Forums: Climbing Information: Beginners:
Woman climbers, arm strength
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Beginners

Premier Sponsor:

 


ShannonT


Apr 4, 2012, 8:42 AM
Post #1 of 103 (9195 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 4, 2012
Posts: 2

Woman climbers, arm strength
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

I've just recently started climbing ALOT and find i have no pull strength which is a pain as i find it hard to do overhang bolder problems. Honestly i can hardly do 2 pull ups.

What shall i do, i'm kind of needing a training programme but don't know where to start.Frown


granite_grrl


Apr 4, 2012, 8:51 AM
Post #2 of 103 (9184 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 14702

Re: [ShannonT] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

ShannonT wrote:
I've just recently started climbing ALOT and find i have no pull strength which is a pain as i find it hard to do overhang bolder problems. Honestly i can hardly do 2 pull ups.

What shall i do, i'm kind of needing a training programme but don't know where to start.Frown

Basic pullups is not a great indication of climbing strength. If you can do two pullups you're WAY in front of the curve in terms of new female climbers.

So knowing that you can do as many pullups as I can I would say that it technique that's holding you back at this point. The Self Coached Climber would be good for you to read, but also take the time to watch other climbers on the steeps. They will incorperate a lot of twisting a turning with their shoulders and their hips to make the moves.

As far as getting stronger, I think you're on the right track by taking a strong interest in bouldering and getting on the steep walls. As you gain technique and start progressing to harder things you will also build muscle. Just don't shy away from the burly problems, they're often the most fun!


rtwilli4


Apr 4, 2012, 10:18 AM
Post #3 of 103 (9135 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 14, 2008
Posts: 1867

Re: [ShannonT] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

My wife can't even begin to do the pull up motion, let alone complete a full pull up. She climbs mid 10 sport with a bit of consistancy.


notapplicable


Apr 4, 2012, 12:12 PM
Post #4 of 103 (9077 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17763

Re: [ShannonT] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (8 ratings)  
Can't Post

Stop boulding and take up trad. You don't need muscles for that.


jeepnphreak


Apr 4, 2012, 1:53 PM
Post #5 of 103 (9034 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 28, 2008
Posts: 1259

Re: [ShannonT] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

ShannonT wrote:
I've just recently started climbing

Well there you problem right there. Just climb more and push your self on to harder problems. Gain technique first and strength will narutaly happen.

my wife cant evan do one pull up but she can lead a solid mid 11s clean.


redlude97


Apr 4, 2012, 3:15 PM
Post #6 of 103 (8995 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 988

Re: [granite_grrl] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

granite_grrl wrote:
As far as getting stronger, I think you're on the right track by taking a strong interest in bouldering and getting on the steep walls. As you gain technique and start progressing to harder things you will also build muscle. Just don't shy away from the burly problems, they're often the most fun!
I would be careful making that assertion, yes you can get quite strong on burly problems, but with improper technique and not enough time to develop climbing specific strength in tendons and joints you are at an increased risk of injury IME.


mheyman


Apr 4, 2012, 8:50 PM
Post #7 of 103 (8917 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 25, 2002
Posts: 607

Re: [ShannonT] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

Ditto to "Just climb more ... Gain technique first and strength will narutaly happen".


mikebee


Apr 5, 2012, 12:33 AM
Post #8 of 103 (8894 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 15, 2006
Posts: 190

Re: [mheyman] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

And because noone else has said it yet, be careful of your fingers early on. A lot of new climbers who go straight into bouldering end up trying to crank on tiny crimps and blow a pulley.


shotwell


Apr 5, 2012, 6:03 AM
Post #9 of 103 (8862 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 5, 2009
Posts: 366

Re: [ShannonT] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ShannonT wrote:
I've just recently started climbing ALOT and find i have no pull strength which is a pain as i find it hard to do overhang bolder problems. Honestly i can hardly do 2 pull ups.

What shall i do, i'm kind of needing a training programme but don't know where to start.Frown

My wife started climbing two years ago, unable to do a pull up. Her 'training program' has always been to climb. She puts in mileage, hits the boulders, and always challenges herself. She rests as needed (typically 2 days on, 1 off.)

After two years of this, she is bouldering V9 with powerful, dynamic movement. She can do several pull ups now. She can campus now. She never trained for either. The only reason I know she can do those is that she has done both on problems and routes.

If you really want to improve as a climber, start climbing. Work on developing great movement skills. Learn to watch better climbers and learn from them. Always challenge yourself, and keep climbing. You'll improve.


adelphos


Apr 5, 2012, 4:40 PM
Post #10 of 103 (8774 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 27, 2011
Posts: 56

Re: [ShannonT] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

In addition to regular climbing, I recommend Crossfit for training. In addition to developing good pulling strength, Crossfit emphasizes core strength. Most people struggle with overhanging problems because they lack core strength.


Geekstar


Apr 5, 2012, 10:04 PM
Post #11 of 103 (8717 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 30, 2011
Posts: 18

Re: [ShannonT] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

Today in the gym I saw an older dude teaching a younger dude to do a route that required pulling four 45* roofs. Younger dude was all muscles and pumped out and fell off the route.

My partner: hey, are you guys still on this?
Muscles: yeah, but I could use a rest
My partner: cool, you inspired her so she wants to try it
Muscles: go for it! Glad to be an inspiration
(I feel a teeny bit bad because my partner and I know I can climb this route, but I consider this exchange educational community service)
*I proceed to climb beautifully*

I cannot do one pull up, I bet Muscles can do quite a few. The moral I very humbly tried to teach him is that sure, muscles can make it easier, but experience, technique, and building up toes and fingers by climbing more are worth way more than that.

*I bailed on a 5.7 earlier in the day, so I was looking for the ego boost I'll admit


lithiummetalman


Apr 5, 2012, 11:09 PM
Post #12 of 103 (8703 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 28, 2004
Posts: 286

Re: [ShannonT] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

pick up hog tying....

Climbed with a girl who did competition hog (or was it calf) .....tying and she is strong both on the rock and physically!

True story, once in a while, she'd chase me down in the gym, pin me, and tie me up with a climbing rope...

....you'd think that be sexy, but it wasn't.... way awkward, and entirely un-sexy trying to move with your right hand tied to your left ankle.

Morale of story: don't piss of someone who is a state champ in hog tying.


(This post was edited by lithiummetalman on Apr 5, 2012, 11:12 PM)


Partner rgold


Apr 6, 2012, 8:10 AM
Post #13 of 103 (8645 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 3, 2002
Posts: 1800

Re: [ShannonT] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (5 ratings)  
Can't Post

Shannon, I don't think you are getting very good advice here.

There is no question that technique reduces the need to apply pure strength, and that one can and should learn an enormous amount from texts like The Self-Coached Climber. But I also think it is irrational to insist that general conditioning is either irrelevant or can be acquired along the way. Its a mantra one hears more and more, and it doesn't make much sense to me, and seems to fly in the face of the accumulated experience of virtually all other sports.

I'm not talking here about non-sport specific things like the Crossfit cult, I'm thinking about specific combinations of basic physical training aimed at the kinds of strength climbers either need for certain types of moves or else could use to prevent the kinds of injuries that occur when, for example, dynamic moves are made without enough strength to control the consequences.

But don't listen to me. (The almost political nature of these debates means that very little listening is going on anyway.) Consider, for example, what a highly accomplished woman climber has to say. Responding in her blog to questions about building strength for women analogous to the questions in this thread, Steph Davis writes, (http://www.highinfatuation.com/blog/gymless-training/)

I think you’re on the right track with wanting to increase your upper body strength for climbing. As a woman, I notice that if I improve my upper body strength at all, I instantly see dramatic results in my climbing. Since women do not naturally build upper body muscle like men do, I think we are forced to climb with more technique in general. If we give any attention to strength building, it allows us to make use of that technique to an extremely gratifying degree.
I’ve also seen many posts written for climbers that play down the benefits of pullups and pullup workouts. I couldn’t disagree more, especially for women. If you start to do pullup workouts, and possibly fingerboard workouts, you will see a dramatic improvement in your climbing very quickly.


Her article has links to weight, hangboard, and pullup training regimens she uses. Might be worth checking out, if for no other reason than to balance the "just climb" chorus heard here.


shotwell


Apr 6, 2012, 10:13 AM
Post #14 of 103 (8614 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 5, 2009
Posts: 366

Re: [rgold] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

rgold wrote:
Shannon, I don't think you are getting very good advice here.

There is no question that technique reduces the need to apply pure strength, and that one can and should learn an enormous amount from texts like The Self-Coached Climber. But I also think it is irrational to insist that general conditioning is either irrelevant or can be acquired along the way. Its a mantra one hears more and more, and it doesn't make much sense to me, and seems to fly in the face of the accumulated experience of virtually all other sports.

I'm not talking here about non-sport specific things like the Crossfit cult, I'm thinking about specific combinations of basic physical training aimed at the kinds of strength climbers either need for certain types of moves or else could use to prevent the kinds of injuries that occur when, for example, dynamic moves are made without enough strength to control the consequences.

But don't listen to me. (The almost political nature of these debates means that very little listening is going on anyway.) Consider, for example, what a highly accomplished woman climber has to say. Responding in her blog to questions about building strength for women analogous to the questions in this thread, Steph Davis writes, (http://www.highinfatuation.com/blog/gymless-training/)

I think you’re on the right track with wanting to increase your upper body strength for climbing. As a woman, I notice that if I improve my upper body strength at all, I instantly see dramatic results in my climbing. Since women do not naturally build upper body muscle like men do, I think we are forced to climb with more technique in general. If we give any attention to strength building, it allows us to make use of that technique to an extremely gratifying degree.
I’ve also seen many posts written for climbers that play down the benefits of pullups and pullup workouts. I couldn’t disagree more, especially for women. If you start to do pullup workouts, and possibly fingerboard workouts, you will see a dramatic improvement in your climbing very quickly.


Her article has links to weight, hangboard, and pullup training regimens she uses. Might be worth checking out, if for no other reason than to balance the "just climb" chorus heard here.

Well, to play my token part of this 'politicized' debate and directly comparing anecdotal evidence, I still don't think it is necessary to do specific strength or power training for either gender.

Without any training whatsoever but climbing and hiking, my wife did this in her first two years.
http://www.youtube.com/...x=3&feature=plcp

She is fit, but she has tiny arms. Again, at the beginning she couldn't do a pull up. She can campus moves now, though I've only watched her do it on a route, not a board.

Eventually she might find benefits from campus training, hang boarding, pull ups, etc. Right now, she continues to keep a steady rate of improvement without them. For the vast majority of female climbers, V9 is a long way away. How you get there doesn't much matter to me, but I think that climbing is way more enjoyable than working on pull ups, hang boards, or other training apparatus.

I do see that you mention that specific strength is required for some moves. Feet off campusing, compression, lock offs, etc. can all be trained through climbing. While a climber with my wife's general muscle tone may never climb with Fred Nicole's style, she can probably find a way to climb in the style of Dave Graham.

For what it is worth, I work out on a campus board, a hangboard for warm up, and do pull ups to warm up for the campus boards. I see far more benefit from training motion than I do training either strength or power. This begs the question of why I would waste my time doing anything but climbing, with the simplest answer being that I am targeting some specific weaknesses that I've identified through reflection of my movement. I'm actually using the campus board to train movement, not strength or power.

I do appreciate the counterpoint you've offered, and see how and why it works for some climbers. I read through Steph's links and sent them to my wife. While I don't see the benefit of doing workouts like that, I know it works for many climbers. I will continue to do what I enjoy, for now. One day may find me a training junkie, especially if I ever have less consistent access to rock.

Finally, to paraphrase Eric Hörst, movement training pays off with a far greater level of efficiency than strength or power training for all but the elite. Make of that what you will.


BClear


Apr 6, 2012, 10:26 AM
Post #15 of 103 (8605 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 23, 2009
Posts: 19

Re: [ShannonT] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

http://www.lamarineofficerprograms.com/The_Armstrong_Workout.pdf

You can't beat Armstrong's pullup routine for gaining pullups. Countless Marines achieved their PFT scores because of the program. I know it gained results for me faster than I could have imagined. Substitute flexed arm hangs initially if need be.


ceebo


Apr 6, 2012, 3:51 PM
Post #16 of 103 (8523 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 8, 2009
Posts: 862

Re: [rgold] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

rgold wrote:
Shannon, I don't think you are getting very good advice here.

There is no question that technique reduces the need to apply pure strength, and that one can and should learn an enormous amount from texts like The Self-Coached Climber. But I also think it is irrational to insist that general conditioning is either irrelevant or can be acquired along the way. Its a mantra one hears more and more, and it doesn't make much sense to me, and seems to fly in the face of the accumulated experience of virtually all other sports.

I'm not talking here about non-sport specific things like the Crossfit cult, I'm thinking about specific combinations of basic physical training aimed at the kinds of strength climbers either need for certain types of moves or else could use to prevent the kinds of injuries that occur when, for example, dynamic moves are made without enough strength to control the consequences.

But don't listen to me. (The almost political nature of these debates means that very little listening is going on anyway.) Consider, for example, what a highly accomplished woman climber has to say. Responding in her blog to questions about building strength for women analogous to the questions in this thread, Steph Davis writes, (http://www.highinfatuation.com/blog/gymless-training/)

I think you’re on the right track with wanting to increase your upper body strength for climbing. As a woman, I notice that if I improve my upper body strength at all, I instantly see dramatic results in my climbing. Since women do not naturally build upper body muscle like men do, I think we are forced to climb with more technique in general. If we give any attention to strength building, it allows us to make use of that technique to an extremely gratifying degree.
I’ve also seen many posts written for climbers that play down the benefits of pullups and pullup workouts. I couldn’t disagree more, especially for women. If you start to do pullup workouts, and possibly fingerboard workouts, you will see a dramatic improvement in your climbing very quickly.


Her article has links to weight, hangboard, and pullup training regimens she uses. Might be worth checking out, if for no other reason than to balance the "just climb" chorus heard here.

I agree with you.

Campusing is the ultimate tool i have found so far. Going through the differant styles of campusing and rung size it will immediately tell you what your upper physical weaknesses are.

Personally i realised i was very strong on doubles but very weak on laddering. That had a real connection to my climbing since i have a heavy dynamic style. After working on ladders im now doing weighted 1-3-5. The obvius connection to climbing is that i do much better on strengthy slow pull through moves that use to be quite a weakness. I find myself going dynamic out of choice rather than ''dynamic or nothing''.

If people look for physical weaknesses the gains are their to be made. If they think campusing and the sorts wont help climbing then they can enjoy the limited choice on the next road trip Sly.

I realise this was slightly off topic to the womens arm strength issue... or was it?. Depends who you ask.

OP, the first few sessions of what ever you choose to do to target the bigger muscles will be very hard and demorolising. Keep at it and you will brake through to see gains. I do admit men seem to start off at a higher level in terms of reps etc.. but trust me we also get the same horrible feeling of being weak.


(This post was edited by ceebo on Apr 6, 2012, 4:06 PM)


onceahardman


Apr 6, 2012, 4:29 PM
Post #17 of 103 (8505 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 3, 2007
Posts: 2467

Re: [shotwell] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

With all due respect, you are not taking on Rich's argument. You are talking around it.

Nobody thinks that more gains will be made by generalized strength training than by specific training for climbing.

But using strength training as an adjunct, as well as a means of lowering the likelihood that you will be injured, can lead to improvements.

I think that is why this issue becomes "political", or even "religious". People "believe" in their own side. Clearly someone with zero strength (say, a quadriplegic) can't climb anything. Someone who manually muscle tests as "fair", or 3/5, isn't going to climb anything. You need some strength to climb hard. It follows there must be some optimal strength level, or more properly, strength/weight ratio.

BTW, the biomechanical differences between training pullups and campusing are pretty trivial, especially if you train pullups on an edge or sloper of some sort, rather than a bar. So, if you train campusing, you'd expect your ability to do pullups to improve, and probably vice versa.


shotwell


Apr 6, 2012, 4:50 PM
Post #18 of 103 (8493 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 5, 2009
Posts: 366

Re: [onceahardman] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

onceahardman wrote:
With all due respect, you are not taking on Rich's argument. You are talking around it.

Nobody thinks that more gains will be made by generalized strength training than by specific training for climbing.

But using strength training as an adjunct, as well as a means of lowering the likelihood that you will be injured, can lead to improvements.

I think that is why this issue becomes "political", or even "religious". People "believe" in their own side. Clearly someone with zero strength (say, a quadriplegic) can't climb anything. Someone who manually muscle tests as "fair", or 3/5, isn't going to climb anything. You need some strength to climb hard. It follows there must be some optimal strength level, or more properly, strength/weight ratio.

BTW, the biomechanical differences between training pullups and campusing are pretty trivial, especially if you train pullups on an edge or sloper of some sort, rather than a bar. So, if you train campusing, you'd expect your ability to do pullups to improve, and probably vice versa.

I never said you can't improve with sport specific strength training, just that you won't be as efficient as if you're using that time to climb. Again, some strength is necessary, but you can certainly build it by sport climbing or bouldering.

As far as the bio-mechanical differences between campusing and pull-ups, I'll restate that I am using campusing to train movement skills, not either strength or power. Believe it or not, there are times you need to be able to campus to complete a problem. While I can get through these problems now, I'm burning a lot more energy than I need to by throwing my lower body around to build momentum. I want to learn how to do large moves using only my upper body. Two sessions of campus work have me confident skipping two rungs on the small Metolius rungs. For me, it seemed to be mainly a question of confidence.

