Sean McColl Training Video

i think everybody is going to be different regarding their success using either method. i basically agree w/ JLP and willS pretty much verbatim. for me, it has been a substantial improvement to separate my strength training from my technique training/movement this year. i used the SCC training format exclusively for about 5 years and the results were pretty demoralizing. this year i switched back to the hangboard and specific strength training and the results have been eye opening.

one of the things that others have pointed out - i think the SCC book is geared towards beginners to intermediate climbers. of the 5.13 and harder climbers that i see at the gym, i can't think of a single time i saw any of them doing any of the SCC movement drills. some of the drills border on absurd. for example the foot pivot drill with people looking like 1950's dancers doing the twist on basketball sized holds. really? most of the climbing i do would be pretty difficult to pivot on the foot holds, and even if you did pivot you would just be grinding them down into polished nothing for the next guy.

perhaps if i climbed at rifle, maple, or the red, i would emphasize the gym climbing/movement more. but, for the majority of the climbing i do, the excessive gym climbing produces sort of a 'blankie' effect. when i get outside on small holds and difficult smears, i want my blankie (ie the big comfortable hand and foot holds).

at the beginning of the year, when i was having a big upswing in success, i was pretty bummed at the thought of wasting 5 years using the SCC method. however, i do think it has improved some aspects of my climbing in terms of efficiency and movement generation. i think that it is probably a good training protocol for beginners to intermediate climbers. the results i have seen in other SCC climbers seem to support this - they are generally topping out in the 11 to 12- range but not really getting any further.

i also noticed doug's condescending tone, and this is pretty consistent with the responses that i have received when asking questions. generally his answers are "you're obviously not doing it right" or "you should move to an area where your climbing better matches your training".

Brendan N. (grayhghost) wrote: My point was that if you are wondering if strength or movement is holding you back, you can use a stronger climber to test it.

i don't think this is a foolproof test. the 1-5-9 kid is obviously stronger than you, but he might also be a better climber than you. so, it's hard to separate whether it is a strength or movement/technique issue.

a better test might be to have somebody that you climb with often, who climbs at a similar grade but isn't as phsically strong try the problem.

slim wrote: a better test might be to have somebody that you climb with often, who climbs at a similar grade but isn't as phsically strong try the problem.

Yes, you are right, it goes both ways. The nice thing is that if you can do it and the 1-5-9-er can't, it's an ego boost. If your weak friend can do it and you can't, it's an ego blow.
In The Tale of Two Brendans I am the campusboard crusher who gets blown off by Brendan P. who spent his youth doing foot pivots with Douglas.
True to form, he has had great success in Smith (5.13 onsights) while I prefer horizontal monkey bars.

i think we can all agree that chris sharma is one of the best sport climber and boulderer in the world.

a lot of folks get frustrated hearing him discuss climbing technique and his training. he only touches upon the things he does because it might not work for anyone else. he usually refers to 'doing something that you enjoy and keeps you psyched.' for him, this is climbing, A LOT, outside, and to a point, this seems to be the majority of his training. he works the movements, 'fails' many times. for some people this sort of 'training' simply won't work primarily because of mindset (repeated failure is hard for many to overcome). many people need to do pullups not only to become stronger, but also be confident and have the groundwork to make the crux and heady moves.

lessons here- no matter what form of climbing you do, if you want to get better, the best way to do that is vastly different for everyone. there has to be a lot of self experimentation and seeing what sort of training works for you. a lot of folks will never do this and would rather just follow a series of routines that someone has come up with. i don't pretend to know anything about SCC, but to me, the most successful self coached climber will be the one who experiments with several different training routines and builds new ones based on how they went for them.

Dave Macleod Tweet about Sean McColl core exercises

I guess this guy must also be really detached from the scientific community, even though he lectures at Oxford on sports science....

The SCC guy had some good points despite his tone, primarily that the best athletes don't necessarily make good training models to follow, and they don't necessarily know whether their methods are sound, probably don't make the best coaches, etc. (This isn't intended to reflect on Sean, all we saw was a snippet, we don't know his training plan/schedule)

But some of the minutia SCC guy gets into is a little crazy and "off" IMO. Like saying the core exercise is useless because of flexion, etc. I mean really, how many times when bouldering near your limit on plastic do you have feet cut and have to hold a swing and re-paste them?...It happens a lot for me. It's the nature of climbing gymnastic plastic problems, and if I were training for climbing in indoor comps, I think that exercise would be quite specific actually.

People tend to think of "train your weakest link" as style specific...like slabs, or technical balancey vertical or whatever. But that also applies to strength, and it's hard to know what is limiting you. That's one more reason I think isolating them is very important, you are sure to hit the weakest (provided you do a full spectrum of exercises) but you don't undertrain the stronger links...they are still getting full attention.

If you look at say, coaches training powerlifters - for the bench press specialists sometimes the coaches will have them stop benching all together and focus on rotator cuff and midrange tricep stuff...and they return to the benchpress six or eight weeks later and destroy their prior bests despite not having performed the specific BP movement for a couple months.

Nico Toscani wrote: I guess this guy must also be really detached from the scientific community, even though he lectures at Oxford on sports science....

and he only climbs 5.14 and v14. He's a wind bag.

Will S wrote: If you look at say, coaches training powerlifters - for the bench press specialists sometimes the coaches will have them stop benching all together and focus on rotator cuff and midrange tricep stuff...and they return to the benchpress six or eight weeks later and destroy their prior bests despite not having performed the specific BP movement for a couple months.

I've seen the same thing back when I practiced muai thai. Elbows were my weapon of choice (i'm short) but for two weeks every two months we'd focus on the pugilistic skills (jabs, straights) and come back throwin heavier and faster elbows.

It doesn't surprise me that Mr. Hunter didn't like the video. The second half is all supplementary exercises. Hunter thinks all that stuff is a waste of time.

The folks over at climbing narc seem to be offended by Hunter's tone, and they're running to Sean's defense...but the video really isn't that good. Or is it just me? It doesn't tell you anything about Sean's training program; it's a workout snapshot.