Post #80 of 94 (2107 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 11, 2011
Posts: 418

Re: [sungam] Getting Better Without Training [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I'm looking at the ingredients on the back of the during drink mix, it has , sucrose, whey, trehalose TM(maybe a proprietary type of "ose"?), fructose, maltodextrin, in that order, and some other stuff.

On the back of the recovery drink mix it has, Dextrose, Whey, maltodextrin, magnesium carbonate, vitamin e, ascorbic acid, l glutamine.

Apparently, the during drink has a few different types of sugars, yes?

BTW, stuff doesn't taste bad at all, pretty good, about gatorade good.


teo916


Dec 1, 2011, 12:46 PM
Post #81 of 94 (2097 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 16, 2009
Posts: 46

Re: [billcoe_] Getting Better Without Training [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Thanks for the link billcoe. Can't agree more about not getting injured being the #1 rule. It was pushing my training too hard that got me basically benched for a while.

As for the SCC, I read it while I was benched these past few weeks. I had in fact ordered it just before this thread started. I DO think it helped me improve just by reading it. I've had more than one person I climb with mention they see my style has improved since I've been back at it. That's not saying I'm climbing harder grades than before, but I can see that coming as a result of this after I get my strength back.

Cheers,

-TEO


redlude97


Dec 1, 2011, 1:07 PM
Post #82 of 94 (2092 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990

Re: [flesh] Getting Better Without Training [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

flesh wrote:
I'm looking at the ingredients on the back of the during drink mix, it has , sucrose, whey, trehalose TM(maybe a proprietary type of "ose"?), fructose, maltodextrin, in that order, and some other stuff.

On the back of the recovery drink mix it has, Dextrose, Whey, maltodextrin, magnesium carbonate, vitamin e, ascorbic acid, l glutamine.

Apparently, the during drink has a few different types of sugars, yes?

BTW, stuff doesn't taste bad at all, pretty good, about gatorade good.
Yes, but you don't really know the ratios. Either way it is overkill for climbing, except possibly in the case that you are mixing it with your water on a multipitch


elcapinyoazz


Dec 2, 2011, 8:11 AM
Post #84 of 94 (2032 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 7, 2003
Posts: 93

Re: [teo916] Getting Better Without Training [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

teo916 wrote:
I've had more than one person I climb with mention they see my style has improved


Yeah, I think they were more commenting on your man-pris, trucker hat, and magenta stripe w/ rattail haircut, not you abyssmal movement on rock that you try to pass off as climbing.


DouglasHunter


Dec 2, 2011, 9:22 AM
Post #85 of 94 (2011 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 1, 2010
Posts: 106

Re: [elcapinyoazz] Getting Better Without Training [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

elcapinyoazz wrote:
This whole premise, "getting better without training" is a rhetorical/semantics game. You redefine "training" to mean whatever you want it to mean so that your method doesn't fit within the definiton, and voila...you are training but not "training".

not at all, training has a specific definition and requires goal setting and scheduling among other things. No structure = no training. Its true that every time we climb we are practicing in one form or another but unstructured practice can not be considered training.


teo916


Dec 2, 2011, 9:55 AM
Post #86 of 94 (1999 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 16, 2009
Posts: 46

Re: [elcapinyoazz] Getting Better Without Training [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Maybe you have me confused with someone else? I'm the horrible climber with the trucker hat and the monkey tail beard:


Attachments: monkeytail.jpg (29.1 KB)


elcapinyoazz


Dec 2, 2011, 12:57 PM
Post #87 of 94 (1974 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 7, 2003
Posts: 93

Re: [DouglasHunter] Getting Better Without Training [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

DouglasHunter wrote:
not at all, training has a specific definition and requires goal setting and scheduling among other things. No structure = no training.

Wrong. You saying it, doesn't make it so.