Finally, I'm not saying you don't need strength to climb. What I am saying is that my wife started climbing, unable to do a pull-up. She was able to build the strength to both pull-up, dyno, and campus by simply climbing. I'm suggesting that other people can do the same.

I'm NOT saying that people can't pursue improvement through alternative means. I'm just saying that movement skill training is considered to have a greater rate of payoff than sport specific strength training.


BClear


Apr 6, 2012, 5:30 PM
Post #19 of 103 (8479 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 23, 2009
Posts: 19

Re: [shotwell] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

Thought the OP asked for programs to help her pullups, not opinions on why you think they're needed. Anyways if you do use Armstrongs plan you should focus on the pullups/straight arm hangs over the pushups if your unable to do both. I'll be honest it's no cakewalk for the first two weeks but I had massive gains in week three. Also lookup Ranger Ron's program, which is a popular alternative to the Armstrong routine. Armstrongs routine is literally handed out by Marine recruiters to assist prospects with their pft, there is something to be said for that.


shotwell


Apr 6, 2012, 6:38 PM
Post #20 of 103 (8467 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 5, 2009
Posts: 366

Re: [onceahardman] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

onceahardman wrote:
It follows there must be some optimal strength level, or more properly, strength/weight ratio.

Missed this in the first go 'round. I couldn't agree more, but I think we have differing opinions on how to hit that proper strength:weight.


Partner rgold


Apr 7, 2012, 12:33 AM
Post #21 of 103 (8414 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 3, 2002
Posts: 1800

Re: [shotwell] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

shotwell wrote:
I never said you can't improve with sport specific strength training, just that you won't be as efficient as if you're using that time to climb. Again, some strength is necessary, but you can certainly build it by sport climbing or bouldering….I'm NOT saying that people can't pursue improvement through alternative means. I'm just saying that movement skill training is considered to have a greater rate of payoff than sport specific strength training.

I don't know what "efficient" or "rate of payoff" is supposed to mean here. It seems to me that both are based on an assumption that no time spent not climbing can possibly be as effective as climbing. Obviously, Steph Davis doesn't believe this, and if this claim were true, then climbing might be the only athletic activity in the world for which it is true. In every other sport I know of, beginning to advanced participants have found it advantageous to spend some time in strength training targeted to the needs of the sport but not developed through simply practicing the sport.

Here's another way to think about it: if you get hurt and need to rehab, you'll be doing all kinds of supplementary training before you get back to climbing, at least if you ever want to recover. Climbing by itself is neither efficient nor does it offer a high payoff in this case.

The rehab analogy is neither far-fetched nor irrelevant. The advantage of supplementary training is control. First, control of the loads imposed on the body, and second, control of the progress of those loads. By contrast, training via climbing has neither form of control. Individual moves, most especially dynamic ones, will place highly variable and unpredictable loads on the body, and although one can go from easier to harder problems, the level of control over the resistances applied to the body isn't even remotely comparable to the fine-tuned ability to adjust supplementary training loads.

Training isn't an either-or situation in any other sport and I don't see any reason why it should be an either-or situation in climbing. Climbing training, involving technique, movement, strength, endurance, and coordination drills, supplemented by weight and/or gymnastic training that targets weaknesses relevant to either climbing moves or injury prevention makes more sense than trying to do it all through climbing. That approach doesn't work for other sports, you can't rehab injuries that way, and there is no reason I can see why climbing should be radically different.

Shotwell's sample of one is contradicted by the considerably more experienced Steph Davis sample of one, and in any case tells us nothing about what the best, safest, and most efficient approach might be, because we can't run Shotwell's wife through an alternate program to see how she would have done, and we can't run clones of her through the same experiences to see what injury potential she may have dodged by building strength via relatively uncontrollable means.

By the way, campusing does not meet the kind of control criteria I mentioned above, which makes it a relatively risky training procedure that is only appropriate for advanced climbers for whom the potential gains outweigh the injury risks.

Many years ago, I had some friendly arguments with a famous climber who insisted that the best way to climbing was just to climb. He developed into a fantastic climber, but I think the lack of supplementary training together with a steady diet of very strenuous climbing resulted in the shoulder instabilities that essentially ended his career.

Getting back to the topic at hand, there are controllable progressive pulling exercises Shannon could do that would double or triple her pullup ability. (Most definitely not the Armstrong program, however. Once she can do, say, six to ten pullups, she'd be far better off building higher pulling strength rather than shooting for pointless high repetition numbers.) Add to the pullups a few simple exercises to strengthen and protect the shoulder girdle and she will be a better and more injury-resistant climber with a better shot at a long career. I'd guess she could make significant progress in an hour a week (split into three 20-minute sessions). That is hardly going to take a big bite out of her climbing opportunities or decrease the "efficiency" of her climbing training.


BClear


Apr 7, 2012, 1:48 AM
Post #22 of 103 (8403 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 23, 2009
Posts: 19

Re: [rgold] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (10 ratings)  
Can't Post

Tell ya what. You hit over 1500 pullups in one session then talk about "pointless" repetitions. Its called endurance. But hey I'd listen to you over a two time world record holder and the United States Marine Corp any day. They get results, period. But what do they know? I mean who's ever heard of a physically fit United States Marine? Thousands of people getting results from a proven system adopted by our branch of service that prides itself on being the most physically fit period vs. an internet opinion. And we're not even talking about anything hardcore here. This is standard fare pre entry to OCS routine we're talking here. Bottom line is pullups are a job requirement for Marines. Not so sure its like that with math profs these days. Its like top rope anchors had sex with hangboards and delivered a child named pullup routines.


(This post was edited by BClear on Apr 7, 2012, 2:30 AM)


BClear


Apr 7, 2012, 1:53 AM
Post #23 of 103 (8402 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 23, 2009
Posts: 19

Re: [BClear] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

And most folks start adding weight to their routines after they're able to hit 20-25 for 3 sets. See http://relativestrengthadvantage.com/7-ways-to-add-resistance-to-pull-ups-chin-ups-and-dips/ for ideas on how to add weight for the strength gains.


shotwell


Apr 7, 2012, 6:54 AM
Post #24 of 103 (8375 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 5, 2009
Posts: 366

Re: [rgold] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

rgold wrote:
shotwell wrote:
I never said you can't improve with sport specific strength training, just that you won't be as efficient as if you're using that time to climb. Again, some strength is necessary, but you can certainly build it by sport climbing or bouldering….I'm NOT saying that people can't pursue improvement through alternative means. I'm just saying that movement skill training is considered to have a greater rate of payoff than sport specific strength training.



I don't know what "efficient" or "rate of payoff" is supposed to mean here. It seems to me that both are based on an assumption that no time spent not climbing can possibly be as effective as climbing. Obviously, Steph Davis doesn't believe this, and if this claim were true, then climbing might be the only athletic activity in the world for which it is true. In every other sport I know of, beginning to advanced participants have found it advantageous to spend some time in strength training targeted to the needs of the sport but not developed through simply practicing the sport.

Here's another way to think about it: if you get hurt and need to rehab, you'll be doing all kinds of supplementary training before you get back to climbing, at least if you ever want to recover. Climbing by itself is neither efficient nor does it offer a high payoff in this case.

The rehab analogy is neither far-fetched nor irrelevant. The advantage of supplementary training is control. First, control of the loads imposed on the body, and second, control of the progress of those loads. By contrast, training via climbing has neither form of control. Individual moves, most especially dynamic ones, will place highly variable and unpredictable loads on the body, and although one can go from easier to harder problems, the level of control over the resistances applied to the body isn't even remotely comparable to the fine-tuned ability to adjust supplementary training loads.

Training isn't an either-or situation in any other sport and I don't see any reason why it should be an either-or situation in climbing. Climbing training, involving technique, movement, strength, endurance, and coordination drills, supplemented by weight and/or gymnastic training that targets weaknesses relevant to either climbing moves or injury prevention makes more sense than trying to do it all through climbing. That approach doesn't work for other sports, you can't rehab injuries that way, and there is no reason I can see why climbing should be radically different.

Shotwell's sample of one is contradicted by the considerably more experienced Steph Davis sample of one, and in any case tells us nothing about what the best, safest, and most efficient approach might be, because we can't run Shotwell's wife through an alternate program to see how she would have done, and we can't run clones of her through the same experiences to see what injury potential she may have dodged by building strength via relatively uncontrollable means.

By the way, campusing does not meet the kind of control criteria I mentioned above, which makes it a relatively risky training procedure that is only appropriate for advanced climbers for whom the potential gains outweigh the injury risks.

Many years ago, I had some friendly arguments with a famous climber who insisted that the best way to climbing was just to climb. He developed into a fantastic climber, but I think the lack of supplementary training together with a steady diet of very strenuous climbing resulted in the shoulder instabilities that essentially ended his career.

Getting back to the topic at hand, there are controllable progressive pulling exercises Shannon could do that would double or triple her pullup ability. (Most definitely not the Armstrong program, however. Once she can do, say, six to ten pullups, she'd be far better off building higher pulling strength rather than shooting for pointless high repetition numbers.) Add to the pullups a few simple exercises to strengthen and protect the shoulder girdle and she will be a better and more injury-resistant climber with a better shot at a long career. I'd guess she could make significant progress in an hour a week (split into three 20-minute sessions). That is hardly going to take a big bite out of her climbing opportunities or decrease the "efficiency" of her climbing training.

I agree absolutely that if you have time for both, and you don't do so much conditioning that you reduce the quality of your climbing opportunities there is not much to lose.

To quote Hörst this time instead of paraphrasing, "The learning curve for skill training is steeper and continues upward for longer and more steadily than a curve showing climbing gains in climbing strength from fitness training. Period." He goes on to say, "Elite climbers with highly trained skills are the exception."

While he doesn't express his reasons for suggesting this, I do trust his opinion. I trust it even more because Hörst at least appears to be a total conditioning junkie.

Using Steph as a metric to compare against a beginner is disingenuous. Steph is of the elite, she isn't just getting started. I can't say absolutely why Steph sees payoffs from strength training, but a plausible explanation is that she has learned properly to apply those strength gains through a keen understanding of how her body interacts with the stone.

I also agree that my wife could have gained her current level of climbing skill in another way. Is the way she did things the best? I don't honestly know. But according to Hörst, it could be.

As far as injury prevention exercises are concerned, it was never my intention to argue against them. Your posts make it clear that I'm ignoring pull exercises and general strength exercises that may extend careers. I primarily stretch for injury prevention, but I'd always be willing to expand my repertoire if it meant extending my career. I've probably been too blase in my decade of climbing about this. Upon reflection, I should probably make some changes here. Thanks for the well thought out argument.

It is also clear that climbers need to have a general baseline of fitness. If you're overweight or a long term couch potato, you'll need to get your strength up and your weight down. Even people that are relatively fit (for America) may need some general conditioning. I'm not sure pulling exercises would be my preferred method of altering a strength:weight ratio, but it is one option.

Thanks again Rich, your skilled debate and wealth of experience make this a fun conversation.


(This post was edited by shotwell on Apr 7, 2012, 7:50 AM)


Partner rgold


Apr 7, 2012, 8:40 AM
Post #25 of 103 (8361 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 3, 2002
Posts: 1800

Re: [BClear] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (5 ratings)  
Can't Post

BClear wrote:
Tell ya what. You hit over 1500 pullups in one session then talk about "pointless" repetitions. Its called endurance.

From the perspective of climbing it is called totally irrelevant and pointless endurance.

BClear wrote:
But hey I'd listen to you over a two time world record holder and the United States Marine Corp any day. They get results, period. But what do they know? I mean who's ever heard of a physically fit United States Marine? Thousands of people getting results from a proven system adopted by our branch of service that prides itself on being the most physically fit period vs. an internet opinion.

The marines don't know squat about climbing fitness. You want to fight the bad guys? Train like a marine. You want to climb long and hard? There are far more relevant approaches.

As for trusting an internet opinion, you have a point there. What I'm saying has to make its own internal sense, because I'm not a marine instructor whose knowledge, regardless of its applicability, is supposed to be beyond questioning.

BClear wrote:
And we're not even talking about anything hardcore here. This is standard fare pre entry to OCS routine we're talking here. Bottom line is pullups are a job requirement for Marines. Not so sure its like that with math profs these days. Its like top rope anchors had sex with hangboards and delivered a child named pullup routines.

Insults aren't arguments. In fact, they're an attempt to avoid discussing the real issues.

For what it is worth, this particular math prof trained to seven one-arm pullups on each arm, the ability to climb a gym climbing rope strictly one arm at a time, settling into a full hang before each stride, and regularly did routines involving combinations of one-arm pullups, muscle-ups, and front levers. In climbing-related strength, I'd have blown 99% of the marines, totally out of the water, and I use that phrase advisedly. Which is neither here not there. Their training goals are different ones.

But if the marines want that kind of fitness, then they're going to have to try some home-brewed hangboard and top-rope anchor sex themselves.

[Edited to clarify that the rope-climbing was a gym rope, not a climbing rope.]


(This post was edited by rgold on Apr 7, 2012, 8:45 AM)


jt512


Apr 7, 2012, 11:24 AM
Post #26 of 103 (2390 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21890

Re: [rgold] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

rgold wrote:
Shotwell's sample of one is contradicted by the considerably more experienced Steph Davis sample of one, and in any case tells us nothing about what the best, safest, and most efficient approach might be, because we can't run Shotwell's wife through an alternate program to see how she would have done, and we can't run clones of her through the same experiences to see what injury potential she may have dodged by building strength via relatively uncontrollable means.

On the other hand, we can't rerun Steph Davis to see if she could have sent V9 within her first two years of climbing if she had trained like Shotwell's wife.

Jay


ceebo


Apr 7, 2012, 12:08 PM
Post #27 of 103 (2382 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 8, 2009
Posts: 862

Re: [jt512] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
rgold wrote:
Shotwell's sample of one is contradicted by the considerably more experienced Steph Davis sample of one, and in any case tells us nothing about what the best, safest, and most efficient approach might be, because we can't run Shotwell's wife through an alternate program to see how she would have done, and we can't run clones of her through the same experiences to see what injury potential she may have dodged by building strength via relatively uncontrollable means.

On the other hand, we can't rerun Steph Davis to see if she could have sent V9 within her first two years of climbing if she had trained like Shotwell's wife.

Jay

But to me that leads to such questions as was she consistent in that level of sending at that time?. Was it a long running project leading to a send of familiarity. Was it a 1 move wonder kind of problem, was it a problem of placement over brute strength. Was the v9 here the same as the v9 their etc. I do not wish to take away anything form this persons acomplishment but using 1 single send uder conditions we do not know of is hardly the grounds for argument.

Besides that their is still the differances in height,reach wieght and so on that would alter the results even more in the already impossible rerun.


(This post was edited by ceebo on Apr 7, 2012, 12:11 PM)


shotwell


Apr 7, 2012, 1:04 PM
Post #28 of 103 (2372 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 5, 2009
Posts: 366

Re: [ceebo] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ceebo wrote:
jt512 wrote:
rgold wrote:
Shotwell's sample of one is contradicted by the considerably more experienced Steph Davis sample of one, and in any case tells us nothing about what the best, safest, and most efficient approach might be, because we can't run Shotwell's wife through an alternate program to see how she would have done, and we can't run clones of her through the same experiences to see what injury potential she may have dodged by building strength via relatively uncontrollable means.

On the other hand, we can't rerun Steph Davis to see if she could have sent V9 within her first two years of climbing if she had trained like Shotwell's wife.

Jay

But to me that leads to such questions as was she consistent in that level of sending at that time?. Was it a long running project leading to a send of familiarity. Was it a 1 move wonder kind of problem, was it a problem of placement over brute strength. Was the v9 here the same as the v9 their etc. I do not wish to take away anything form this persons acomplishment but using 1 single send uder conditions we do not know of is hardly the grounds for argument.

Besides that their is still the differances in height,reach wieght and so on that would alter the results even more in the already impossible rerun.

Well, I can answer some of those questions.

1) Last Dance is consensus V9. It is in Bishop, CA. You're welcome to go try it if you think it is soft.

2) Leading up to her send of this problem and in the course of two weeks she climbed: The Little Arete (Consensus V8, 2 days, 2 hours), Gleaming the Cube (Consensus V8, she suggested V5 second attempt, she dabbed on the V2 topout the first), The Croft Problem (Consensus hard V8, 2 days, 2 hours), Mr. Frosty (Consensus V8) 1 day, 1 hour, and Junior's Achievement (Kind of variable between easy V8 and hard V7. She suggested easy for V7, 1 day, 3 or 4 tries) She also completed more V7's in this time period than I would take the time to count.

3) I linked a video to the problem earlier in the thread.

http://www.youtube.com/...x=3&feature=plcp

Last Dance is normally considered "over" after you hit the big compression move. My wife considered the crux to be the big move after, but considered it to be significantly harder than any of the V8s listed above. It was certainly not a 'delicate' problem, though it required grace, precision, and pure power.

4) She put in three sessions of 1 hour a piece to send Last Dance.

As far as directly comparing Steph and my wife, that is kind of foolish. Steph climbs cracks primarily, my wife mainly climbs faces.


shotwell


Apr 7, 2012, 1:09 PM
Post #29 of 103 (2370 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 5, 2009
Posts: 366

Re: [jt512] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
rgold wrote:
Shotwell's sample of one is contradicted by the considerably more experienced Steph Davis sample of one, and in any case tells us nothing about what the best, safest, and most efficient approach might be, because we can't run Shotwell's wife through an alternate program to see how she would have done, and we can't run clones of her through the same experiences to see what injury potential she may have dodged by building strength via relatively uncontrollable means.

On the other hand, we can't rerun Steph Davis to see if she could have sent V9 within her first two years of climbing if she had trained like Shotwell's wife.

Jay

I wanted to make this argument as well, but I thought it would sound too arrogant coming from me.


ceebo


Apr 7, 2012, 1:20 PM
Post #30 of 103 (2368 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 8, 2009
Posts: 862

Re: [shotwell] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

shotwell wrote:
ceebo wrote:
jt512 wrote:
rgold wrote:
Shotwell's sample of one is contradicted by the considerably more experienced Steph Davis sample of one, and in any case tells us nothing about what the best, safest, and most efficient approach might be, because we can't run Shotwell's wife through an alternate program to see how she would have done, and we can't run clones of her through the same experiences to see what injury potential she may have dodged by building strength via relatively uncontrollable means.

On the other hand, we can't rerun Steph Davis to see if she could have sent V9 within her first two years of climbing if she had trained like Shotwell's wife.

Jay

But to me that leads to such questions as was she consistent in that level of sending at that time?. Was it a long running project leading to a send of familiarity. Was it a 1 move wonder kind of problem, was it a problem of placement over brute strength. Was the v9 here the same as the v9 their etc. I do not wish to take away anything form this persons acomplishment but using 1 single send uder conditions we do not know of is hardly the grounds for argument.

Besides that their is still the differances in height,reach wieght and so on that would alter the results even more in the already impossible rerun.

Well, I can answer some of those questions.

1) Last Dance is consensus V9. It is in Bishop, CA. You're welcome to go try it if you think it is soft.

2) Leading up to her send of this problem and in the course of two weeks she climbed: The Little Arete (Consensus V8, 2 days, 2 hours), Gleaming the Cube (Consensus V8, she suggested V5 second attempt, she dabbed on the V2 topout the first), The Croft Problem (Consensus hard V8, 2 days, 2 hours), Mr. Frosty (Consensus V8) 1 day, 1 hour, and Junior's Achievement (Kind of variable between easy V8 and hard V7. She suggested easy for V7, 1 day, 3 or 4 tries) She also completed more V7's in this time period than I would take the time to count.

3) I linked a video to the problem earlier in the thread.

http://www.youtube.com/...x=3&feature=plcp

Last Dance is normally considered "over" after you hit the big compression move. My wife considered the crux to be the big move after, but considered it to be significantly harder than any of the V8s listed above. It was certainly not a 'delicate' problem, though it required grace, precision, and pure power.

4) She put in three sessions of 1 hour a piece to send Last Dance.

As far as directly comparing Steph and my wife, that is kind of foolish. Steph climbs cracks primarily, my wife mainly climbs faces.

Try not to take offence i did not mean it in that way. Thnx for the elaborations.


Partner rgold


Apr 7, 2012, 9:11 PM
Post #31 of 103 (2325 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 3, 2002
Posts: 1800

Re: [jt512] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
rgold wrote:
Shotwell's sample of one is contradicted by the considerably more experienced Steph Davis sample of one, and in any case tells us nothing about what the best, safest, and most efficient approach might be, because we can't run Shotwell's wife through an alternate program to see how she would have done, and we can't run clones of her through the same experiences to see what injury potential she may have dodged by building strength via relatively uncontrollable means.

On the other hand, we can't rerun Steph Davis to see if she could have sent V9 within her first two years of climbing if she had trained like Shotwell's wife.

Jay

Of course. My only point in bringing up Steph Davis as a "sample of one" was to emphasize the fact that you can find examples for any conclusion you'd like. The main point about Steph Davis is that, as a very experienced woman climber offering advice to people in Shannon's postion, she has found supplementary training to be of considerable value and specifically discounted the claim that just climbing is equivalent.

Back in the day, people learned climbing outdoors, progressing at what now would be considered a pedestrian pace through the grades. By the time some upper body strength might be helpful, they already had an substantial base of skills and a conditioning base.

Now people start out indoors and in very short order are trying relatively difficult overhanging problems with dynamic moves and all the shock loading that goes along with them, especially since technique is just developing. To be doing this with relatively little upper-body strength courts all kinds of injury potential in my opinion, especially if hand strength outstrips the ability to stabilize the torso.

Someone who can do one or two pullups who is trying dynamic moves that could end up loading full body weight on one arm is more likely to end up injured in my opinion (and yes, that is an internet opinion whose value will have to be decided by the accompanying logic.) In addtion to the career-ending example I cited previously, I also know a number of very capable women who have had shoulder surgery after a few years of high-standard climbing. Whether they could have avoided the injuries with supplementary pullup and pressing training is unknown, but it is hard to imagine that such training could have hurt.

There's a peculiar paradox in modern bouldering and sport climbing. Dynamic technique has greatly reduced, some people would say has eliminated, the utility of upper body strength. (This is much less true of trad climbing.) But while learning both dynamic technique and static techniques on overhanging terrain, it seems to me that the beginning climber needs the protection afforded by upper body strength more than ever.


shotwell


Apr 8, 2012, 6:36 AM
Post #32 of 103 (2288 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 5, 2009
Posts: 366

Re: [rgold] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

rgold wrote:
Back in the day, people learned climbing outdoors, progressing at what now would be considered a pedestrian pace through the grades. By the time some upper body strength might be helpful, they already had an substantial base of skills and a conditioning base.

Now people start out indoors and in very short order are trying relatively difficult overhanging problems with dynamic moves and all the shock loading that goes along with them, especially since technique is just developing. To be doing this with relatively little upper-body strength courts all kinds of injury potential in my opinion, especially if hand strength outstrips the ability to stabilize the torso.

Modern climbers that do very little climbing indoors are making these huge gains as well. The simple truth is that safer styles such as padded bouldering and sport climbing allow climbers to 'outpace' what their rate of improvement would have been in the past. Gyms have contributed to this phenomenon, as they offer another safe place to work on skills, strength, and power. All provide essentially the same opportunities for improvement.

I have some misgivings about the argument you use about developing upper body strength as a means of developing further control. Dave Graham and Fred Nicole were used as examples earlier in the thread. I get that the application is a little different here, as both are men.

Dave, for example, is fairly dynamic and pretty weak. He can't do a one-arm pull-up. He has climbed exceptional dynamic problems, doesn't train, and climbed very well in his first year. He has been on top of his game for a very long time.

Fred, alternatively, is very static and exceptionally strong. He can crank one pinkie pull-ups. He climbs statically on overhangs, and really believes in control. He has been on the top of his game (and the world) for a long time.

I'm not sure exactly how much protection this upper body strength is affording, to be honest. I understand the logic, but I think we're both just seeing the world through the sum of our experiences. Yours are more extensive, though I feel mine are more applicable to modern techniques. I say this with extreme reservation, as I assume you learned a thing or two about cutting it loose by climbing with Gill.


ceebo


Apr 8, 2012, 6:40 AM
Post #33 of 103 (2288 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 8, 2009
Posts: 862

Re: [rgold] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

rgold wrote:
jt512 wrote:
rgold wrote:
Shotwell's sample of one is contradicted by the considerably more experienced Steph Davis sample of one, and in any case tells us nothing about what the best, safest, and most efficient approach might be, because we can't run Shotwell's wife through an alternate program to see how she would have done, and we can't run clones of her through the same experiences to see what injury potential she may have dodged by building strength via relatively uncontrollable means.

On the other hand, we can't rerun Steph Davis to see if she could have sent V9 within her first two years of climbing if she had trained like Shotwell's wife.

Jay

Of course. My only point in bringing up Steph Davis as a "sample of one" was to emphasize the fact that you can find examples for any conclusion you'd like. The main point about Steph Davis is that, as a very experienced woman climber offering advice to people in Shannon's postion, she has found supplementary training to be of considerable value and specifically discounted the claim that just climbing is equivalent.

Back in the day, people learned climbing outdoors, progressing at what now would be considered a pedestrian pace through the grades. By the time some upper body strength might be helpful, they already had an substantial base of skills and a conditioning base.

Now people start out indoors and in very short order are trying relatively difficult overhanging problems with dynamic moves and all the shock loading that goes along with them, especially since technique is just developing. To be doing this with relatively little upper-body strength courts all kinds of injury potential in my opinion, especially if hand strength outstrips the ability to stabilize the torso.

Someone who can do one or two pullups who is trying dynamic moves that could end up loading full body weight on one arm is more likely to end up injured in my opinion (and yes, that is an internet opinion whose value will have to be decided by the accompanying logic.) In addtion to the career-ending example I cited previously, I also know a number of very capable women who have had shoulder surgery after a few years of high-standard climbing. Whether they could have avoided the injuries with supplementary pullup and pressing training is unknown, but it is hard to imagine that such training could have hurt.

There's a peculiar paradox in modern bouldering and sport climbing. Dynamic technique has greatly reduced, some people would say has eliminated, the utility of upper body strength. (This is much less true of trad climbing.) But while learning both dynamic technique and static techniques on overhanging terrain, it seems to me that the beginning climber needs the protection afforded by upper body strength more than ever.

The shock load from dynamic miss haps is a logical reason of injury, on the other hand don't you think the injury potential may just be shifted to elbows and wrists in the more static nature?. Or instead of freak shock load injurys you would perhaps expect to see more built over time injurys in the static nature.

I would pot shot guess that the main reason of injury in new and more experianced climbers is doing to much and/or to much of the same. Most of the advice is '' 5 days a week, 2 hour sessions''. Take that with the fact most new climbers feel the need to climb full steam every session.

For the more experianced climbers perhaps they fall victem to doing to much of the same. For example how differant is a campus session to climbing steep over hang for the relitave body parts?. The finger grip styls may change but the elbows/shoulders don't get quite the same luxury.

I don't think any amount of off training could stop a injury of such over use or shock load.


(This post was edited by ceebo on Apr 8, 2012, 6:42 AM)


Partner rgold


Apr 8, 2012, 8:58 AM
Post #34 of 103 (2278 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 3, 2002
Posts: 1800

Re: [shotwell] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

shotwell wrote:
I have some misgivings about the argument you use about developing upper body strength as a means of developing further control. Dave Graham and Fred Nicole were used as examples earlier in the thread. I get that the application is a little different here, as both are men.

Well, I had decided for this discussion, about what might be useful for a woman starting out, to stay away from the utility of strength for expert climbers. But I do wish I could find a link to a bouldering video I saw with Dave Graham and Chris Sharma. They were trying an overhanging dynamic move to a catch that caused both feet to cut loose. Graham couldn't come close; Sharma nailed it multiple times. The difference was entirely one of strength. Sharma could catch and maintain a one-arm lockoff as he swung out, Graham caught and immediately (and rather violently) dropped to full-arm extension, his body forming a longer pendulum that caused him to fly off the hold into space every time.

Strength has other uses. In trad climbing, dynamic technique isn't always appropriate for survival reasons. But there is also the matter of getting gear in. You can't dyno in high protection, you have to be able to lock off to place high pieces. Although perhaps not common, there are times when a quick pullup is actually a more efficient solution to a move that otherwise requires a host of intricate body positions. And strength also increases your margin of error, which is to say that you can miss the precise timing or the obscure and counterintuitive foot placement and still make the move on the first try. Such considerations are nothing more than arcane matters of style classification for boulderers and sport climbers, but for trad climbers, avoiding falling may have more than stylistic consequences.

I don't think anyone can seriously suggest that more strength isn't a good thing, even for David Graham. The claim is that you'll get more out of the time spent developing technique. I absolutely agree, don't get me wrong. But then we get what I think are argument extremes in which even relatively minor amounts of strength training are denounced. Some of this is understandable, since it is in response to intense and protracted body-building routines that are surely a waste of good climbing time.

But as I've said over and over, completely rejecting limited, appropriate, and targeted strength training really makes no sense and flies in the face to the substantial accumulated wisdom of training and rehabilitating for sports. But the two points of view are now just repeating themselves and so it is surely time to give it a rest.


granite_grrl


Apr 9, 2012, 8:06 AM
Post #35 of 103 (2214 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 14702

Re: [rgold] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

rgold wrote:
Shannon, I don't think you are getting very good advice here.

There is no question that technique reduces the need to apply pure strength, and that one can and should learn an enormous amount from texts like The Self-Coached Climber. But I also think it is irrational to insist that general conditioning is either irrelevant or can be acquired along the way. Its a mantra one hears more and more, and it doesn't make much sense to me, and seems to fly in the face of the accumulated experience of virtually all other sports.

I'm not talking here about non-sport specific things like the Crossfit cult, I'm thinking about specific combinations of basic physical training aimed at the kinds of strength climbers either need for certain types of moves or else could use to prevent the kinds of injuries that occur when, for example, dynamic moves are made without enough strength to control the consequences.

But don't listen to me. (The almost political nature of these debates means that very little listening is going on anyway.) Consider, for example, what a highly accomplished woman climber has to say. Responding in her blog to questions about building strength for women analogous to the questions in this thread, Steph Davis writes, (http://www.highinfatuation.com/blog/gymless-training/)

I think you’re on the right track with wanting to increase your upper body strength for climbing. As a woman, I notice that if I improve my upper body strength at all, I instantly see dramatic results in my climbing. Since women do not naturally build upper body muscle like men do, I think we are forced to climb with more technique in general. If we give any attention to strength building, it allows us to make use of that technique to an extremely gratifying degree.
I’ve also seen many posts written for climbers that play down the benefits of pullups and pullup workouts. I couldn’t disagree more, especially for women. If you start to do pullup workouts, and possibly fingerboard workouts, you will see a dramatic improvement in your climbing very quickly.


Her article has links to weight, hangboard, and pullup training regimens she uses. Might be worth checking out, if for no other reason than to balance the "just climb" chorus heard here.

Great post, rgold. I think a lot of women would do well focusing on some strength training and I'm looking forward to going through Steph's blag too.

But what I worry about with Shannon's post is that she's probably not identifying the things that are actually holding her back. If she's a newer climber she might be trying problems from V2 to V4. Telling her that focusing on strength to get up these problems won't take her as far as learning the techniqu required in these initial month (based on the fact that she already sounds decently strong).

She should absolutly work on building strength as well and continue with this through her climbing career, but I think that focusing on bouldering initially will bring her a long way in terms of strength building too (at least for a while). But if she doesn't build up her technique right now any strength gains she makes will go to waste.


ceebo


Apr 9, 2012, 5:40 PM
Post #36 of 103 (2151 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 8, 2009
Posts: 862

Re: [granite_grrl] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

granite_grrl wrote:
rgold wrote:
Shannon, I don't think you are getting very good advice here.

There is no question that technique reduces the need to apply pure strength, and that one can and should learn an enormous amount from texts like The Self-Coached Climber. But I also think it is irrational to insist that general conditioning is either irrelevant or can be acquired along the way. Its a mantra one hears more and more, and it doesn't make much sense to me, and seems to fly in the face of the accumulated experience of virtually all other sports.

I'm not talking here about non-sport specific things like the Crossfit cult, I'm thinking about specific combinations of basic physical training aimed at the kinds of strength climbers either need for certain types of moves or else could use to prevent the kinds of injuries that occur when, for example, dynamic moves are made without enough strength to control the consequences.

But don't listen to me. (The almost political nature of these debates means that very little listening is going on anyway.) Consider, for example, what a highly accomplished woman climber has to say. Responding in her blog to questions about building strength for women analogous to the questions in this thread, Steph Davis writes, (http://www.highinfatuation.com/blog/gymless-training/)

I think you’re on the right track with wanting to increase your upper body strength for climbing. As a woman, I notice that if I improve my upper body strength at all, I instantly see dramatic results in my climbing. Since women do not naturally build upper body muscle like men do, I think we are forced to climb with more technique in general. If we give any attention to strength building, it allows us to make use of that technique to an extremely gratifying degree.
I’ve also seen many posts written for climbers that play down the benefits of pullups and pullup workouts. I couldn’t disagree more, especially for women. If you start to do pullup workouts, and possibly fingerboard workouts, you will see a dramatic improvement in your climbing very quickly.


Her article has links to weight, hangboard, and pullup training regimens she uses. Might be worth checking out, if for no other reason than to balance the "just climb" chorus heard here.

Great post, rgold. I think a lot of women would do well focusing on some strength training and I'm looking forward to going through Steph's blag too.

But what I worry about with Shannon's post is that she's probably not identifying the things that are actually holding her back. If she's a newer climber she might be trying problems from V2 to V4. Telling her that focusing on strength to get up these problems won't take her as far as learning the techniqu required in these initial month (based on the fact that she already sounds decently strong).

She should absolutly work on building strength as well and continue with this through her climbing career, but I think that focusing on bouldering initially will bring her a long way in terms of strength building too (at least for a while). But if she doesn't build up her technique right now any strength gains she makes will go to waste.

You consider ''barely 2 pull ups'' as reasonably strong?. I would consider that to be a bigger weakness than her current technique level, how ever low that might be. 2 pull ups is good for a women is what you meant?. Ok great, cookies for her.. but being realistic in reltaion to climbing, 2 pull ups? thats weak. I'm sorry to be harsh but be honist.. it just is.

You yourself are trying to increase your own upper body strength right?. Why then is it ok for you and not for her.. becuase you have some technique, oh ok.

Don't you think that (in your own admition) being to weak in the upper body held you back on steeper terain?. In the interest of her faster being in a position to learn and climb on steeper terain then should't the base skills include the strength to actualy be on them in the first place?. It escapes me how a person can learn technique on steep ground where they are forced to be straight armed or else they burn out.

Just building to 5-7 pull ups is hardly asking miricles, hard work sure.. get use to it?.

Pull ups and technique are hardly the repeling poles of magnets either. It's actualy possible to do a few sets of pull ups and then good technique drills in one sesion. The horror.


(This post was edited by ceebo on Apr 9, 2012, 5:42 PM)


granite_grrl


Apr 9, 2012, 6:24 PM
Post #37 of 103 (2132 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 14702

Re: [ceebo] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ceebo wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
rgold wrote:
Shannon, I don't think you are getting very good advice here.

There is no question that technique reduces the need to apply pure strength, and that one can and should learn an enormous amount from texts like The Self-Coached Climber. But I also think it is irrational to insist that general conditioning is either irrelevant or can be acquired along the way. Its a mantra one hears more and more, and it doesn't make much sense to me, and seems to fly in the face of the accumulated experience of virtually all other sports.

I'm not talking here about non-sport specific things like the Crossfit cult, I'm thinking about specific combinations of basic physical training aimed at the kinds of strength climbers either need for certain types of moves or else could use to prevent the kinds of injuries that occur when, for example, dynamic moves are made without enough strength to control the consequences.

But don't listen to me. (The almost political nature of these debates means that very little listening is going on anyway.) Consider, for example, what a highly accomplished woman climber has to say. Responding in her blog to questions about building strength for women analogous to the questions in this thread, Steph Davis writes, (http://www.highinfatuation.com/blog/gymless-training/)

I think you’re on the right track with wanting to increase your upper body strength for climbing. As a woman, I notice that if I improve my upper body strength at all, I instantly see dramatic results in my climbing. Since women do not naturally build upper body muscle like men do, I think we are forced to climb with more technique in general. If we give any attention to strength building, it allows us to make use of that technique to an extremely gratifying degree.
I’ve also seen many posts written for climbers that play down the benefits of pullups and pullup workouts. I couldn’t disagree more, especially for women. If you start to do pullup workouts, and possibly fingerboard workouts, you will see a dramatic improvement in your climbing very quickly.


Her article has links to weight, hangboard, and pullup training regimens she uses. Might be worth checking out, if for no other reason than to balance the "just climb" chorus heard here.

Great post, rgold. I think a lot of women would do well focusing on some strength training and I'm looking forward to going through Steph's blag too.

But what I worry about with Shannon's post is that she's probably not identifying the things that are actually holding her back. If she's a newer climber she might be trying problems from V2 to V4. Telling her that focusing on strength to get up these problems won't take her as far as learning the techniqu required in these initial month (based on the fact that she already sounds decently strong).

She should absolutly work on building strength as well and continue with this through her climbing career, but I think that focusing on bouldering initially will bring her a long way in terms of strength building too (at least for a while). But if she doesn't build up her technique right now any strength gains she makes will go to waste.

You consider ''barely 2 pull ups'' as reasonably strong?. I would consider that to be a bigger weakness than her current technique level, how ever low that might be. 2 pull ups is good for a women is what you meant?. Ok great, cookies for her.. but being realistic in reltaion to climbing, 2 pull ups? thats weak. I'm sorry to be harsh but be honist.. it just is.

You yourself are trying to increase your own upper body strength right?. Why then is it ok for you and not for her.. becuase you have some technique, oh ok.

Don't you think that (in your own admition) being to weak in the upper body held you back on steeper terain?. In the interest of her faster being in a position to learn and climb on steeper terain then should't the base skills include the strength to actualy be on them in the first place?. It escapes me how a person can learn technique on steep ground where they are forced to be straight armed or else they burn out.

Just building to 5-7 pull ups is hardly asking miricles, hard work sure.. get use to it?.

Pull ups and technique are hardly the repeling poles of magnets either. It's actualy possible to do a few sets of pull ups and then good technique drills in one sesion. The horror.

Have you ever done a poll of women who recently started climbing of how many pullups they can do?

By my own admission I know there are specific moves that require lock off and controlled dynamic movement that I have had problems with on routes in the past (in general I'm not shabby on steep rock though and I love climbing that stuff). I have also been climbing long enough that I can do a reasonable analysis of my climbing abilities.

Most beginners can't. Most female beginners (at least most of the ones I've climb with over the years) can't do a single pullup much less two, so yeah, that's probably not her problem at the moment. Most beginners lack technique and no matter how strong (or weak) this is generally what's really holding them back. I've seen many girls focus on needing to get stronger and ignore the fact that there's a lot of technique involved as well.


ceebo


Apr 9, 2012, 7:49 PM
Post #38 of 103 (2111 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 8, 2009
Posts: 862

Re: [granite_grrl] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

granite_grrl wrote:
Most beginners can't. Most female beginners (at least most of the ones I've climb with over the years) can't do a single pullup much less two, so yeah, that's probably not her problem at the moment. Most beginners lack technique and no matter how strong (or weak) this is generally what's really holding them back. I've seen many girls focus on needing to get stronger and ignore the fact that there's a lot of technique involved as well.

And this amounts to a overhang being not so far off pull ups. It stands to reason the more upper strength a person has.. the more time they have on the wall to learn technique. When i say this i guess you automaticaly think that a newb with strength by nature has no concept of technique.. they are so strong they just don't need to learn it.. so they campus to the top?. That's rediculess.

This is where friends, coach etc come into it. We can speed up the learning of technique. With that in mind (and this is not guessing) the stronger climbers progress much faster.

Ofc their are people who are not so strong but are just gifted in picking up technique.. but their are also strong climbers who are just as gifted. Its not a clear cut case of one or the other that you seem to see in climbing.

I come into contact with new climbers alot. I have seen many times a person with great technique fall off a over hang where a person with lesser technique was able to pull through the lip.

I'm not saying one is better than the other, im simply saying the middle ground between both is going to be the best start for a climber. 2 pull ups.. is not the middle ground sorry.


(This post was edited by ceebo on Apr 9, 2012, 7:50 PM)


granite_grrl


Apr 10, 2012, 4:29 AM
Post #39 of 103 (2072 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 14702

Re: [ceebo] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ceebo wrote:
And this amounts to a overhang being not so far off pull ups. It stands to reason the more upper strength a person has.. the more time they have on the wall to learn technique.

If this is what you think overhang technique consists of then it sounds like you need to work on your technique as well.

FYI - strength is not what keeps a person hanging onto a wall, giving them time to figure out a move, it's endurance. You would do well with reading the Self Coached Climber yourself.


Partner cracklover


Apr 10, 2012, 9:04 AM
Post #40 of 103 (2036 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 9973

Re: [shotwell] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

shotwell wrote:
ShannonT wrote:
I've just recently started climbing ALOT and find i have no pull strength which is a pain as i find it hard to do overhang bolder problems. Honestly i can hardly do 2 pull ups.

What shall i do, i'm kind of needing a training programme but don't know where to start.Frown

My wife started climbing two years ago, unable to do a pull up. Her 'training program' has always been to climb. She puts in mileage, hits the boulders, and always challenges herself. She rests as needed (typically 2 days on, 1 off.)

After two years of this, she is bouldering V9 with powerful, dynamic movement.

That is very, very impressive.

GO


ceebo


Apr 10, 2012, 9:49 AM
Post #41 of 103 (2024 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 8, 2009
Posts: 862

Re: [granite_grrl] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

granite_grrl wrote:
ceebo wrote:
And this amounts to a overhang being not so far off pull ups. It stands to reason the more upper strength a person has.. the more time they have on the wall to learn technique.

If this is what you think overhang technique consists of then it sounds like you need to work on your technique as well.

FYI - strength is not what keeps a person hanging onto a wall, giving them time to figure out a move, it's endurance. You would do well with reading the Self Coached Climber yourself.

You miss understood, a begginer does not have refined over hang technique (see the part i bolded in your other post). For all they do have feet on the wall they are rarely using them properly.. and yes it does amount to something better described as pull ups than climbing.

You just don't seem to accept that a stronger climber has a better start to climbing when shown down the right path of tehcnique training. They can put in more miledge at the same level as the weaker climber to learn even more. They can also be taught certain techniques that genuinely require X amount of strength.

On the last part you are just being petty or again miss understood. For her to build upto 5 pull ups would be better described as strength training. That higher base of strength will allow a higher base of endurance to develop within climbing.

Allot of newer climbers also spend far greater time on easier angle terrain. The fingers and forearms get a better work out. Then when it comes to over hangs you may find (if you watch enough new climbers) that the leading reason for the fall wa upper body strength or even core. Having a greater base of upper strength eliminates it as the prodominent reason for failure (technique aside) and thus alows the fingers and for arms to develop under the greater weight inherent of steeper terain.

Now i sence again you will take the part i said ''technique aside'' out of context. Think logical, a person with lower strength and bad technique can not be in a better position than a person with higher strength and the same level of technique (can we assume the climbers are clones of the same so you cant take that road of avoidence).

If you assume fingers, forearms and technique are allways going to be the weakest and train you must.. don't complain when you realise your upper body and the likes of core become the real weakness.

- edit. I personaly think its lazy or just bad advice when the words ''just learn technique'' are given to new climbers. When do they stop learning just technique.. when physical ability is the reason for a 2 year long platue?. Explain to me why a new climber (3-12 month) should only train technique and rely on physical gains to come as a by product?.

Instead of arguing technique learning makes the most of what ever physical ability you have.. how about you try and prove wrong the notion than being to weak slows down the learning of technique. Good luck.


(This post was edited by ceebo on Apr 10, 2012, 10:04 AM)


redlude97


Apr 10, 2012, 9:59 AM
Post #42 of 103 (2016 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 988

Re: [ceebo] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ceebo wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
ceebo wrote:
And this amounts to a overhang being not so far off pull ups. It stands to reason the more upper strength a person has.. the more time they have on the wall to learn technique.

If this is what you think overhang technique consists of then it sounds like you need to work on your technique as well.

FYI - strength is not what keeps a person hanging onto a wall, giving them time to figure out a move, it's endurance. You would do well with reading the Self Coached Climber yourself.

You miss understood, a begginer does not have refined over hang technique (see the part i bolded in your other post). For all they do have feet on the wall they are rarely using them properly.. and yes it does amount to something better described as pull ups than climbing.

You just don't seem to accept that a stronger climber has a better start to climbing when shown down the right path of tehcnique training. They can put in more miledge at the same level as the weaker climber to learn even more. They can also be taught certain techniques that genuinely require X amount of strength.

On the last part you are just being petty or again miss understood. For her to build upto 5 pull ups would be better described as strength training. That higher base of strength will allow a higher base of endurance to develop within climbing.

Allot of newer climbers also spend far greater time on easier angle terrain. The fingers and forearms get a better work out. Then when it comes to over hangs you may find (if you watch enough new climbers) that the leading reason for the fall wa upper body strength or even core. Having a greater base of upper strength eliminates it as the prodominent reason for failure (technique aside) and thus alows the fingers and for arms to develop under the greater weight inherent of steeper terain.

Now i sence again you will take the part i said ''technique aside'' out of context. Think logical, a person with lower strength and bad technique can not be in a better position than a person with higher strength and the same level of technique (can we assume the climbers are clones of the same so you cant take that road of avoidence).

If you assume fingers, forearms and technique are allways going to be the weakest and train you must.. don't complain when you realise your upper body and the likes of core become the real weakness.
Well no shit sherlock. Of course starting out stronger would be better in most cases.

Now take 2 beginner climbers with the same strength, have one train in the climbing gym 3 days a week, and have the other climb 1 day a week, and devote the other 2 days to pullups. Which one do you think will be the better climber after a month?


(This post was edited by redlude97 on Apr 10, 2012, 10:00 AM)


Partner cracklover


Apr 10, 2012, 10:00 AM
Post #43 of 103 (2013 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 9973

Re: [ceebo] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ceebo wrote:
granite_grrl wrote:
Most beginners can't. Most female beginners (at least most of the ones I've climb with over the years) can't do a single pullup much less two, so yeah, that's probably not her problem at the moment. Most beginners lack technique and no matter how strong (or weak) this is generally what's really holding them back. I've seen many girls focus on needing to get stronger and ignore the fact that there's a lot of technique involved as well.

And this amounts to a overhang being not so far off pull ups. It stands to reason the more upper strength a person has.. the more time they have on the wall to learn technique. When i say this i guess you automaticaly think that a newb with strength by nature has no concept of technique.. they are so strong they just don't need to learn it.. so they campus to the top?. That's rediculess.

This is where friends, coach etc come into it. We can speed up the learning of technique. With that in mind (and this is not guessing) the stronger climbers progress much faster.

Ofc their are people who are not so strong but are just gifted in picking up technique.. but their are also strong climbers who are just as gifted. Its not a clear cut case of one or the other that you seem to see in climbing.

I come into contact with new climbers alot. I have seen many times a person with great technique fall off a over hang where a person with lesser technique was able to pull through the lip.

I'm not saying one is better than the other, im simply saying the middle ground between both is going to be the best start for a climber. 2 pull ups.. is not the middle ground sorry.

I agree entirely with GG - there is no evidence that the OP is so weak that time doing anything aside from climbing will give greater benefit than climbing alone, at this point. In fact, I suspect that being too strong is detrimental to beginners learning good technique as quickly as possible.

But with that said, I don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater - I do think that for some climbers (maybe most?) supplemental training is beneficial.

There is a part of RG's argument that I'd like to flesh out. I think we all agree that there is an optimum level of climbing-specific power (per weight) for climbing. His supposition, I think, is that targeted supplemental training can get you there more effectively than climbing alone (setting aside the issue of injury).

Here's where I'd like to expand on RG's argument.

Everyone's body responds to physical training differently. On one end of the spectrum are those who gain power relatively quickly, for a given amount of training. Natural bodybuilders, if you will. On the other are those who can put more time and effort into it and see only half the gains. Natural ectomorphs, if you will.

It stands to reason that if you are in the pool of people on the ectomorph end of the spectrum, *some* amount of specifically targeted training would be required to get you the gains that people on the bodybuilder end would get automatically, through just climbing.

To say otherwise would be to claim that those people who genetically gain less strength through the same amount of effort "should" have less strength. An accident of genetics is the only difference between the two pools, and why should the people on one end of the pool not be allowed to gain some of the strength through non-climbing training regimes that the people on the other end of the pool will get without them?

For some people, simply being a girl is just such an accident of genetics. So why shouldn't they do supplemental training? It makes perfect sense to me that it would be helpful for someone like Steph Davis, if you think about things in the way I've stated it above.

GO


(This post was edited by cracklover on Apr 10, 2012, 10:14 AM)


shotwell


Apr 10, 2012, 2:16 PM
Post #44 of 103 (1967 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 5, 2009
Posts: 366

Re: [cracklover] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

cracklover wrote:
shotwell wrote:
ShannonT wrote:
I've just recently started climbing ALOT and find i have no pull strength which is a pain as i find it hard to do overhang bolder problems. Honestly i can hardly do 2 pull ups.

What shall i do, i'm kind of needing a training programme but don't know where to start.Frown

My wife started climbing two years ago, unable to do a pull up. Her 'training program' has always been to climb. She puts in mileage, hits the boulders, and always challenges herself. She rests as needed (typically 2 days on, 1 off.)

After two years of this, she is bouldering V9 with powerful, dynamic movement.

That is very, very impressive.

GO

I promised myself I wouldn't respond to this thread anymore after Rich's suggestion that we agree to disagree, but thanks from her and one very proud husband.

The funny thing is that she doesn't consider it impressive, at all. It amazes me how the rising standards for the elite change the perception of (IMO) a pretty talented new climber.


ceebo


Apr 10, 2012, 4:11 PM
Post #45 of 103 (1938 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 8, 2009
Posts: 862

Re: [redlude97] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

redlude97 wrote:
Now take 2 beginner climbers with the same strength, have one train in the climbing gym 3 days a week, and have the other climb 1 day a week, and devote the other 2 days to pullups. Which one do you think will be the better climber after a month?

You have set conditions where their is only one winner.. so why bother?.

Even it up a bit, the guy would also introduce other forms of training when able. Hang boards, campusing and all the rest of it ( ofc im talking greater duration than 1 month). How can you say for sure the ''just climb'' guy takes all?. Has this been tested?. I would apreciate some links to actual experiments of this because it genuinely interests me.

An interesting thought, the guy doing 1 day per week seperates the enviroment he learns technique in to the enviroment he gains physical condition in.

As a training plan i think that means something. He can look at the climbing and fully focus that time on pure technique learning and consoldation (until the point it deminishes and he can spend timefully projecting and grade pushing). He can use the campusing etc to focus on physical weaknesses.. its very very easy to determin a physical weakness when you focus them individualy as with campusing and so. Its also far easier to track and develop those weaknesses into strengths as a result.

When a person falls off a problem you can't be enitrely sure why.. it could be a number of influences or a combination of a few. 'that imo makes discovering true weaknesses a difficult task.

Perhaps that more direct aproach would gave greater rewards than you may think at first look?.

Do you think on the whole a person realy needs to spend LOTS of time on technique?. IMO technique is the first thing to go into deminishing returns (lets not confuse technique with route spacific problem solving). Again IMO i think physical condition of all things climbing related takes far longer to see deminished returns. You may actualy have not been far off with your 2:1 ratio.


(This post was edited by ceebo on Apr 10, 2012, 4:35 PM)


bearbreeder


Apr 10, 2012, 4:34 PM
Post #46 of 103 (1928 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [ShannonT] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ignore all the usual RC banter ....

it all depends what you call "climbing" ... there is plenty of climbing that is not your usual gym overhung big holds routes ...

just go to anywhere that has difficult less than overhanging terrain .... squamish for example .. and youll find that footwork is what pays dividends here ...

there are other places that do require a bit more upper body strength ... but then its quite hilarious when some hawt yung gurl can outclimb me on those type of terrains regardless of how little arm strength they have ... they simply have better technique

when was the last time you had to do a pull up on a slab, or a less than vertical crack? ... hmmmmm

now finger strength ... that does matter ....

Wink


ceebo


Apr 10, 2012, 4:40 PM
Post #47 of 103 (1922 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 8, 2009
Posts: 862

Re: [bearbreeder] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
ignore all the usual RC banter ....

it all depends what you call "climbing" ... there is plenty of climbing that is not your usual gym overhung big holds routes ...

just go to anywhere that has difficult less than overhanging terrain .... squamish for example .. and youll find that footwork is what pays dividends here ...

there are other places that do require a bit more upper body strength ... but then its quite hilarious when some hawt yung gurl can outclimb me on those type of terrains regardless of how little arm strength they have ... they simply have better technique

when was the last time you had to do a pull up on a slab, or a less than vertical crack? ... hmmmmm

now finger strength ... that does matter ....

Wink

I call all sorts of climbing.. climbing. Do you intend to come across as though one style (probably the style you do) is better than the other?.

What if she wans to climb over hangs?.. and i can show you plenty of overhangs that have not a wif of a jug.. and also require good footwork.

I tend to think that hawt chick not only has better technique than you.. but she is also stronger than you. Do you find it difficult to accept a women is stronger than you?.


redlude97


Apr 10, 2012, 4:44 PM
Post #48 of 103 (1921 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 988

Re: [ceebo] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ceebo wrote:
redlude97 wrote:
Now take 2 beginner climbers with the same strength, have one train in the climbing gym 3 days a week, and have the other climb 1 day a week, and devote the other 2 days to pullups. Which one do you think will be the better climber after a month?

You have set conditions where their is only one winner.. so why bother?.

Even it up a bit, the guy would also introduce other forms of training when able. Hang boards, campusing and all the rest of it ( ofc im talking greater duration than 1 month). How can you say for sure the ''just climb'' guy takes all?. Has this been tested?. I would apreciate some links to actual experiments of this because it genuinely interests me.

An interesting thought, the guy doing 1 day per week seperates the enviroment he learns technique in to the enviroment he gains physical condition in.

As a training plan i think that means something. He can look at the climbing and fully focus that time on pure technique learning and consoldation (until the point it deminishes and he can spend timefully projecting and grade pushing). He can use the campusing etc to focus on physical weaknesses.. its very very easy to determin a physical weakness when you focus them individualy as with campusing and so. Its also far easier to track and develop those weaknesses into strengths as a result.

When a person falls off a problem you can't be enitrely sure why.. it could be a number of influences or a combination of a few. 'that imo makes discovering true weaknesses a difficult task.

Perhaps that more direct aproach would gave greater rewards than you may think at first look?.

Do you think on the whole a person realy needs to spend LOTS of time on technique?. IMO technique is the first thing to go into deminishing returns (lets not confuse technique with route spacific problem solving). Again IMO i think physical condition of all things climbing related takes far longer to see deminished returns. You may actualy have not been far off with your 2:1 ratio.
You realize you are posting in the beginners forum right? Yes a beginner needs to focus solely on technique, the strength can come later, whereas focusing on strength too early leads to ingraining poor technique the majority of the time. most people are susceptible to it.


bearbreeder


Apr 10, 2012, 4:54 PM
Post #49 of 103 (1911 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 1, 2009
Posts: 1960

Re: [ceebo] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ceebo wrote:
I call all sorts of climbing.. climbing. Do you intend to come across as though one style (probably the style you do) is better than the other?.

What if she wans to climb over hangs?.. and i can show you plenty of overhangs that have not a wif of a jug.. and also require good footwork.

I tend to think that hawt chick not only has better technique than you.. but she is also stronger than you. Do you find it difficult to accept a women is stronger than you?.

blah blah blah blah blah blah ....

i can definitely do more "pull ups" than than many chicks who can outclimb me easily ... and more push ups, arm curls, and campus jugs ...

it doesnt matter .... their technique is simply better than mine ...

the best way to gain dividends fast and avoid injury is to work on yr technique when starting out ... at a certain point extra training in certain areas may help you ... but not for a new climber fresh in the gym

as to "better" climbing .. thats yr own words ... the idea that you need arm strength or pull ups for ALL climbing is simply not true ... try some slab sometime

or just go out and climb instead of keyboard commandoing ... i just got back from a 4 day trip so im having some old fashion RC fun on my rest day before i head back out

Tongue


redlude97


Apr 10, 2012, 4:56 PM
Post #50 of 103 (1906 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 988

Re: [bearbreeder] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

bearbreeder wrote:
ceebo wrote:
I call all sorts of climbing.. climbing. Do you intend to come across as though one style (probably the style you do) is better than the other?.

What if she wans to climb over hangs?.. and i can show you plenty of overhangs that have not a wif of a jug.. and also require good footwork.

I tend to think that hawt chick not only has better technique than you.. but she is also stronger than you. Do you find it difficult to accept a women is stronger than you?.

blah blah blah blah blah blah ....

i can definitely do more "pull ups" than than many chicks who can outclimb me easily ... and more push ups, arm curls, and campus jugs ...

it doesnt matter .... their technique is simply better than mine ...

the best way to gain dividends fast and avoid injury is to work on yr technique when starting out ... at a certain point extra training in certain areas may help you ... but not for a new climber fresh in the gym

as to "better" climbing .. thats yr own words ... the idea that you need arm strength or pull ups for ALL climbing is simply not true ... try some slab sometime

or just go out and climb instead of keyboard commandoing ... i just got back from a 4 day trip so im having some old fashion RC fun on my rest day before i head back out

Tongue
The world is about to end, I actually agree with bearbreeder


ceebo


Apr 10, 2012, 6:20 PM
Post #51 of 103 (3233 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 8, 2009
Posts: 862

Re: [redlude97] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

redlude97 wrote:
You realize you are posting in the beginners forum right? Yes a beginner needs to focus solely on technique, the strength can come later, whereas focusing on strength too early leads to ingraining poor technique the majority of the time. most people are susceptible to it.

Where did you get that conclusion from?. I have never came across solid evidence from people who have tested this indepth. I have seen new climbers with no help doing just that, im yet to see a climber with good guidence have their strength ruine their learning of technique as you imply.

How can you expect them to learn what feels efficient if its all easy for them?. These links below kinde demonstrate how being strong would alow a climber to skip what would be considered ''good technique''. Woods is clearly just pissing the problems for fun, new strong climbers may attempt a less gracefull version on a lower level with lack of guidence. The guidence is to put them on a level of climbing where he benifit of technique can be felt.

http://www.youtube.com/...&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKruqscrzT4


hannah.wolfmom


Apr 10, 2012, 6:59 PM
Post #52 of 103 (3227 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 27, 2011
Posts: 23

Re: [ShannonT] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

<
ShannonT wrote:
I've just recently started climbing ALOT and find i have no pull strength which is a pain as i find it hard to do overhang bolder problems. Honestly i can hardly do 2 pull ups.

What shall i do, i'm kind of needing a training programme but don't know where to start.Frown
>

I like this question... I haven't been ciimbing that long, only a little over a year but I can consistently lead most 5.9 sport routes, and a lot of 10's. I really fell in love with climbing. I know it's annoying to bring up the length of time climbing : grade ratio, but I think it has some value here. When I am suplementing "just climbing" with strength training, I can more consistently climb .10's. Maybe there are some people out there who climbed .10's their first season without doing any training, but I am not one of those people. So, from one noob to another...

I very often get "oh, just climb and you'll get better" from people, mostly guys, but that hasn't been my experience. When I am doing strength training consistently, basic push ups and (really simple, often assisted) hangboard exercises, and focused ab workouts, I can climb harder and more fun routes. The focused ab workout have really helped maintain tension on a lot of routes, and especially traversing moves. It's really improved my balance and footwork, so I can push down on weirder, less secure, footholds, with more strength. I love yoga as a recovery workout, and it develops more awareness for how my body works, where my balance is, what muscles to shift... the ecstasy of movement definitely translates to climbing!

I lose muscle mass really quickly, maybe because I am a vegetarian, so I have found that even climbing 2-3 times a week doesn't always equal strength or muscle maintenance. Maybe there is because climbing can require more strength in focused muscle groups to complete certain moves, muscle groups you might not "hit" as hard if you lift just your body weight.

A big Yes! to focusing on technique early on, but there are some really helpful things about muscle training.

I find it really interesting that most climber guys tell me not to do strength training (except for my boyfriend, yay), but I've never gotten that advice from a lady climber. As far as the gender dynamics of this question go, I ran a question by a coworker of mine who also owns a crossfit gym. "Do you think people don't tell women to do weight training becasuse it's considered 'unfeminine' or they don't want them to succeed?" His answer was a pretty quick "yes". It was intimidating and foreign to do strength training for me was a chic, but when I started to see my climbing improving and my pain while climbing go down, it's a no-brainer. I have to draw on that awareness sometimes to keep doing strength training. I have to rely more on what I know about what my limits are, and less on what people tell me I "need to be doing".

Cute story: there is a really beautiful female trainer who is always encouraging women to do weight-bearing exercises at her gym. When her clients say "but I don't want to bulk up." she says "do I look bulky to you?" muscle tone isn't always unattractive.

oh, also, even if you can't do 2 pullups now, don't give up! If you can't do a pullup, just hold a hang with bent arms for as long as you can. Start where you are, and things will improve! I did pushups on my knees for a long, long, time, and now I can do a bunch from my toes, with weights! It's really humbling to do things that seem "easy" to other people, but keep pushing yourself!

As far as the flame and ego wars on the rc. go... fuckit. everybody wants to help each other out by giving each other advice, but it is a little much when everyone insists they are "right", or dive in to cutting up each others "arguments". Take some time to do some training, climb, and see what works for you. Change your routine and see how your climbing changes. Isn't that part of the beauty of climbing? That we are working with who we are, what our strengths and "weaknesses" are, humble ourselves to try new things, talk and listen to each other, and f'ing enjoy it? It's a practice, not a perfect prescription. I try to edit out some of the back and forth on rc.

enough rambling... this has just been on my mind a lot. with spring starting and the rock season starting again, i've been wanting to get in better shape. great question. oh yeah, and get the most expensive pair of climbing shoes you can find and you'll increase your skill level like 3 grades... JUST KIDDING.


ceebo


Apr 11, 2012, 12:50 PM
Post #53 of 103 (3160 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 8, 2009
Posts: 862

Re: [hannah.wolfmom] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

hannah.wolfmom wrote:
<
ShannonT wrote:
I've just recently started climbing ALOT and find i have no pull strength which is a pain as i find it hard to do overhang bolder problems. Honestly i can hardly do 2 pull ups.

What shall i do, i'm kind of needing a training programme but don't know where to start.Frown
>

I like this question... I haven't been ciimbing that long, only a little over a year but I can consistently lead most 5.9 sport routes, and a lot of 10's. I really fell in love with climbing. I know it's annoying to bring up the length of time climbing : grade ratio, but I think it has some value here. When I am suplementing "just climbing" with strength training, I can more consistently climb .10's. Maybe there are some people out there who climbed .10's their first season without doing any training, but I am not one of those people. So, from one noob to another...

I very often get "oh, just climb and you'll get better" from people, mostly guys, but that hasn't been my experience. When I am doing strength training consistently, basic push ups and (really simple, often assisted) hangboard exercises, and focused ab workouts, I can climb harder and more fun routes. The focused ab workout have really helped maintain tension on a lot of routes, and especially traversing moves. It's really improved my balance and footwork, so I can push down on weirder, less secure, footholds, with more strength. I love yoga as a recovery workout, and it develops more awareness for how my body works, where my balance is, what muscles to shift... the ecstasy of movement definitely translates to climbing!

I lose muscle mass really quickly, maybe because I am a vegetarian, so I have found that even climbing 2-3 times a week doesn't always equal strength or muscle maintenance. Maybe there is because climbing can require more strength in focused muscle groups to complete certain moves, muscle groups you might not "hit" as hard if you lift just your body weight.

A big Yes! to focusing on technique early on, but there are some really helpful things about muscle training.

I find it really interesting that most climber guys tell me not to do strength training (except for my boyfriend, yay), but I've never gotten that advice from a lady climber. As far as the gender dynamics of this question go, I ran a question by a coworker of mine who also owns a crossfit gym. "Do you think people don't tell women to do weight training becasuse it's considered 'unfeminine' or they don't want them to succeed?" His answer was a pretty quick "yes". It was intimidating and foreign to do strength training for me was a chic, but when I started to see my climbing improving and my pain while climbing go down, it's a no-brainer. I have to draw on that awareness sometimes to keep doing strength training. I have to rely more on what I know about what my limits are, and less on what people tell me I "need to be doing".

Cute story: there is a really beautiful female trainer who is always encouraging women to do weight-bearing exercises at her gym. When her clients say "but I don't want to bulk up." she says "do I look bulky to you?" muscle tone isn't always unattractive.

oh, also, even if you can't do 2 pullups now, don't give up! If you can't do a pullup, just hold a hang with bent arms for as long as you can. Start where you are, and things will improve! I did pushups on my knees for a long, long, time, and now I can do a bunch from my toes, with weights! It's really humbling to do things that seem "easy" to other people, but keep pushing yourself!

As far as the flame and ego wars on the rc. go... fuckit. everybody wants to help each other out by giving each other advice, but it is a little much when everyone insists they are "right", or dive in to cutting up each others "arguments". Take some time to do some training, climb, and see what works for you. Change your routine and see how your climbing changes. Isn't that part of the beauty of climbing? That we are working with who we are, what our strengths and "weaknesses" are, humble ourselves to try new things, talk and listen to each other, and f'ing enjoy it? It's a practice, not a perfect prescription. I try to edit out some of the back and forth on rc.

enough rambling... this has just been on my mind a lot. with spring starting and the rock season starting again, i've been wanting to get in better shape. great question. oh yeah, and get the most expensive pair of climbing shoes you can find and you'll increase your skill level like 3 grades... JUST KIDDING.

I liked that post very much. Please share some more of your thoughts.

How long in your opinion should ''early on'' last?. I have seen much debate on when people should consider other types of training outside climbing. Some say after year 1, others after year 2. Some have the opinion (as i once did) not to bother till you are able to climb X grade. Yes, some say dont bother at all.

Where do we draw those pieces of advice from, other than what others have told us. What did the ''others'' base it off?. Perhaps from the risk of injury gathere by people who probably over trained?, thats a debate in itself. Body builders for example deal with far heavier load than we would ever need or dare, and they achieve that gain far earlier. I know many body builders and they have never been injured as of yet. Thats logicaly down to the sets/reps and alternations between what they train. If the real threat only boils down to fingers then why not water it down to a level of safety (as with fleshes big open hand ideals, expanded ofc to the indivduals level). To ignore the training of other vitel body parts for fear of finger injury imo is a bad deal.

The other point you made i thought is very good. You said that being stronger opened more doors to you and you basically had more choice of technique to apply.

I'd like to add more to that. Climber A has very little arm strength, climber B has ''enough''.

1 Single move, over hanging and the move was intended to be completed in a static to lock off nature.

Climber A does not have the arm strength to do that.. so insteat goes for it dynamicly. The move is completed dynamicly, job done.

Climber B first goes for it staticly and completes the move. Climber B then repeats the move dynamicly.

From a learning point climber B has took the advantedge. Climber A has more likely ingrained the habit ''to hard for my arms.. engage dynamic/dyno''. Where as climber B has done it both ways and has the irst hand experiance to now compare, along with the muscle memory/motor gains of both ways.

Whats interesting is that climber A is likely at a greater risk of injury because the move is being done closer to the realms of physical desperation. Their is a tipping point where you should realy grab the hold during the weightles period. Climber A is at far greater risk of grabing the hold when the tipping point has just been lost, that gives very little time for the other muscles to coushin the weight as it slams onto the fingers. I find that a logical due to the weaker muscles being more prone to under shooting the mark.

Now ofc its possible that climber A can try to do the move staticly to the lock off. Depending on how steep the angle is and the position of foot holds (or bad technique) this will result in the climber being exposed very closely to the conditions of a 1 arm lock off. Now, to a person who can barely do a pull up with both arms.. having a single arm momenteraly axposed to maybe 20 pound less weight than a 1 arm lock off is a elbow/shoulder injury waiting to pounce.

In that light, regardless of how long the climber has climbed.. don't you think they are at far less risk of injury if they build that arm strength with pull ups. the weight is controlled and spread over 2 arms (perhaps even feet too) and the holds on the hang board are naturaly the most finger friendly.

The idea that new climbers + any form of strength training = injury is rediculess (unless left to their own devices). Today i went to train at the local gym and i heard a comment from a new climber to his friend. He said ''we have been bouldering for 6 hours''. I very politely commented that its too long climbing even for a good climber. When i left they were still climbing. I guess we have all done it right?, mostly as a result of being missinformed, that you would expect from a new climber left to their own will.

But again i get back to body builders. They have regimented reps, sets wieght incriments to abide by, even to a new lifter they know the rules and play by them (mostly). In climbing we have no such rules becuase nobody is willing to advise a climber onto strength training. Why do you balieve they don't do that?. I personally balieve they don't do it out of complete fear they will be responsible for the injury of a new climber, not because they actualy think its a terrible idea. So it's realy a self preservation act deleating out what could actualy be a better way to become a stronger climber.

Im prety damn confident if their was a ''noob'' strength training plan so regerasly set out like you find amoung body builders.. we would see a generation of far stronger men and especialy women.

feel free to slate everything i wrote, before the rest do ;p.


boadman


Apr 11, 2012, 1:13 PM
Post #54 of 103 (3155 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 726

Re: [rgold] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (6 ratings)  
Can't Post

Steph Davis isn't a great example, she doesn't really climb that hard for being a full time climber.


Partner rgold


Apr 11, 2012, 7:31 PM
Post #55 of 103 (3117 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 3, 2002
Posts: 1800

Re: [boadman] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

boadman wrote:
Steph Davis isn't a great example, she doesn't really climb that hard for being a full time climber.

Meaning what? She doesn't spend a week redpointing a bolted forty-foot 5.14? She's exceeded by far what most men (and everyone commenting in this thread) will ever achieve in the sport. Most people on this site would consider any one of her main achievements to be the crowning accomplishment of their careers, if they could do it at all (which most could not).

Free Solos

  • The Diamond (Longs Peak). The Casual Route (V 5.10) two times, Pervertical Sanctuary (V 5.11-) two times.

  • North Face, Castleton Tower (5.11)

  • Coyne Crack (5.11+) Indian Creek.

  • Scarface (5.11) Indian Creek.


  • Some Routes

  • Freerider (VI 5.12.d/13a). El Capitan. Second woman to free El Cap in a day.

  • Salathé Wall (El Capitan) (VI 5.13 b/c) El Capitan. First woman to free the Salathe Wall.

  • Concepcion (5.13b/c) Moab. Third ascent of the route, first woman to redpoint it. The free ascent links the full pitch, bypassing the anchors partway up the route.

  • The Tombstone (5.13) Moab. First free ascent, team style with Dean Potter.

  • The Crackhouse, Moab. First female ascent.

  • Shipton Spire, Pakistan. Inshallah VI 5.12 A1. Third ascent of Shipton Spire, new route climbed all free except for a blank 10 foot section. With Kennan Harvey and Seth Shaw.

  • Tahir Tower, Pakistan. All Quiet on the Eastern Front (VI 5.11 A3). First ascent of the tower in the Kondus Valley with Jimmy Chin, Brady Robinson and Dave Anderson.

  • Jushua Tower, Baffin Island. Zen and the Art of Leadership (VI 5.11 A4). First ascent of the tower with Russ Mitrovich and Brandon Kannier.

  • Peak 3850, Kyrgyzstan. Big Yellow Moon. (V 5.12). First free ascent with Kennan Harvey.

  • Peak 4520, Kyrgyzstan. “A Thousand Years of Christianity” (V 5.9). Solo ascent.

  • Poincinot North Face, Potter-Davis Route (V 5.11 C1 WI4). First ascent with Dean Potter, alpine style.

  • Torre Egger, Titanic. (East Pillar) (UIAA VI+ A2) First one-day ascent of Torre Egger, with Dean Potter.

  • Cerro Standhardt. New route with Dean Potter.

  • Fitzroy, Franco-Argentine. First American woman to summit Fitzroy.

  • Poincinot, Whillans Route.

  • Guillaumet, 3 ascents.

  • Mermoz, Red Pillar (V 5.12).

  • L’Aiguille de l’S. Two times. With Charlie Fowler and Laurence Monnoyeur.

  • Innominata.

  • Saint Exupery. The Englishman’s Route.

  • The North Tower of Paine, with Charlie Fowler.


  • I'd say it might be worth taking a moment from our comparatively trivial climbing pursuits to listen to what she has to say. So I'm going to have to disagree with you Boadman. Steph Davis is about as good an example as you are likely to find anywhere.

    [Edit: Steph's list of climbs was taken from the Wikipedia page on her.]


    (This post was edited by rgold on Apr 11, 2012, 7:58 PM)


    shotwell


    Apr 11, 2012, 8:02 PM
    Post #56 of 103 (3103 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 5, 2009
    Posts: 366

    Re: [rgold] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    rgold wrote:
    boadman wrote:
    Steph Davis isn't a great example, she doesn't really climb that hard for being a full time climber.

    Meaning what? She doesn't spend a week redpointing a bolted forty-foot 5.14? She's exceeded by far what most men (and everyone commenting in this thread) will ever achieve in the sport. Most people on this site would consider any one of her main achievements to be the crowning accomplishment of their careers, if they could do it at all (which most could not).

    Free Solos

  • The Diamond (Longs Peak). The Casual Route (V 5.10) two times, Pervertical Sanctuary (V 5.11-) two times.

  • North Face, Castleton Tower (5.11)

  • Coyne Crack (5.11+) Indian Creek.

  • Scarface (5.11) Indian Creek.


  • Some Routes

  • Freerider (VI 5.12.d/13a). El Capitan. Second woman to free El Cap in a day.

  • Salathé Wall (El Capitan) (VI 5.13 b/c) El Capitan. First woman to free the Salathe Wall.

  • Concepcion (5.13b/c) Moab. Third ascent of the route, first woman to redpoint it. The free ascent links the full pitch, bypassing the anchors partway up the route.

  • The Tombstone (5.13) Moab. First free ascent, team style with Dean Potter.

  • The Crackhouse, Moab. First female ascent.

  • Shipton Spire, Pakistan. Inshallah VI 5.12 A1. Third ascent of Shipton Spire, new route climbed all free except for a blank 10 foot section. With Kennan Harvey and Seth Shaw.

  • Tahir Tower, Pakistan. All Quiet on the Eastern Front (VI 5.11 A3). First ascent of the tower in the Kondus Valley with Jimmy Chin, Brady Robinson and Dave Anderson.

  • Jushua Tower, Baffin Island. Zen and the Art of Leadership (VI 5.11 A4). First ascent of the tower with Russ Mitrovich and Brandon Kannier.

  • Peak 3850, Kyrgyzstan. Big Yellow Moon. (V 5.12). First free ascent with Kennan Harvey.

  • Peak 4520, Kyrgyzstan. “A Thousand Years of Christianity” (V 5.9). Solo ascent.

  • Poincinot North Face, Potter-Davis Route (V 5.11 C1 WI4). First ascent with Dean Potter, alpine style.

  • Torre Egger, Titanic. (East Pillar) (UIAA VI+ A2) First one-day ascent of Torre Egger, with Dean Potter.

  • Cerro Standhardt. New route with Dean Potter.

  • Fitzroy, Franco-Argentine. First American woman to summit Fitzroy.

  • Poincinot, Whillans Route.

  • Guillaumet, 3 ascents.

  • Mermoz, Red Pillar (V 5.12).

  • L’Aiguille de l’S. Two times. With Charlie Fowler and Laurence Monnoyeur.

  • Innominata.

  • Saint Exupery. The Englishman’s Route.

  • The North Tower of Paine, with Charlie Fowler.


  • I'd say it might be worth taking a moment from our comparatively trivial climbing pursuits to listen to what she has to say.

    Part of this response is uncharacteristically hasty, but Steph's ticklist is very impressive and bold. However, I don't agree that no one commenting on this thread never has a chance to build an equivalent ticklist, whether it is by sport climbing significantly harder, bouldering significantly harder, or even climbing long free routes at a higher standard. If anyone on this thread ever does, it will be significant.

    Steph's ticklist impresses me at least as much as Sasha's or Lisa Rands'. The long and free nature of many of the climbs on that list have serious significance, especially Freerider. These accomplishments just need to be viewed for what they really are, not for what they first appear to be.


    Partner rgold


    Apr 11, 2012, 8:10 PM
    Post #57 of 103 (3098 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Dec 3, 2002
    Posts: 1800

    Re: [shotwell] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    Hasty? It took me forever to put those bullets in. I ran out of time to say anything.

    Of course, I have no business saying people I know nothing about have no chance of equaling Steph's accomplishments. Maybe someone here will do that. As you say, it will be a significant event, because climbers like Davis are extremely rare.

    My main point is that the idea that she doesn't climb hard enough to offer advice to beginners about training is beyond absurd.


    shotwell


    Apr 11, 2012, 8:16 PM
    Post #58 of 103 (3095 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 5, 2009
    Posts: 366

    Re: [rgold] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    rgold wrote:
    Hasty? It took me forever to put those bullets in. I ran out of time to say anything.

    Of course, I have no business saying people I know nothing about have no chance of equaling Steph's accomplishments. Maybe someone here will do that. As you say, it will be a significant event, because climbers like Davis are extremely rare.

    My main point is that the idea that she doesn't climb hard enough to offer advice to beginners about training is beyond absurd.

    Couldn't agree more. Even if I do continue to see things a different way!


    boadman


    Apr 12, 2012, 9:12 AM
    Post #59 of 103 (3047 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Oct 6, 2003
    Posts: 726

    Re: [rgold] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
    Can't Post

    She's very impressive, and her ascents are very difficult. However, they don't represent huge physical challenges for someone who's climbing full time. Her mental game is impressive, but her physical accomplishments, which relate the argument as to the efficacy of pull-up training, are not much better than what you'd expect out of an average obsessed climber who has the time to get out whenever they want to.


    bearbreeder


    Apr 12, 2012, 10:11 AM
    Post #60 of 103 (3030 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Feb 1, 2009
    Posts: 1960

    Re: [boadman] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
    Can't Post

    im wondering how many pull ups beth rodden could do when she sent meltdown 5.14 trad ... anyone know ...

    different styles, different needs ...

    to say that you NEED arm strength for all types of climbing is a fallacy ...

    however footwork pays dividends no matter what you climb ...


    hannah.wolfmom


    Apr 19, 2012, 7:05 AM
    Post #61 of 103 (2867 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: May 27, 2011
    Posts: 23

    Re: [bearbreeder] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    i would like to send V9 my first few seasons as much as I'd like to reverse global warming, have santa claus come down my chimney with flowers, and to not have peeps explode in the microwave.

    the point being, are you guys sure following the training regimens of pros, or using them as examples, is going to yield the same results?


    hannah.wolfmom


    Apr 19, 2012, 7:11 AM
    Post #62 of 103 (2865 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: May 27, 2011
    Posts: 23

    Re: [ceebo] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
    Can't Post

    <
    ceebo wrote:
    hannah.wolfmom wrote:
    <
    ShannonT wrote:
    I've just recently started climbing ALOT and find i have no pull strength which is a pain as i find it hard to do overhang bolder problems. Honestly i can hardly do 2 pull ups.

    What shall i do, i'm kind of needing a training programme but don't know where to start.Frown
    >

    I like this question... I haven't been ciimbing that long, only a little over a year but I can consistently lead most 5.9 sport routes, and a lot of 10's. I really fell in love with climbing. I know it's annoying to bring up the length of time climbing : grade ratio, but I think it has some value here. When I am suplementing "just climbing" with strength training, I can more consistently climb .10's. Maybe there are some people out there who climbed .10's their first season without doing any training, but I am not one of those people. So, from one noob to another...

    I very often get "oh, just climb and you'll get better" from people, mostly guys, but that hasn't been my experience. When I am doing strength training consistently, basic push ups and (really simple, often assisted) hangboard exercises, and focused ab workouts, I can climb harder and more fun routes. The focused ab workout have really helped maintain tension on a lot of routes, and especially traversing moves. It's really improved my balance and footwork, so I can push down on weirder, less secure, footholds, with more strength. I love yoga as a recovery workout, and it develops more awareness for how my body works, where my balance is, what muscles to shift... the ecstasy of movement definitely translates to climbing!

    I lose muscle mass really quickly, maybe because I am a vegetarian, so I have found that even climbing 2-3 times a week doesn't always equal strength or muscle maintenance. Maybe there is because climbing can require more strength in focused muscle groups to complete certain moves, muscle groups you might not "hit" as hard if you lift just your body weight.

    A big Yes! to focusing on technique early on, but there are some really helpful things about muscle training.

    I find it really interesting that most climber guys tell me not to do strength training (except for my boyfriend, yay), but I've never gotten that advice from a lady climber. As far as the gender dynamics of this question go, I ran a question by a coworker of mine who also owns a crossfit gym. "Do you think people don't tell women to do weight training becasuse it's considered 'unfeminine' or they don't want them to succeed?" His answer was a pretty quick "yes". It was intimidating and foreign to do strength training for me was a chic, but when I started to see my climbing improving and my pain while climbing go down, it's a no-brainer. I have to draw on that awareness sometimes to keep doing strength training. I have to rely more on what I know about what my limits are, and less on what people tell me I "need to be doing".

    Cute story: there is a really beautiful female trainer who is always encouraging women to do weight-bearing exercises at her gym. When her clients say "but I don't want to bulk up." she says "do I look bulky to you?" muscle tone isn't always unattractive.

    oh, also, even if you can't do 2 pullups now, don't give up! If you can't do a pullup, just hold a hang with bent arms for as long as you can. Start where you are, and things will improve! I did pushups on my knees for a long, long, time, and now I can do a bunch from my toes, with weights! It's really humbling to do things that seem "easy" to other people, but keep pushing yourself!

    As far as the flame and ego wars on the rc. go... fuckit. everybody wants to help each other out by giving each other advice, but it is a little much when everyone insists they are "right", or dive in to cutting up each others "arguments". Take some time to do some training, climb, and see what works for you. Change your routine and see how your climbing changes. Isn't that part of the beauty of climbing? That we are working with who we are, what our strengths and "weaknesses" are, humble ourselves to try new things, talk and listen to each other, and f'ing enjoy it? It's a practice, not a perfect prescription. I try to edit out some of the back and forth on rc.

    enough rambling... this has just been on my mind a lot. with spring starting and the rock season starting again, i've been wanting to get in better shape. great question. oh yeah, and get the most expensive pair of climbing shoes you can find and you'll increase your skill level like 3 grades... JUST KIDDING.

    I liked that post very much. Please share some more of your thoughts.

    How long in your opinion should ''early on'' last?. I have seen much debate on when people should consider other types of training outside climbing. Some say after year 1, others after year 2. Some have the opinion (as i once did) not to bother till you are able to climb X grade. Yes, some say dont bother at all.

    Where do we draw those pieces of advice from, other than what others have told us. What did the ''others'' base it off?. Perhaps from the risk of injury gathere by people who probably over trained?, thats a debate in itself. Body builders for example deal with far heavier load than we would ever need or dare, and they achieve that gain far earlier. I know many body builders and they have never been injured as of yet. Thats logicaly down to the sets/reps and alternations between what they train. If the real threat only boils down to fingers then why not water it down to a level of safety (as with fleshes big open hand ideals, expanded ofc to the indivduals level). To ignore the training of other vitel body parts for fear of finger injury imo is a bad deal.

    The other point you made i thought is very good. You said that being stronger opened more doors to you and you basically had more choice of technique to apply.

    I'd like to add more to that. Climber A has very little arm strength, climber B has ''enough''.

    1 Single move, over hanging and the move was intended to be completed in a static to lock off nature.

    Climber A does not have the arm strength to do that.. so insteat goes for it dynamicly. The move is completed dynamicly, job done.

    Climber B first goes for it staticly and completes the move. Climber B then repeats the move dynamicly.

    From a learning point climber B has took the advantedge. Climber A has more likely ingrained the habit ''to hard for my arms.. engage dynamic/dyno''. Where as climber B has done it both ways and has the irst hand experiance to now compare, along with the muscle memory/motor gains of both ways.

    Whats interesting is that climber A is likely at a greater risk of injury because the move is being done closer to the realms of physical desperation. Their is a tipping point where you should realy grab the hold during the weightles period. Climber A is at far greater risk of grabing the hold when the tipping point has just been lost, that gives very little time for the other muscles to coushin the weight as it slams onto the fingers. I find that a logical due to the weaker muscles being more prone to under shooting the mark.

    Now ofc its possible that climber A can try to do the move staticly to the lock off. Depending on how steep the angle is and the position of foot holds (or bad technique) this will result in the climber being exposed very closely to the conditions of a 1 arm lock off. Now, to a person who can barely do a pull up with both arms.. having a single arm momenteraly axposed to maybe 20 pound less weight than a 1 arm lock off is a elbow/shoulder injury waiting to pounce.

    In that light, regardless of how long the climber has climbed.. don't you think they are at far less risk of injury if they build that arm strength with pull ups. the weight is controlled and spread over 2 arms (perhaps even feet too) and the holds on the hang board are naturaly the most finger friendly.

    The idea that new climbers + any form of strength training = injury is rediculess (unless left to their own devices). Today i went to train at the local gym and i heard a comment from a new climber to his friend. He said ''we have been bouldering for 6 hours''. I very politely commented that its too long climbing even for a good climber. When i left they were still climbing. I guess we have all done it right?, mostly as a result of being missinformed, that you would expect from a new climber left to their own will.

    But again i get back to body builders. They have regimented reps, sets wieght incriments to abide by, even to a new lifter they know the rules and play by them (mostly). In climbing we have no such rules becuase nobody is willing to advise a climber onto strength training. Why do you balieve they don't do that?. I personally balieve they don't do it out of complete fear they will be responsible for the injury of a new climber, not because they actualy think its a terrible idea. So it's realy a self preservation act deleating out what could actualy be a better way to become a stronger climber.

    Im prety damn confident if their was a ''noob'' strength training plan so regerasly set out like you find amoung body builders.. we would see a generation of far stronger men and especialy women.

    feel free to slate everything i wrote, before the rest do ;p.
    >

    i like the way this is put... i don't know.... what about training yourself to focus on footwork, balance, and technique early on, regardless of arm strength? like, you don't have to chose between being strong and having good technique. i feel like this includes training yourself to time rests appropriately when doing longer and more challenging wall climbs.


    johnwesely


    Apr 19, 2012, 7:54 AM
    Post #63 of 103 (2848 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jun 12, 2006
    Posts: 5343

    Re: [hannah.wolfmom] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    rgold is really delivering beat down after beat down in this thread.


    shotwell


    Apr 19, 2012, 8:03 AM
    Post #64 of 103 (2843 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 5, 2009
    Posts: 366

    Re: [hannah.wolfmom] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    hannah.wolfmom wrote:
    i would like to send V9 my first few seasons as much as I'd like to reverse global warming, have santa claus come down my chimney with flowers, and to not have peeps explode in the microwave.

    the point being, are you guys sure following the training regimens of pros, or using them as examples, is going to yield the same results?

    My wife (the V9 example in this thread) is not a pro. No sponsorship, no free shoes, no discounts. That is exactly why I used her as an example. She was a raw beginner two years ago, and even weaker than the OP.

    To recap, she started unable to do a pull up. She climbed, and only climbed. This got her onsighting 5.12a and redpointing 5.12c in one year, to V9 in two years, taught her to campus (on route), and built the strength to do pull ups.

    You probably won't achieve her results, but if you dedicate enough time and effort to climbing I bet you improve drastically. That isn't a secret, climbing is a complex skill. Most people just need to get way more mileage and put in far more effort during their sessions.


    bearbreeder


    Apr 19, 2012, 8:54 AM
    Post #65 of 103 (2818 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Feb 1, 2009
    Posts: 1960

    Re: [hannah.wolfmom] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    better footwork pays dividends no matter how low yr level ...

    not to say you shouldnt do more funky things later ..


    ceebo


    Apr 19, 2012, 1:32 PM
    Post #66 of 103 (2783 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Nov 8, 2009
    Posts: 862

    Re: [bearbreeder] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
    Can't Post

    bearbreeder wrote:
    better footwork pays dividends no matter how low yr level ...

    not to say you shouldnt do more funky things later ..

    In a 2 hour ''training'' session what is stopping you from doing both. A 45 min warm up is a long time, enough to kill a few birds with the same stone. With the remaining time, get funky?.

    For every move you find that any amount of strength will not pass with ought the right foot work, i'll find you one that any amount of foot work will not pass with ought the strength.

    It's not a fking war.. or a foot ball game.. you don't have to pick sides. Have both Unimpressed.


    (This post was edited by ceebo on Apr 19, 2012, 1:35 PM)


    bearbreeder


    Apr 19, 2012, 3:36 PM
    Post #67 of 103 (2764 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Feb 1, 2009
    Posts: 1960

    Re: [ceebo] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    that depends on what type of conditions yr in IMO ... many people i see are limited by time (work, life, family) .... and IMO many newer people could spend the time working on their technique than doing pullup or other such ...

    as noted previously it all depends what your goals are and where you climb .. out here its pretty useless on most climbs to be able to do a pullup unless you are climbing hard overhanging sport ...

    footwork and technique is eternal ... strength fades away ...


    BClear


    Apr 19, 2012, 4:38 PM
    Post #68 of 103 (2752 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 23, 2009
    Posts: 19

    Re: [bearbreeder] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uds2CwrMwBI

    Watch the three videos in the links. Do the work, eat the food, get results. No mystery in how to gain strength or endurance. Advice from world record holding max weighted pullup holder via youtube (former Marine...shocking right) v. craptastic opinions from inflated egos.


    (This post was edited by BClear on Apr 19, 2012, 4:47 PM)


    shotwell


    Apr 19, 2012, 5:07 PM
    Post #69 of 103 (2738 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 5, 2009
    Posts: 366

    Re: [BClear] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    BClear wrote:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uds2CwrMwBI

    Watch the three videos in the links. Do the work, eat the food, get results. No mystery in how to gain strength or endurance. Advice from world record holding max weighted pullup holder via youtube (former Marine...shocking right) v. craptastic opinions from inflated egos.

    I'll say this as kindly as I can.

    How exactly do you think being the world record holder for weighted pull ups helps with climbing?

    Do as much pull up work as you want. When you 'get results' from your pull up training that applies to your climbing, post a video. Spray on. Just don't expect me to care until you can show real world climbing results. If this was a pull up forum, results would be doing more pull ups or pull ups at a higher weight. The truth is, it isn't. This is rockclimbing.com.

    I respect rgold's opinion even if I disagree. I think you're an idiot.


    BClear


    Apr 19, 2012, 6:07 PM
    Post #70 of 103 (2716 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 23, 2009
    Posts: 19

    Re: [shotwell] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
    Can't Post

    You may notice the topic is "arm strength" not give me your opinion on whether its needed in climbing. The vids give instruction and ideas on how to gain reps and strength from someone who undeniably has gained both.

    Any climber who states that upper body strength does not help in rockclimbing is a buffoon. Just like anyone who denies the benefits of proper footwork or leg strength is a buffoon. Anyone wanting to argue the lack of benefits doing a pullup has to upper body/back strength is a buffoon. They aren't the only method of making gains but they are arguably the most efficient, simplistic and reliable.

    And as for my opinion of you, the world needs egotistical jackasses too I suppose.


    (This post was edited by BClear on Apr 19, 2012, 6:52 PM)


    shotwell


    Apr 19, 2012, 7:12 PM
    Post #71 of 103 (2689 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 5, 2009
    Posts: 366

    Re: [BClear] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    BClear wrote:
    You may notice the topic is "arm strength" not give me your opinion on whether its needed in climbing. The vids give instruction and ideas on how to gain reps and strength from someone who undeniably has gained both.

    Any climber who states that upper body strength does not help in rockclimbing is a buffoon. Just like anyone who denies the benefits of proper footwork or leg strength is a buffoon. Anyone wanting to argue the lack of benefits doing a pullup has to upper body/back strength is a buffoon. They aren't the only method of making gains but they are arguably the most efficient, simplistic and reliable.

    And as for my opinion of you, the world needs egotistical jackasses too I suppose.

    I have upper body strength. So does my wife. So do plenty of people that just climb. I just disagree that you will gain any real climbing skill by doing a mind numbing number of pull ups.

    The topic may be arm strength, but it is specifically about application. This is still on rockclimbing.com.

    Sorry that everyone here thinks you are wrong, including the proponents of targeted strength training. Maybe we are all jackasses for thinking you are foolish.


    Greggle


    Apr 19, 2012, 7:29 PM
    Post #72 of 103 (2679 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Mar 26, 2010
    Posts: 226

    Re: Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    Where's Sungam? This thread is in serious need of some Pinkie Pie.


    BClear


    Apr 19, 2012, 7:34 PM
    Post #73 of 103 (2675 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 23, 2009
    Posts: 19

    Re: [shotwell] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    I'm not entirely sure what your having a problem wrapping that massive brain of yours around here but nowhere did I propose a mind numbing number of pullups. I merely stated the ability of the individuals to do said mind numbing number and the ability of their training methods to help those who are at all of 2 or 3 pullups attain a reasonable number of pullups aka 20ish in the fastest period of time. Same methods have been used by literally thousands of men and women to get gains in strength and endurance in as short a period of time as possible. But then again I'd miss all the comments of how "pumpy" routes are because so many climbers have neither.


    (This post was edited by BClear on Apr 19, 2012, 8:14 PM)


    jt512


    Apr 19, 2012, 9:18 PM
    Post #74 of 103 (2649 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Apr 11, 2001
    Posts: 21890

    Re: [BClear] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    BClear wrote:
    I'm not entirely sure what your having a problem wrapping that massive brain of yours around here but nowhere did I propose a mind numbing number of pullups. I merely stated the ability of the individuals to do said mind numbing number and the ability of their training methods to help those who are at all of 2 or 3 pullups attain a reasonable number of pullups aka 20ish in the fastest period of time. Same methods have been used by literally thousands of men and women to get gains in strength and endurance in as short a period of time as possible. But then again I'd miss all the comments of how "pumpy" routes are because so many climbers have neither.

    Listen, you idiot, the OP doesn't want to know how to do pull-ups. She wants to know how to climb better, and she mistakenly thinks the answer is to build "arm strength." Everyone in this thread except you understands this and is trying to give her advice to attain her tacit goal.

    Nobody here cares about how Marines train for pullups. I'm sure there are websites where your knowledge would be appreciated. I suggest you go find one.

    Jay


    BClear


    Apr 19, 2012, 9:43 PM
    Post #75 of 103 (2636 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 23, 2009
    Posts: 19

    Re: [jt512] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    Lol, yeah your a real leet pro I forgot. Great usage of the comma there as well. Op identified a weakness and asked for help for training. Personally could care less if she uses the info but its there. As far as I can tell not a single person has posted another effective way of getting more pullups or armstrength. To say climb more and leave it at that is just ignorant without knowing more about the ops situation. Not everyone lives near a gym or crags. But hey she's a woman so I guess you figure you should do her thinking for her. Or wait maybe because your such a leet pro who sends with no armstrength.


    (This post was edited by BClear on Apr 19, 2012, 9:48 PM)


    jt512


    Apr 19, 2012, 9:59 PM
    Post #76 of 103 (1317 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Apr 11, 2001
    Posts: 21890

    Re: [BClear] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    BClear wrote:
    Lol, yeah your a real leet pro I forgot. Great usage of the comma there as well.

    Hard to know what to make of the juxtaposition of those two sentences.

    In reply to:
    Op identified a weakness and asked for help for training. Personally could care less if she uses the info but its there. As far as I can tell not a single person has posted another effective way of getting more pullups or armstrength. To say climb more and leave it at that is just ignorant without knowing more about the ops situation. Not everyone lives near a gym or crags. But hey she's a woman so I guess you figure you should do her thinking for her. Or wait maybe because your such a leet pro who sends with no armstrength.

    *plonk* goes another moron.


    (This post was edited by jt512 on Apr 19, 2012, 10:03 PM)


    BClear


    Apr 19, 2012, 10:03 PM
    Post #77 of 103 (1310 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 23, 2009
    Posts: 19

    Re: [jt512] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    Yeah your a regular nugget of wisdom. Just like your fab website lol. Maybe you should just suggest the op is too chunky and should just diet to climb better.

    Regardless I posted a possible selection the op may take to train. Actually come to think of it I've posted about three different training methods/sites this thread. All of which discuss and encorporate other exercises than the pullup. But hey pushups don't help climbing either. Or the military press. THE ONLY THING THAT HELPS CLIMBING IS CLIMBING RIGHT GUYS? Just like the only thing that helps boxing is boxing and footwork. Same with football. I mean who pulls up with their arms on an overhang.

    If you don't like it super, fill her with your uber knowledge and make her a rock prodigy. But only after she spends at least a year climbing in a gym. And don't start leading right away its way too complicated lol. And the pros are all footwork.


    (This post was edited by BClear on Apr 19, 2012, 11:11 PM)


    ceebo


    Apr 20, 2012, 3:55 AM
    Post #78 of 103 (1273 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Nov 8, 2009
    Posts: 862

    Re: [BClear] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    BClear wrote:
    Yeah your a regular nugget of wisdom. Just like your fab website lol. Maybe you should just suggest the op is too chunky and should just diet to climb better.

    Regardless I posted a possible selection the op may take to train. Actually come to think of it I've posted about three different training methods/sites this thread. All of which discuss and encorporate other exercises than the pullup. But hey pushups don't help climbing either. Or the military press. THE ONLY THING THAT HELPS CLIMBING IS CLIMBING RIGHT GUYS? Just like the only thing that helps boxing is boxing and footwork. Same with football. I mean who pulls up with their arms on an overhang.

    If you don't like it super, fill her with your uber knowledge and make her a rock prodigy. But only after she spends at least a year climbing in a gym. And don't start leading right away its way too complicated lol. And the pros are all footwork.

    You are completely the other extreme to the people shouting ''you only need technique''.

    I have climbed for years now and also built upto 20lb extra weighted campusing. That's quite an advanced level (no spray intended) yet it has only alowed me to achieve around 25 pull ups off the bat none weighted. That's relivent becuase when you consider my level of technique will far out do a new climber.. their is simply no need what so ever for them to have anywhere near that level of physical condition. Why?.. becuase with that level of physical condition comes a level of climbing where fingers are going to get injured if not well trained.

    A realistic goal is to achieve a physical fitness that reflects the current climbers climbing ability.

    I aint a expert of any type.. but a person can IMO quite safely do a quick MOT of their physical ability and then improve on it out of climbing.

    5 pull ups? not alot to us. But to somebody who can only do 2, thats 150% more. Thats a big deal don't you think?. However.. its a realistic improvement for their level.. to achieve slowly over a few month. Standard pull ups are shit, i menitioned somewhere that more of a ''pull in'' seems to reflect climbing situation mroe.

    Lock off strength, another basic physical attribute. In a few angles, building upto 5 to 10 second lock offs in those positions is also a basic easy to target skill for their level that will help them.

    Some basic core work outs.. also will help them.

    such basic ''base levels'' as above along side alot of climbing miledge for technique and so is going to help alot.

    Drilling into pull ups to get to a level closer to ''advanced'' standards with the lack of technique and finger resiliance to go with it is completely rediculess. Also, those pull ups were a by product of the likes of campusing, you don't learn motor skills and get contact strength from pull ups. You are at yet another loss in spending so much time to train upto so many pull ups. After a certain level it's jus going to deminish as a training tool.. just like constantly drilling technique does, etc.

    And stop going on like the core is the best thing since sliced bread. Set your google search settings to global, perhaps you may be shocked to learn their are MANY better trained regiments for the purpose of ''war''. But hey, when the anual world army's pull up compition comes around, im sure you guys got it in the bag!.


    (This post was edited by ceebo on Apr 20, 2012, 4:03 AM)


    BClear


    Apr 20, 2012, 6:26 AM
    Post #79 of 103 (1252 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 23, 2009
    Posts: 19

    Re: [ceebo] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    I hardly believe setting a goal of 20 pullups is an extreme goal for someone to have. Weighted pullups are for people who can already achieve at least 20 and wish to gain more. Again those programs routinely bring individuals from 0 pullups to over 20 in months not years. And they also have a proven track record. If you don't want the ability to rip off at least 20 good for you. Standard pullups are just another tool that can be used to achieve a result. Theres tons of variations which target various parts of the body more than others. Typewriter pullups are some of my personal favs for example. So are pullup pushdowns. But a lot of them are available unless you can crank some reps of the standard variety.

    Its the Corps not the core. Apparantly some people don't understand the Marine Corps requires pullups before you show for basic or are selected for OCS. It has nothing to do with claims the Corp is an elite warfighting machine (which it frankly is), rather its the only service branch requiring their performance before you are hired.


    shotwell


    Apr 20, 2012, 6:31 AM
    Post #80 of 103 (1250 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 5, 2009
    Posts: 366

    Re: [BClear] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    BClear wrote:
    Yeah your a regular nugget of wisdom. Just like your fab website lol. Maybe you should just suggest the op is too chunky and should just diet to climb better.

    Regardless I posted a possible selection the op may take to train. Actually come to think of it I've posted about three different training methods/sites this thread. All of which discuss and encorporate other exercises than the pullup. But hey pushups don't help climbing either. Or the military press. THE ONLY THING THAT HELPS CLIMBING IS CLIMBING RIGHT GUYS? Just like the only thing that helps boxing is boxing and footwork. Same with football. I mean who pulls up with their arms on an overhang.

    If you don't like it super, fill her with your uber knowledge and make her a rock prodigy. But only after she spends at least a year climbing in a gym. And don't start leading right away its way too complicated lol. And the pros are all footwork.

    I'd probably think you're less of an idiot if you hadn't cross posted your pull up regimen on redriverclimbing.com. If I recall correctly, it got the same treatment there.

    I'll say this once more, and once more only. You're advocating an extreme position that will have very little to no payoff in real world climbing. I can at least supply anecdotal results at a very high standard for beginning women with the training plan that I advocate.

    Finally, I will always believe in the necessity of upper body strength. Everyone in this thread with the possible exception of bearbreeder does. Targeted climbing will build power, skill, body awareness, and strength. If you think of the rock as your training tool, you'll see that you can train anything you want to with proper climb selection. You'll just learn all of that with the proper application skills at the same time.

    You can do all the pull ups you want to do. You can advocate this regimen all over the net. But here and now, I'm calling this bullshit out. How long have you been climbing? What are your best sends?

    This is relevant to the conversation, not just elitism. If you claim that copious upper body strength is this necessary for beginners, you need to back that up.


    BClear


    Apr 20, 2012, 6:50 AM
    Post #81 of 103 (1239 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 23, 2009
    Posts: 19

    Re: [shotwell] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
    Can't Post

    The program was never attacked actually. So piss off with that weaksauce. You want to compare dick sizes too? Mines bigger it's the pullups.


    (This post was edited by BClear on Apr 20, 2012, 6:51 AM)


    shotwell


    Apr 20, 2012, 6:53 AM
    Post #82 of 103 (1233 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 5, 2009
    Posts: 366

    Re: [BClear] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    BClear wrote:
    The program was never attacked actually. So piss off with that weaksauce. You want to compare dick sizes too? Mines bigger it's the pullups.

    Go back to page 1. rgold specifically refuted the relevance of your methods.

    The only relevance comes from results in climbing. How long have you been climbing? What are your best sends?


    sungam


    Apr 20, 2012, 7:03 AM
    Post #83 of 103 (1227 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jun 24, 2004
    Posts: 26571

    Re: [BClear] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
    Can't Post



    You may be missing the point...


    BClear


    Apr 20, 2012, 7:07 AM
    Post #84 of 103 (1222 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 23, 2009
    Posts: 19

    Re: [shotwell] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    Actually my direct results are best displayed through my wife, as is the notion beginners don't need upper body strength. She couldn't even climb a thing initially. Literally nada. It sure as hell wasn't footwork that helped her.


    (This post was edited by BClear on Apr 20, 2012, 7:09 AM)


    shotwell


    Apr 20, 2012, 7:15 AM
    Post #85 of 103 (1213 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 5, 2009
    Posts: 366

    Re: [BClear] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    BClear wrote:
    Actually my direct results are best displayed through my wife, as is the notion beginners don't need upper body strength. She couldn't even climb a thing initially. Literally nada.

    You're not keeping up here boss. How long has she been climbing? What are her accomplishments?

    If you're really interested in defending your position, answer these questions.


    BClear


    Apr 20, 2012, 7:18 AM
    Post #86 of 103 (1208 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 23, 2009
    Posts: 19

    Re: [shotwell] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    What position do you believe I have exactly? I'm not entirely sure what your opposed to really. You claim to be a proponent of upper body strength but attack pullups as a method of gaining it? Do you have any idea how idiotic that looks to anyone with any experience in physical fitness? I'm seriously baffled how stupid people can truly be.

    As for her accomplishments how bout she can climb up easy walls instead of being unable to progress period.


    (This post was edited by BClear on Apr 20, 2012, 7:24 AM)


    shotwell


    Apr 20, 2012, 7:22 AM
    Post #87 of 103 (1194 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 5, 2009
    Posts: 366

    Re: [BClear] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    BClear wrote:
    What position do you believe I have exactly? I'm not entirely sure what your opposed to really. You claim to be a proponent of upper body strength but attack pullups as a method of gaining it? Do you have any idea how idiotic that looks to anyone with any experience in physical fitness?

    Because I am an advocate of application. I don't believe that you're building skill while you're cranking out pull ups. To me, that is a waste of training time. If I want to build upper body strength I go boulder on the steeps.

    If you're unwilling to directly compare results in a public forum, it says to me that the results from the position I advocate are far superior. I wonder WHY I would be a fan of this position if that is the case...


    sungam


    Apr 20, 2012, 7:26 AM
    Post #88 of 103 (1190 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jun 24, 2004
    Posts: 26571

    Re: [BClear] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
    Can't Post

    BClear wrote:
    What position do you believe I have exactly? I'm not entirely sure what your opposed to really. You claim to be a proponent of upper body strength but attack pullups as a method of gaining it? Do you have any idea how idiotic that looks to anyone with any experience in physical fitness?



    BClear


    Apr 20, 2012, 7:26 AM
    Post #89 of 103 (1189 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 23, 2009
    Posts: 19

    Re: [shotwell] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
    Can't Post

    Lol yeah your kung fu is the greatest. It literally reminds me of the martial arts idiots who argue their style is dah greatest.


    shotwell


    Apr 20, 2012, 7:27 AM
    Post #90 of 103 (1185 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 5, 2009
    Posts: 366

    Re: [sungam] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    sungam wrote:
    BClear wrote:
    What position do you believe I have exactly? I'm not entirely sure what your opposed to really. You claim to be a proponent of upper body strength but attack pullups as a method of gaining it? Do you have any idea how idiotic that looks to anyone with any experience in physical fitness?
    [image]http://i.imgur.com/GxoM0.jpg[/image]

    You need to spell check your memes. Laugh


    BClear


    Apr 20, 2012, 7:27 AM
    Post #91 of 103 (1183 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 23, 2009
    Posts: 19

    Re: [sungam] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    Relivent eh...lol.

    Let me make this perfectly clear, pullups aren't the end all be all of anything other than pullups. Just like the bench press, or any other routine. It's called supplementation. Theres literally countless hangboard routines that encorporate pullups.


    (This post was edited by BClear on Apr 20, 2012, 7:32 AM)


    shotwell


    Apr 20, 2012, 7:31 AM
    Post #92 of 103 (1179 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 5, 2009
    Posts: 366

    Re: [BClear] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    BClear wrote:
    Lol yeah your kung fu is the greatest. It literally reminds me of the martial arts idiots who argue their style is dah greatest.

    Thanks for the concession. It is clear to me (and I would imagine anyone reading this) that you're both unwilling and incapable of showing application here. I'll just go ahead and assume that everyone knows the true value of your program.

    Style is a totally different conversation, far more relevant to elites than beginners. Needless to say, you'd be totally out to sea in that conversation.

    We should meet up in the Red sometime. I'd be happy to show you the difference between strength and applied strength in climbing.


    BClear


    Apr 20, 2012, 7:34 AM
    Post #93 of 103 (1168 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 23, 2009
    Posts: 19

    Re: [shotwell] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    Lol I'd rather climb with a drunk monkey. You are pro though man no doubt. And your ubercool. You should train us all because you are a climbing god with the end all be all opinion on how to climb.


    (This post was edited by BClear on Apr 20, 2012, 7:40 AM)


    sungam


    Apr 20, 2012, 7:40 AM
    Post #94 of 103 (1157 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jun 24, 2004
    Posts: 26571

    Re: [shotwell] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    shotwell wrote:
    sungam wrote:
    BClear wrote:
    What position do you believe I have exactly? I'm not entirely sure what your opposed to really. You claim to be a proponent of upper body strength but attack pullups as a method of gaining it? Do you have any idea how idiotic that looks to anyone with any experience in physical fitness?
    [image]http://i.imgur.com/GxoM0.jpg[/image]

    You need to spell check your memes. Laugh
    \begin{uncalled for aggressive defence}
    Firstly, big man, I am flood several other threads with this stupid yet "relivent" picture spam.

    Secondly, in equestria the spell things however the fuck they want, they're talking fucking ponies.

    Finally, that's not a meme. Just because it is laid out in the advice animals format does not a meme make. A meme is actually a term, phrase, or representative picture that spreads in popularity and has a known and recognised meaning. For example a picture of the trollface has a clear meaning, you know something devious is going on (how the meme "troll" got turned around like that we may never know). And if someone says "fucking xxxxx how do THEY work?" it's clearly pointing out that the person they are responding to doesn't understand what thjey are talking about. For example "Fucking memes, how do THEY work?". Memes have a rich history, from "all your base are belong to us" to ridiculously photogenic guy, it would be a true shame to lose the meaning of the word.

    And no, I won't proof read my response.


    shotwell


    Apr 20, 2012, 7:43 AM
    Post #95 of 103 (1152 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 5, 2009
    Posts: 366

    Re: [sungam] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    sungam wrote:
    shotwell wrote:
    sungam wrote:
    BClear wrote:
    What position do you believe I have exactly? I'm not entirely sure what your opposed to really. You claim to be a proponent of upper body strength but attack pullups as a method of gaining it? Do you have any idea how idiotic that looks to anyone with any experience in physical fitness?
    [image]http://i.imgur.com/GxoM0.jpg[/image]

    You need to spell check your memes. Laugh
    \begin{uncalled for aggressive defence}
    Firstly, big man, I am flood several other threads with this stupid yet "relivent" picture spam.

    Secondly, in equestria the spell things however the fuck they want, they're talking fucking ponies.

    Finally, that's not a meme. Just because it is laid out in the advice animals format does not a meme make. A meme is actually a term, phrase, or representative picture that spreads in popularity and has a known and recognised meaning. For example a picture of the trollface has a clear meaning, you know something devious is going on (how the meme "troll" got turned around like that we may never know). And if someone says "fucking xxxxx how do THEY work?" it's clearly pointing out that the person they are responding to doesn't understand what thjey are talking about. For example "Fucking memes, how do THEY work?". Memes have a rich history, from "all your base are belong to us" to ridiculously photogenic guy, it would be a true shame to lose the meaning of the word.

    And no, I won't proof read my response.

    I wish I could give this 1000 stars. You'll have to settle for five.


    shotwell


    Apr 20, 2012, 7:54 AM
    Post #96 of 103 (1131 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 5, 2009
    Posts: 366

    Re: [BClear] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    BClear wrote:
    Lol I'd rather climb with a drunk monkey. You are pro though man no doubt. And your ubercool. You should train us all because you are a climbing god with the end all be all opinion on how to climb.

    Well, I've already pointed out that my wife isn't a pro. I guess I'll have to make it clear that neither am I. Nor have I claimed to be.

    Look, if you're going to get all butthurt over being wrong, don't advocate worthless positions. It is a pretty simple concept.

    I'm also pretty sure that I pointed out that I respect rgold's opinion, even if I disagree with it. I don't consider myself the end all be all, I just think that the stance I advocate has the ability to quickly help beginners build climbing skill and applied strength.

    I also am definitely NOT 'ubercool.' If you look through my posting history, you'll find that I'm about as well liked around here as jt512. I'm ok with that. The people I know in my life like me, and I don't really need general internet acceptance. I'll stand up against idiocy and ignorance when in the mood, and sometimes that makes me come off as a jackass. If I think you're wrong, you'll probably know it.

    Obviously, your personal repugnance for me will keep you from even considering meeting with my wife and I in person. No worries on my part, we'll just keep getting better.


    blueeyedclimber


    Apr 20, 2012, 7:59 AM
    Post #97 of 103 (1121 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Nov 19, 2002
    Posts: 4602

    Re: [BClear] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    BClear wrote:
    What position do you believe I have exactly? I'm not entirely sure what your opposed to really. You claim to be a proponent of upper body strength but attack pullups as a method of gaining it? Do you have any idea how idiotic that looks to anyone with any experience in physical fitness? I'm seriously baffled how stupid people can truly be.

    It's called specificity of training. Look it up.

    In reply to:
    As for her accomplishments how bout she can climb up easy walls instead of being unable to progress period.

    I guarantee you that I could teach someone with the weakest arms i have ever seen to climb an "easy" wall by developing good technique.

    Josh


    BClear


    Apr 20, 2012, 8:01 AM
    Post #98 of 103 (1117 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jan 23, 2009
    Posts: 19

    Re: [shotwell] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    Frankly I no longer give a damn.


    jt512


    Apr 20, 2012, 8:26 AM
    Post #99 of 103 (1092 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Apr 11, 2001
    Posts: 21890

    Re: [sungam] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    sungam wrote:
    shotwell wrote:
    sungam wrote:
    BClear wrote:
    What position do you believe I have exactly? I'm not entirely sure what your opposed to really. You claim to be a proponent of upper body strength but attack pullups as a method of gaining it? Do you have any idea how idiotic that looks to anyone with any experience in physical fitness?
    [image]http://i.imgur.com/GxoM0.jpg[/image]

    You need to spell check your memes. Laugh
    \begin{uncalled for aggressive defence}
    Firstly, big man, I am flood several other threads with this stupid yet "relivent" picture spam.

    Secondly, in equestria the spell things however the fuck they want, they're talking fucking ponies.

    Finally, that's not a meme. Just because it is laid out in the advice animals format does not a meme make. A meme is actually a term, phrase, or representative picture that spreads in popularity and has a known and recognised meaning. For example a picture of the trollface has a clear meaning, you know something devious is going on (how the meme "troll" got turned around like that we may never know). And if someone says "fucking xxxxx how do THEY work?" it's clearly pointing out that the person they are responding to doesn't understand what thjey are talking about. For example "Fucking memes, how do THEY work?". Memes have a rich history, from "all your base are belong to us" to ridiculously photogenic guy, it would be a true shame to lose the meaning of the word.

    And no, I won't proof read my response.

    That's not going to compile without a matching \end{}.

    Jay


    sungam


    Apr 20, 2012, 8:29 AM
    Post #100 of 103 (1089 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jun 24, 2004
    Posts: 26571

    Re: [jt512] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
    Can't Post

    jt512 wrote:
    sungam wrote:
    shotwell wrote:
    sungam wrote:
    BClear wrote:
    What position do you believe I have exactly? I'm not entirely sure what your opposed to really. You claim to be a proponent of upper body strength but attack pullups as a method of gaining it? Do you have any idea how idiotic that looks to anyone with any experience in physical fitness?
    [image]http://i.imgur.com/GxoM0.jpg[/image]

    You need to spell check your memes. Laugh
    \begin{uncalled for aggressive defence}
    Firstly, big man, I am flood several other threads with this stupid yet "relivent" picture spam.

    Secondly, in equestria the spell things however the fuck they want, they're talking fucking ponies.

    Finally, that's not a meme. Just because it is laid out in the advice animals format does not a meme make. A meme is actually a term, phrase, or representative picture that spreads in popularity and has a known and recognised meaning. For example a picture of the trollface has a clear meaning, you know something devious is going on (how the meme "troll" got turned around like that we may never know). And if someone says "fucking xxxxx how do THEY work?" it's clearly pointing out that the person they are responding to doesn't understand what thjey are talking about. For example "Fucking memes, how do THEY work?". Memes have a rich history, from "all your base are belong to us" to ridiculously photogenic guy, it would be a true shame to lose the meaning of the word.

    And no, I won't proof read my response.

    That's not going to compile without a matching \end{}.

    Jay
    Haha, I noticed that. I decided my comeback would be "who says I'm done?".


    jt512


    Apr 20, 2012, 8:29 AM
    Post #101 of 103 (614 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Apr 11, 2001
    Posts: 21890

    Re: [sungam] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    sungam wrote:
    jt512 wrote:
    sungam wrote:
    shotwell wrote:
    sungam wrote:
    BClear wrote:
    What position do you believe I have exactly? I'm not entirely sure what your opposed to really. You claim to be a proponent of upper body strength but attack pullups as a method of gaining it? Do you have any idea how idiotic that looks to anyone with any experience in physical fitness?
    [image]http://i.imgur.com/GxoM0.jpg[/image]

    You need to spell check your memes. Laugh
    \begin{uncalled for aggressive defence}
    Firstly, big man, I am flood several other threads with this stupid yet "relivent" picture spam.

    Secondly, in equestria the spell things however the fuck they want, they're talking fucking ponies.

    Finally, that's not a meme. Just because it is laid out in the advice animals format does not a meme make. A meme is actually a term, phrase, or representative picture that spreads in popularity and has a known and recognised meaning. For example a picture of the trollface has a clear meaning, you know something devious is going on (how the meme "troll" got turned around like that we may never know). And if someone says "fucking xxxxx how do THEY work?" it's clearly pointing out that the person they are responding to doesn't understand what thjey are talking about. For example "Fucking memes, how do THEY work?". Memes have a rich history, from "all your base are belong to us" to ridiculously photogenic guy, it would be a true shame to lose the meaning of the word.

    And no, I won't proof read my response.

    That's not going to compile without a matching \end{}.

    Jay
    Haha, I noticed that. I decided my comeback would be "who says I'm done?".

    That's good.


    Partner cracklover


    Apr 20, 2012, 8:34 AM
    Post #102 of 103 (608 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Nov 14, 2002
    Posts: 9973

    Re: [jt512] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    jt512 wrote:
    sungam wrote:
    jt512 wrote:
    sungam wrote:
    shotwell wrote:
    sungam wrote:
    BClear wrote:
    What position do you believe I have exactly? I'm not entirely sure what your opposed to really. You claim to be a proponent of upper body strength but attack pullups as a method of gaining it? Do you have any idea how idiotic that looks to anyone with any experience in physical fitness?
    [image]http://i.imgur.com/GxoM0.jpg[/image]

    You need to spell check your memes. Laugh
    \begin{uncalled for aggressive defence}
    Firstly, big man, I am flood several other threads with this stupid yet "relivent" picture spam.

    Secondly, in equestria the spell things however the fuck they want, they're talking fucking ponies.

    Finally, that's not a meme. Just because it is laid out in the advice animals format does not a meme make. A meme is actually a term, phrase, or representative picture that spreads in popularity and has a known and recognised meaning. For example a picture of the trollface has a clear meaning, you know something devious is going on (how the meme "troll" got turned around like that we may never know). And if someone says "fucking xxxxx how do THEY work?" it's clearly pointing out that the person they are responding to doesn't understand what thjey are talking about. For example "Fucking memes, how do THEY work?". Memes have a rich history, from "all your base are belong to us" to ridiculously photogenic guy, it would be a true shame to lose the meaning of the word.

    And no, I won't proof read my response.

    That's not going to compile without a matching \end{}.

    Jay
    Haha, I noticed that. I decided my comeback would be "who says I'm done?".

    That's good.

    But only if you're okay with all of our responses being part of what you're trying to say.

    GO


    sungam


    Apr 20, 2012, 8:41 AM
    Post #103 of 103 (599 views)
    Shortcut

    Registered: Jun 24, 2004
    Posts: 26571

    Re: [cracklover] Woman climbers, arm strength [In reply to]
    Report this Post
    Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
    Can't Post

    While we are on the topic of equestria and coding, I might as well put it out there that there is now a brony distro, Twililinux
    http://www.reddit.com/r/twililinux



    Forums : Climbing Information : Beginners

     


    Search for (options)

    Log In:

    Username:
    Password: Remember me:

    Go Register
    Go Lost Password?
    $215.06 (10% off)
    $1.35 (10% off)
    $107.06 (10% off)
    $53.96 (10% off)



    Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook