|
swederock
Jan 8, 2006, 11:37 PM
Post #1 of 22
(6080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2005
Posts: 2
|
Hi, I´m Swederock!
I´m from Sweden and primary a indoor sport climber. I try to combine my climbing with lifting weights, great weights.
Therefore, i find myself to be a rather mediocre (spelling?) climber, only able to boulder jug-overhangs really good. When it comes to endurance, i really suck.. I´m familiar with the theories of "short" resp. "long" muscles, and what they´re good for. So, fellow climbers, what is my question?
Question:
Can I ever be a good climber when it comes to long sport routes without "altering" the shape of my body?
I´m not some kind of beast, but I have a bigger "body-building-like" body than the others at the gym...
Please respond without explaining the differences of long- and short muscles, I´m aware of them.
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Jan 8, 2006, 11:49 PM
Post #2 of 22
(6080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
It sounds like you are a relative beginner. You'll get more endurance and technique (which will also help you climb long routes) as you improve.
It might be time to stop lifting for bulk. I wouldn't sweat it yet, just climb.
|
|
|
|
|
colotopian
Jan 8, 2006, 11:51 PM
Post #3 of 22
(6080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2005
Posts: 518
|
I'm not a physical trainer but people (coaches, mentors, and physical trainers) have told me with climbing, like kayaking, strength to weight ratios are important. Also they say balance with all types of fitness is good to keep in mind regardless of sport (core, upper body, lower body, cardio, and etc. should be kept in balance, and symmetric). They tell me this and they tell me to drink heavily whenever the need arises. :D
|
|
|
|
|
tommez
Jan 9, 2006, 10:35 AM
Post #4 of 22
(6080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2005
Posts: 46
|
In reply to: Therefore, i find myself to be a rather mediocre (spelling?) climber, only able to boulder jug-overhangs really good. When it comes to endurance, i really suck..
If you want endurance, you have to train endurance. I may be wrong, but it sounds like you only do boulder problems. There are already some great treads on this subject on this site. Read these and learn some of the basics, and also get some tips on how to train for endurance.
To your question. Big muscles can be a draw back when it comes to endurance. On the other hand, most of the routes in your home area are short and bouldery.
|
|
|
|
|
hanuman
Jan 9, 2006, 10:47 AM
Post #5 of 22
(6080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 28, 2001
Posts: 8
|
well, firstly u shud stop thinking that u r a poor climber. cos it will turn into a self fulfilling prophecy. And secondly , u need to have a burning desire to climb. And when u start getting more climbing experiences, u will notice other climbers, techniques and naturally u r bound to improve. Bodies are led by minds and not otherwise. 8^)
|
|
|
|
|
sul-pont
Deleted
Jan 9, 2006, 2:51 PM
Post #6 of 22
(6080 views)
Shortcut
Registered:
Posts:
|
Two things that have helped me build endurance are:
1) Do laps on routes a grade or two below your best. Just rope up and try to climb the route as efficiently as possible without getting sloppy, then repeat immediately after getting lowered down until you're too tired to continue.
2) Do long traverses that aren't too hard for you. Try go for a while, like 15-20 minutes to begin with and work your way up.
I find that both of these drills are best when executed at the end of a climbing session.
I also take an easy run for about 30 minutes on my rest days, that helps my general endurance.
As tommez said, there are some great posts regarding endurance on this site that can give you more detail than I.
|
|
|
|
|
swederock
Jan 9, 2006, 5:34 PM
Post #7 of 22
(6080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2005
Posts: 2
|
I´ve been climbing for about 4 years, mostly indoor but also outdoor about 2 months/year. I don´t consider myself a beginner, but my progress has leveled out. And I feel that the only thing I can do about it is re-shaping my body, meaning training differently (more reps, running etc.).
I´ve never seen a picture of a good climber with a body like mine, so that is why i´m asking..
Thanks for your answers!
Swederock
|
|
|
|
|
overzealous
Jan 9, 2006, 5:52 PM
Post #8 of 22
(6080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2004
Posts: 257
|
I don't know how you're built so I can't answer for sure.. but not all climbers are waifs. It is true that a large scale study noticed that high level (I believe it was 5.12 and over, but I'm not certainl) climbers tend to be smaller than average, but this is certainly not a hard and fast rule.
Take a look at Alex Hubar or John Long.
|
|
|
|
|
foeslts16
Jan 9, 2006, 5:54 PM
Post #9 of 22
(6080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 27, 2002
Posts: 210
|
Take a look at the Huber Brothers, these guys aren't exactly small.
http://climbing.com/current/bigwall03/
If you need endurance climb ALOT. Go to the gym and get 10-12 routes in each session. You will improve after time.
|
|
|
|
|
organic
Jan 9, 2006, 5:58 PM
Post #10 of 22
(6080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 16, 2003
Posts: 2215
|
Nate Gold is like 6'2" and ~95kg
Chris Sharma is like 6' and ~85kg
You probably need to up your climbing training and do more climbing specific training.
|
|
|
|
|
jto
Jan 9, 2006, 7:41 PM
Post #11 of 22
(6080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 18, 2004
Posts: 272
|
What I´ve heard from people close to these stars Sharma is more like 75 and the HUGE man himself, Fred Nicole is only the same, 75 max. The big guys Klem Loskot and Toni Lamprecht are close to 85 during the off season but the guys are about 190cm tall each. Lamprecht is usually closer to 77-78 when sport climbing. TV can lie big time.
Anyway I´m not here arguing who weighs how much but the fact is you have to carry every kilo up there. Big muscles demand much more oxygene than smaller ones. Mostly the bulky guys excell on boulders but hey, nobody tells you to stop trying. I´m 36 years old, 193cm and 88kgs myself and yes, I WILL climb an 8a before I turn 40. I´ll also lose the extra 8 kgs before a road trip :)
Cheers :D
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
dudemanbu
Jan 9, 2006, 9:20 PM
Post #14 of 22
(6080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2005
Posts: 941
|
are you saying 6'2 185 lbs is big? because that's quite small by bodybuilding standards. i myself have been at 185 at 5'8 and still considered myself to be small, even at 7% bodyfat.
|
|
|
|
|
markc
Jan 9, 2006, 9:30 PM
Post #15 of 22
(6080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2003
Posts: 2481
|
I'm not trying to start a pissing match, but that dude isn't very big. He has 4 inches and 25 pounds on me. He's tall, but he's a pretty average weight for his height. I agree that training your weakness is a good strategy, but if the OP is body-builder big, it's going to cause some unique issues.
After a certain point, increased muscle mass is going to be more of a liability than an asset. If this is the case with the OP, there is a choice that has to be made. Would he rather maintain his current physique and continue training his weaknesses, or would he like to reduce his bulk and see if it aids his climbing?
|
|
|
|
|
gonz
Jan 9, 2006, 9:51 PM
Post #16 of 22
(6080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 9, 2005
Posts: 25
|
Swede - you may want to take some time to think about what's more important to you. Getting huge in weightlifting is not an overnight thing, it takes years of effort to achieve. So I'm going to assume that lifting and your current body are important to you. Before you change things up and consider reshaping your body so you can possibly (it's not a guarantee) climb harder be sure that you're not going to regret it later.
But it does put a funny image in my head - a guy I used to see at the gym that was so built up that he couldn't reach a chalk bag behind his back! So instead he wore two chalkbags six-shooter style to compensate.
|
|
|
|
|
tommez
Jan 10, 2006, 9:58 AM
Post #17 of 22
(6080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2005
Posts: 46
|
In reply to: But it does put a funny image in my head - a guy I used to see at the gym that was so built up that he couldn't reach a chalk bag behind his back! So instead he wore two chalkbags six-shooter style to compensate.
For real? :shock:
|
|
|
|
|
mcgivney_nh
Jan 10, 2006, 11:44 AM
Post #18 of 22
(6080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2005
Posts: 421
|
In reply to: Two things that have helped me build endurance are: 1) Do laps on routes a grade or two below your best. Just rope up and try to climb the route as efficiently as possible without getting sloppy, then repeat immediately after getting lowered down until you're too tired to continue.
If instead of lowering and climbing upo again,, you will find that downclimbing, then climbing, then downclimbing etc. Will help to improve your endurance and your technique.
-Sean
|
|
|
|
|
ajkclay
Jan 10, 2006, 2:09 PM
Post #19 of 22
(6080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2002
Posts: 1567
|
I guess if you are Arnie sized then it would be a problem, but, have you seen Chris Sharma in Dosage 3? That boy is getting big!
I guess the thing is where your size is; if it's upper body it is not as bad as legs, but I guess if you are looking like a body builder then it's big heavy legs too = not great for climbing.
But hey, it's not all about grades anyway.
Oh, and welcome to the site, and climbing in general
:)
Adam
|
|
|
|
|
unrooted
Jan 10, 2006, 6:30 PM
Post #20 of 22
(6080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 13, 2003
Posts: 840
|
it is huge compared to almost every other climber I know who can climb at those grades.
In reply to: I'm not trying to start a pissing match, but that dude isn't very big. He has 4 inches and 25 pounds on me. He's tall, but he's a pretty average weight for his height. I agree that training your weakness is a good strategy, but if the OP is body-builder big, it's going to cause some unique issues. After a certain point, increased muscle mass is going to be more of a liability than an asset. If this is the case with the OP, there is a choice that has to be made. Would he rather maintain his current physique and continue training his weaknesses, or would he like to reduce his bulk and see if it aids his climbing? |
|
|
|
|
hweight
Feb 2, 2006, 4:56 AM
Post #21 of 22
(6080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 20, 2006
Posts: 22
|
I'm about 5'5" and 165 lbs. For what it's worth (I don;t know what you consider "hard climbing") I've climbed hard 12 consistently, and up to 13a. For years, I couldn't sport climb worth shit (compared to bouldering), but it wasn't because of my body type; it was a lack of mileage. Just get out and put in days of 8+ routes. Do it EVERY time you can. Frankly, gym climbing has done little for me besides be really fun and give me finger problems, so make as many days as possible outside days.
My friend James at the NRG is over 6 ft in height and well over 200 lbs; he climbs solid mid-13. It's a problem of practice and fitness, not body type. You have to be willing to get pumped stupid on something other people are hiking, come down, de-pump, and do it again. Training weaknesses takes humility and long-sightedness.
|
|
|
|
|
norsk
Feb 2, 2006, 5:32 AM
Post #22 of 22
(6080 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2005
Posts: 33
|
great topic and discussion... something I have been wrestling with myself. I am 6'2 205 pounds, muscular, lean, and cardiovascularly fit. I can move a tremendous amount of weight in the weightroom, but at best I have only been able to climb in the high 10s. I think I have decent enough form to climb at a higher grade; on routes when I can't make it I feel I am limited by strength not technique (although I am NOT denying my technique could improve). So, this is quite frustrating to me. Based on my thinking, I would add two caveats to the discussion.
First, while the "strength to weight ratio" is very important, I think it needs to be re-phrased as "climbing-strength to weigth ratio". Climbing strength is not the same as weightroom strength obviously (you don't bench press your way up the wall). But I also mean that doing weighted pull-ups is different than pulling a fraction of your body weight up the wall even while holding a jug. Moreover, my grip/forearm strength is great in the weightroom, but I can barely hang - let alone pull up - on a finger training board. So, even though I can mimic climbing techniques in the weightroom successfully, it is another thing compeltely to actually do it climbing.
Second, I think for the average climber (climbs once, twice a week, average strength and body weight), there is a threshold body weight once over they are at a significant disadvantage. For example, if there are two 'average' climbers but one weighs 160 and one weighs 200, the first will have an easier time getting up the wall. In fact, I think that even if the second (heavier) climber had better technique and more strength, the first probably would 'out climb' him. Of course there are some climbers who are over 200lbs and out of shape, but because they climb daily and have been doing so for years they can climb high grades. But my thinking is just for 'average' climbers.
These are just my thoughts, based on my experience- namely that my partner can out climb me, but I have a much higher weigthroom strength to weight ratio, better technique, and more experience. I am currently trying to decide if I want to continue my training the way it is, or if I want to devote myself more to climbing. I look forward to more thoughts on the matter!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
