|
chazman07
Mar 31, 2009, 7:32 AM
Post #1 of 83
(13630 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 4, 2009
Posts: 4
|
I have been climbing about six months or so. I mostly boulder. I started a weight lifting program and am looking to increase my strength. The side effect is increasing my weight. I am 6'1" and about 185 lbs. Where is a good stopping point? Where should I cap my weight at for climbing?
Also, I am a casual climber, but would like to improve. I am climbing mostly V0-V2 right now. I know grip strength and technique have a lot to do with things as well.
(This post was edited by chazman07 on Mar 31, 2009, 7:36 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
patto
Mar 31, 2009, 8:22 AM
Post #2 of 83
(13616 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2005
Posts: 1453
|
As long as the women folk are liking your massive muscles who cares if you can't climb V9! 
(This post was edited by patto on Mar 31, 2009, 8:23 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
chazman07
Mar 31, 2009, 8:32 AM
Post #3 of 83
(13609 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 4, 2009
Posts: 4
|
I definately don't want to be a massive muscle. I would like to tone up for the summer, but strength gains are my main priority.
|
|
|
|
|
I_do
Mar 31, 2009, 10:58 AM
Post #4 of 83
(13587 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 2, 2008
Posts: 1232
|
chazman07 wrote: I definately don't want to be a massive muscle. I would like to tone up for the summer, but strength gains are my main priority.
So why exactly do you want strength gains again?
|
|
|
|
|
heavyfire247
Mar 31, 2009, 12:13 PM
Post #5 of 83
(13569 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 21, 2009
Posts: 4
|
Well I'm 5'10 and 190 and I'm climbing V4-V5. Strength nor weight are MY limiting factors.
|
|
|
|
|
bigjonnyc
Mar 31, 2009, 12:19 PM
Post #6 of 83
(13564 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2004
Posts: 369
|
I would say that when your rate of increase of weight begins to exceed your rate of increase in strength. As long as you're getting stronger fast enough to make up for your increased weight then it's no worry.
|
|
|
|
|
chadnsc
Mar 31, 2009, 2:28 PM
Post #7 of 83
(13527 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449
|
I would say it's time to stop before you reach my size. . .
|
|
|
|
|
dwv16
Apr 1, 2009, 12:55 AM
Post #8 of 83
(13452 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 19, 2008
Posts: 13
|
Are you the next Chris Sharma? If not, what the hell difference does it make how much muscle you gain if you like lifting weights? If you like to swim. swim. If you like to bike, bike. If you like to drink beer, drink beer. Like I said, if Sharma ain't in your sights, who gives a rat's ass what else you do?
(This post was edited by dwv16 on Apr 1, 2009, 12:56 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Apr 1, 2009, 1:02 AM
Post #9 of 83
(13443 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
If you're just screwing around on the rocks, don't worry.
If you want to really climb hard, you could probably drop to 165.
The guys that say weight doesn't matter generally have never been light so they really don't know. They then back it by citing 2 heavier guys who climb really hard and aren't light. They forget to mention the couple hundred at a similar level who are light.
|
|
|
|
|
EvilMonkey
Apr 1, 2009, 1:22 AM
Post #10 of 83
(13424 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 19, 2008
Posts: 195
|
dwv16 wrote: Are you the next Chris Sharma? If not, what the hell difference does it make how much muscle you gain if you like lifting weights? If you like to swim. swim. If you like to bike, bike. If you like to drink beer, drink beer. Like I said, if Sharma ain't in your sights, who gives a rat's ass what else you do?
|
|
|
|
|
Climbing_Pink
Apr 1, 2009, 1:52 AM
Post #11 of 83
(13407 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 10, 2008
Posts: 88
|
chazman07 wrote: I have been climbing about six months or so. I mostly boulder. I started a weight lifting program and am looking to increase my strength. The side effect is increasing my weight. I am 6'1" and about 185 lbs. Where is a good stopping point? Where should I cap my weight at for climbing? Also, I am a casual climber, but would like to improve. I am climbing mostly V0-V2 right now. I know grip strength and technique have a lot to do with things as well.
I'm a personal trainer and make sure if you're looking for strength gains you're lifting really high rate at low reps (4-8) for 3-4 sets. If you're climbing on a regular basis I would not worry about strength gain in you're back, biceps and forearms, the climbing will do that for you.
However, it's important to make sure you keep your chest and triceps balanced, if you don't you'll probably get injured.
As for legs, I would keep high reps (12-15) low weight just for joint stability because building muscle in you're legs is counter-intuitive to climbing (especially bouldering) If you look at more experienced boulderers they usually have big ass upper bodies and little spindley legs.
Feel free to PM me if you'd like my workout, I've seen huge strength gains from it (and I'm a chick)
ps. if you're worried about being to heavy to climb, keep your diet super clean and make sure you do lots of HIIT cardio to keep your body fat low
|
|
|
|
|
dschultz
Apr 1, 2009, 1:54 AM
Post #12 of 83
(13404 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 19, 2005
Posts: 40
|
I think I read in Performance Rock Climbing that for every 1lb of weight you gain you get only a 60% advantage of strength. In other words, your strength to weight ratio will begin to suffer when you get heavier. I could be wrong though. I'm 6'1" 210 but climbed much harder at 190 and was nearly as strong. There are a lot of guys out there who struggle in the pullup department but can bench press a ton. But as many others posted, if your doing "curls for the girls" who cares...
|
|
|
|
|
aerili
Apr 1, 2009, 6:28 AM
Post #13 of 83
(13364 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 13, 2006
Posts: 1166
|
dschultz wrote: I think I read in Performance Rock Climbing that for every 1lb of weight you gain you get only a 60% advantage of strength. In other words, your strength to weight ratio will begin to suffer when you get heavier.
Heavier than what? Gaining a pound over what?
Sorry, that makes no sense.
Also, I don't see how a blanket statement of "every pound gained will elicit only a 60% strength advantage" means anything. Functional strength as a function of body weight isn't measured like the weather. Specifics about exact muscles, exact joint angles the muscles are working through and consequent body kinematics have to be examined to make any sense of a statement like that.
What is a "100%" advantage of strength? Strength gains with no hypertrophy? That is called pure increase in neural recruitment. But it only goes so far. Then some hypertrophy can and MUST occur, unless you prefer to stay weaker.
|
|
|
|
|
AntinJ
Apr 1, 2009, 9:08 AM
Post #14 of 83
(13337 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 4, 2008
Posts: 475
|
Chazman,
I am a pretty big guy for a climber and I also choose to split my time between the rock gym and the "regular" gym. I've also been climbing for a fairly short period of time. I would keep doing both. I find that the biggest factor is not mass, but my body fat percentage. If I get sloppy with diet and skimp out on to many cardio sessions, my BF% gets too high and my climbing struggles noticeably. However, I'm pretty content with my progress thus far and I don't think the size has been a major issue. Keep grinding away at both until you plateau, then reevaluate your training program.
You can always try the Workout From Hell. Definitely not the most conventional training program, but it was fun going through once.
http://stuff.mit.edu/...andros/doc/TWFH.html
-J
|
|
|
|
|
krusher4
Apr 1, 2009, 1:23 PM
Post #15 of 83
(13278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 17, 2005
Posts: 997
|
heavyfire247 wrote: Well I'm 5'10 and 190 and I'm climbing V4-V5. Strength nor weight are MY limiting factors.
sounds to me like strenghth and weight ARE your limiting factors. Your too heavy and V5 really is not that hard so there's the strengh side of it
|
|
|
|
|
chadnsc
Apr 1, 2009, 2:25 PM
Post #16 of 83
(13251 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 24, 2003
Posts: 4449
|
krusher4 wrote: heavyfire247 wrote: Well I'm 5'10 and 190 and I'm climbing V4-V5. Strength nor weight are MY limiting factors. sounds to me like strenghth and weight ARE your limiting factors. Your too heavy and V5 really is not that hard so there's the strengh side of it
There is also a body shape and body composition side to things.
Obviously you want to lose body fat and retain muscle. If the OP is 5'10" and 165 pounds with 10% body fat their really isn't much that he can lose without going after lean muscle.
Hell when compared to other climbers I’m morbidly huge and I can climb V5’s. I have a few things going for me though, height, an ape index of plus 2.5, and a rather good strength to weight ratio. Not to mention good climbing technique.
|
|
|
|
|
fresh
Apr 1, 2009, 2:39 PM
Post #17 of 83
(13240 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2007
Posts: 1199
|
I think he was referring to the idea that generally speaking, strength is a function of the cross-section area of a muscle while weight is a function of the, well, the mass of the muscle.
I don't know enough to know if it's valid or not though. what are your thoughts?
to the OP, being heavier than necessary is one of the biggest things holding most people back. just try to keep your body fat low. which means you have to reduce your intake and increase your energy output. if you really like lifting I'd recommend to generally focus on low-rep, high-weight exercises (1-3 reps) without going to failure. it doesn't cause much muscle growth (aka hypertrophy) but it'll really stimulate neuromuscular efficiency.
otherwise, as someone else said, just enjoy your life and don't worry too much about being the best climber possible.
|
|
|
|
|
dschultz
Apr 1, 2009, 2:46 PM
Post #18 of 83
(13235 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 19, 2005
Posts: 40
|
I certainly understand your comments. Because I don't have the exact quote from Performance Rock Climbing by Dale Goddard and Udo Neumann (great book by the way...I just have to find it again). I believe they were suggesting two things: increasing your muscle mass by 1 pound is not a 1:1 proposition in strength gain. In other words, thinking that somehow doubling your muscle mass directly correlates to a doubling in strength is erroneous. Yes, there are a whole lot of issues with regards to body mechanics, lever length, etc (as a long time track coach you are just not going to have 245 lb high jumpers or triple jumpers). The poster simply wanted to know if there is a point of diminishing returns in gaining muscle mass and weight increases to his climbing performance. And yes, once again, climbing performance is based on many, many factors but it is quite apparent that the "mouse/elephant" effect as a very famous John states it http://www128.pair.com/r3d4k7/Chinups.html, occurs.
At the website you will see the greatest chin-up masters are light fellows and ladies - simple as that. For our poster, I am sure you'll agree that technique, general fitness, yoga for balance, flexibility, and concentration, and a whole lotta' climbin' will get him further in climbing than thrashing 45-plates around in the gym.
|
|
|
|
|
Toast_in_the_Machine
Apr 1, 2009, 4:50 PM
Post #19 of 83
(13198 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 12, 2008
Posts: 5208
|
The answer lies within. If you are concerned about it, then you probably have a problem. You know the answer. My guess is that you were posting here looking for acceptance. You know the truth, you need to act on it.
|
|
|
|
|
ryanb
Apr 1, 2009, 5:42 PM
Post #20 of 83
(13175 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 4, 2004
Posts: 832
|
aerili wrote: dschultz wrote: I think I read in Performance Rock Climbing that for every 1lb of weight you gain you get only a 60% advantage of strength. In other words, your strength to weight ratio will begin to suffer when you get heavier. Heavier than what? Gaining a pound over what? Sorry, that makes no sense. Also, I don't see how a blanket statement of "every pound gained will elicit only a 60% strength advantage" means anything. Functional strength as a function of body weight isn't measured like the weather. Specifics about exact muscles, exact joint angles the muscles are working through and consequent body kinematics have to be examined to make any sense of a statement like that. What is a "100%" advantage of strength? Strength gains with no hypertrophy? That is called pure increase in neural recruitment. But it only goes so far. Then some hypertrophy can and MUST occur, unless you prefer to stay weaker.
Here is the section I think he is referring to. I think you will agree with it, it is an excellent and well researched book by some folks who trained like fiends and climbed damn hard.
http://books.google.com/...s_search_s&cad=0
Angry and dschultz (relayed from "Performace Rock Climbing") advice is the best advice on this thread.
I climbed reasonably hard as a kid and then got up to around 190 (after a year or two doing other things) and couldn't pull v3 or 5.11. Now i'm at 175 and climbing v6 and onsiting 5.11 on gear. I'm working on dropping into to the 160's this spring (while keeping up climbing specific strength excercises) and red point some harder stuff i've been falling off.
What ever you do, keep having fun with climbing. Try new things, check out new areas, and enjoy the adventure not just the grades.
If you enjoy climbing hard and training to do so you need to spend a lot of time learning how to do so. Forums are not the best place for that since most of the posters (myself included) don't climb particularly hard. Check out rockprodagies (sp?) article on periodization in the articles section on this site and the training info on dave macleod, sonnie trotter, ben moon and eric horsts sites.
|
|
|
|
|
dschultz
Apr 1, 2009, 10:00 PM
Post #21 of 83
(13123 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 19, 2005
Posts: 40
|
RyanB
Yep, that is the section from Performance Rock Climbing I was referencing. Thanks!
DSchultz
If only I could find it around the house somewhere...
|
|
|
|
|
Toast_in_the_Machine
Apr 2, 2009, 3:00 AM
Post #22 of 83
(13066 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 12, 2008
Posts: 5208
|
ryanb wrote: aerili wrote: dschultz wrote: I think I read in Performance Rock Climbing that for every 1lb of weight you gain you get only a 60% advantage of strength. In other words, your strength to weight ratio will begin to suffer when you get heavier. Heavier than what? Gaining a pound over what? Sorry, that makes no sense. Also, I don't see how a blanket statement of "every pound gained will elicit only a 60% strength advantage" means anything. Functional strength as a function of body weight isn't measured like the weather. Specifics about exact muscles, exact joint angles the muscles are working through and consequent body kinematics have to be examined to make any sense of a statement like that. What is a "100%" advantage of strength? Strength gains with no hypertrophy? That is called pure increase in neural recruitment. But it only goes so far. Then some hypertrophy can and MUST occur, unless you prefer to stay weaker. Here is the section I think he is referring to. I think you will agree with it, it is an excellent and well researched book by some folks who trained like fiends and climbed damn hard. http://books.google.com/...s_search_s&cad=0 Angry and dschultz (relayed from "Performace Rock Climbing") advice is the best advice on this thread. I climbed reasonably hard as a kid and then got up to around 190 (after a year or two doing other things) and couldn't pull v3 or 5.11. Now i'm at 175 and climbing v6 and onsiting 5.11 on gear. I'm working on dropping into to the 160's this spring (while keeping up climbing specific strength excercises) and red point some harder stuff i've been falling off. What ever you do, keep having fun with climbing. Try new things, check out new areas, and enjoy the adventure not just the grades. If you enjoy climbing hard and training to do so you need to spend a lot of time learning how to do so. Forums are not the best place for that since most of the posters (myself included) don't climb particularly hard. Check out rockprodagies (sp?) article on periodization in the articles section on this site and the training info on dave macleod, sonnie trotter, ben moon and eric horsts sites.
c'mon - pimp the "pod climber radio" on the front page.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Apr 2, 2009, 3:26 AM
Post #23 of 83
(13056 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
chazman07 wrote: I have been climbing about six months or so. I mostly boulder. I started a weight lifting program and am looking to increase my strength. The side effect is increasing my weight. I am 6'1" and about 185 lbs. Where is a good stopping point? Where should I cap my weight at for climbing?
175 lb.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
aerili
Apr 2, 2009, 4:27 AM
Post #24 of 83
(13038 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 13, 2006
Posts: 1166
|
dschultz wrote: I believe they were suggesting two things: increasing your muscle mass by 1 pound is not a 1:1 proposition in strength gain. In other words, thinking that somehow doubling your muscle mass directly correlates to a doubling in strength is erroneous.
dschultz wrote: For our poster, I am sure you'll agree that ... general fitness ... and a whole lotta' climbin' will get him further in climbing than thrashing 45-plates around in the gym.
Have you considered the fact that 45 lb plates can actually be a well integrated part of a climber's general fitness training? It's just that most of y'all don't know how. <sigh> But I don't want to get into all that again.
fresh wrote: I think he was referring to the idea that generally speaking, strength is a function of the cross-section area of a muscle while weight is a function of the, well, the mass of the muscle.
Strength isn't completely a function of the cross-sectional area of a muscle. In fact, any strength gains made initially are purely neural. One will observe a big leap in strength with zero cross sectional increase. Also things like motor unit recruitment (that thing climbers love to talk about) will greatly influence strength as well but do not really correlate with muscle mass.
As for weight, I believe it is a function of gravity, not mass.
(This post was edited by aerili on Apr 2, 2009, 4:28 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
aerili
Apr 2, 2009, 4:43 AM
Post #25 of 83
(13032 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 13, 2006
Posts: 1166
|
ryanb wrote: Here is the section I think he is referring to. I think you will agree with it, it is an excellent and well researched book by some folks who trained like fiends and climbed damn hard
Thanks, ryan. Generally I find most of the "training" climbing books on the market have pretty good science behind them, but I can't say that I agree with everything in them.
For instance, Dale and Goddard say weight lifting requires minimal technique and no intermuscular coordination. Ha! Spoken like true armchair lifters.
They also state forced negatives improve max recruitment. Hmmm, eccentric exercise (negative phase) actually requires less recruitment than concentric exercise (i.e. what we utilize most during climbing--that and isometric strength). I'm not sure that even if you maximally overload (the "forced" part) during a negative phase that such training translates into improved CONCENTRIC recruitment.
But otherwise most of these books are pretty good.
(This post was edited by aerili on Apr 2, 2009, 4:44 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