Websters:

"3 a : to form by instruction, discipline, or drill
b : to teach so as to make fit, qualified, or proficient
4: to make prepared (as by exercise)

Now why don't you go ahead and show me where that says anything about goal setting, scheduling or structure. Don't like Websters? Let's try another, how about Oxfords:

"develop and improve (a mental or physical faculty) through instruction or practice"

Well shit, you're still wrong. Maybe try Cambridge?

"to prepare or be prepared for a job, activity or sport, by learning skills and/or by mental or physical exercise"

Still wrong. Perhaps MacMillan?
"to practise a sport regularly before a match or competition"

Your failure to comprehend the very essence of the subject you seek to posture as an expert on is revealing.


(This post was edited by elcapinyoazz on Dec 2, 2011, 1:00 PM)


shockabuku


Dec 2, 2011, 1:35 PM
Post #88 of 94 (1961 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 20, 2006
Posts: 4863

Re: [elcapinyoazz] Getting Better Without Training [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

elcapinyoazz wrote:
DouglasHunter wrote:
not at all, training has a specific definition and requires goal setting and scheduling among other things. No structure = no training.

Wrong. You saying it, doesn't make it so.

Websters:

"3 a : to form by instruction, discipline, or drill
b : to teach so as to make fit, qualified, or proficient
4: to make prepared (as by exercise)

Now why don't you go ahead and show me where that says anything about goal setting, scheduling or structure. Don't like Websters? Let's try another, how about Oxfords:

"develop and improve (a mental or physical faculty) through instruction or practice"

Well shit, you're still wrong. Maybe try Cambridge?

"to prepare or be prepared for a job, activity or sport, by learning skills and/or by mental or physical exercise"

Still wrong. Perhaps MacMillan?
"to practise a sport regularly before a match or competition"

Your failure to comprehend the very essence of the subject you seek to posture as an expert on is revealing.

Seems like a lot of those words imply standards/goals and some kind of schedule to me.


sungam


Dec 2, 2011, 1:42 PM
Post #89 of 94 (1956 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26618

Re: [elcapinyoazz] Getting Better Without Training [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

Wow did I just almost-facepalm. That's when I was about to facepalm but then laughed at you instead.


elcapinyoazz


Dec 2, 2011, 1:58 PM
Post #90 of 94 (1947 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 7, 2003
Posts: 93

Re: [sungam] Getting Better Without Training [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

sungam wrote:
Wow did I just almost-facepalm. That's when I was about to facepalm but then laughed at you instead.

You have 24000+ posts on rc.n00b, and climb what...5.9? Keep laughing haggis boy.

Maybe set up a schedule for the laughing and you could call it training.

What you knobs can't seem to comprehend is that practice IS training. Bouldering with your friends in the gym without a structure, formal goals, or schedule is STILL practice which is still training.

Homeboy is jabbering about "well your definitions seem to imply that.." Uh, FAIL. Definitions do not need to imply, they are specifically EXPLICIT, not IMPLICIT. Read the definitions, they indicate practice and/or preparation, not scheduling and specific goals.

If you weaklings had some basic understanding of the topic you'd actually BE training instead of wanking about to the result of 25k posts on a site full of wankers, n00bs, and never was beens and hanging your way up routes I routinely solo.


But please, carry on...without me. Now that I recall why I rarely visit this clown show fail parade, I'll mosey on back to my regular haunts.


jt512


Dec 2, 2011, 2:01 PM
Post #91 of 94 (1944 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21893

Re: [elcapinyoazz] Getting Better Without Training [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

elcapinyoazz wrote:
sungam wrote:
Wow did I just almost-facepalm. That's when I was about to facepalm but then laughed at you instead.

You have 24000+ posts on rc.n00b, and climb what...5.9? Keep laughing haggis boy.

Maybe set up a schedule for the laughing and you could call it training.

What you knobs can't seem to comprehend is that practice IS training. Bouldering with your friends in the gym without a structure, formal goals, or schedule is STILL practice which is still training.

Homeboy is jabbering about "well your definitions seem to imply that.." Uh, FAIL. Definitions do not need to imply, they are specifically EXPLICIT, not IMPLICIT. Read the definitions, they indicate practice and/or preparation, not scheduling and specific goals.

If you weaklings had some basic understanding of the topic you'd actually BE training instead of wanking about to the result of 25k posts on a site full of wankers, n00bs, and never was beens and hanging your way up routes I routinely solo.


But please, carry on...without me. Now that I recall why I rarely visit this clown show fail parade, I'll mosey on back to my regular haunts.

Let me guess: boldering.com.


csproul


Dec 2, 2011, 2:33 PM
Post #92 of 94 (1930 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 1768

Re: [elcapinyoazz] Getting Better Without Training [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

elcapinyoazz wrote:
sungam wrote:
Wow did I just almost-facepalm. That's when I was about to facepalm but then laughed at you instead.

You have 24000+ posts on rc.n00b, and climb what...5.9? Keep laughing haggis boy.

Maybe set up a schedule for the laughing and you could call it training.

What you knobs can't seem to comprehend is that practice IS training. Bouldering with your friends in the gym without a structure, formal goals, or schedule is STILL practice which is still training.

Homeboy is jabbering about "well your definitions seem to imply that.." Uh, FAIL. Definitions do not need to imply, they are specifically EXPLICIT, not IMPLICIT. Read the definitions, they indicate practice and/or preparation, not scheduling and specific goals.

If you weaklings had some basic understanding of the topic you'd actually BE training instead of wanking about to the result of 25k posts on a site full of wankers, n00bs, and never was beens and hanging your way up routes I routinely solo.


But please, carry on...without me. Now that I recall why I rarely visit this clown show fail parade, I'll mosey on back to my regular haunts.
Bullshit. Practicing is NOT training, bullshit dictionary definition or not. I am not a high level climber, but I can give a very concrete example from another sport. I spent years as a competitive cyclist. I raced for years with my "training" consisting of just going for rides, either solo, in small groups, or in large group rides. It got me a ways in the sport, but only so far. In order to really make a leap, I had to really train, and that meant not "just riding with friends". It meant planning, setting goals, making schedules, and following a pre-prescribed training plan. It involved measuring gains by specific, pre-determined metrics. I don't see that climbing is any different. The point of the OP is that there are those that don't want this level of commitment, and yet there are things they can incorporate while "just climbing with friends" that will allow some gains.


sungam


Dec 3, 2011, 2:12 AM
Post #93 of 94 (1901 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26618

Re: [elcapinyoazz] Getting Better Without Training [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Haha, yeah. Firstly I will throw down 50 bucks that says you wouldn't solo any of the routes I've had to hang on this year. If you can then you deserve the 50 bucks.

Secondly, dictionaries are almost always wrong when it comes to technical definitions. Look up any word that has a definite meaning in some technical field and you will quickly find that out. The dictionary is a resource for finding the way words are used day-to-day in normal conversation, that does not mean the correct technical definition is given.

I walk to school - am I training for alpinism?

It's pretty clear that this whole thread is about getting better without planned training. If you actually have a complaint with the contents of the thread you are either ridiculously pedantic and set in your definition of training, or you are just too stupid (or just haven't given it the though) to see what is so blatantly being talked about.


damienclimber


Dec 22, 2011, 2:59 PM
Post #94 of 94 (1645 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 13, 2011
Posts: 313

Re: [DouglasHunter] Getting Better Without Training [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

DouglasHunter wrote:
elcapinyoazz wrote:
This whole premise, "getting better without training" is a rhetorical/semantics game. You redefine "training" to mean whatever you want it to mean so that your method doesn't fit within the definiton, and voila...you are training but not "training".

not at all, training has a specific definition and requires goal setting and scheduling among other things. No structure = no training. Its true that every time we climb we are practicing in one form or another but unstructured practice can not be considered training.

Hey, I think Rockclimbing.com has an advertising department to sell your products.

Besides its against the rules to sell anything in the forums.
Even those window coverings by HunterDouglas which can keep people in the dark.

First page Previous page 1 2 3 4 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Climbing Information : Technique & Training

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook