Adam Ondra: "Any climber with mediocre stregnth can climb at least V8 given perfect technique" Thoughts?

I think he may be correct... If you add in any SKINNY climber with mediocre strength. And I think V7 might be a more accurate end game for technique. Even at V7 you are looking at very high finger strength and usually some strong lock-offs or deadpoints.

Tim Lutz wrote:If this were true, many would have been doing v8s and 10s in the 70s. Or the route grade equivalent of 13+/14-. Fun to think that climbing has a clueless Ayn Rand figure now. Sure, everyone can pull up by their bootstraps to be millionaire, make bold v8 flash, and make fun Euro dance party!

Climbing technique, and shoes, have both come a long way since the 70's

BS! As Chuck Pratt once stated, "It's easy to have good technique if you're strong." Climbers endowed with strong hands/fingers and good muscular endurance can't relate to what it's like if you don't. Coordination, core strength, upper-body strength, light weight, a cool head, technique and training all help, but, if you don't have fingers of steel, sequencing the holds on most V8s will be impossible.

I think the statement makes more sense in the context of raw/genetic potential. Most people will never be able to climb 5.15, regardless of technique, effort, or training. The same could be said of running a 4 minute mile or a sub 2:30 marathon.

If he is trying to say that the median climber has the potential to climb V8, I agree. It doesn't take freak genetics to get there. V15, on the other hand...

It seems to me that if someone climbed long enough to acquire perfect technique that they would have also acquired more than mediocre strength along the way.

Any climber of mediocre strength can climb at least V8 given that the style of problem fits their own personal style, they make enough attempts at it(repetition), and (least important compared with the first two) they use perfect style. So style/repetition+technique=V8 for an average Joey.

George Bracksieck wrote:BS! As Chuck Pratt once stated, "It's easy to have good technique if you're strong." Climbers endowed with strong hands/fingers and good muscular endurance can't relate to what it's like if you don't. Coordination, core strength, upper-body strength, light weight, a cool head, technique and training all help, but, if you don't have fingers of steel, sequencing the holds on most V8s will be impossible.

Climbing friend,

No one is "endowed" with strong hands/fingers. You must utilize your crushing grip of iron on the boulders mercilessly - like an angry wolf about to tear out the throat of some poor animal - for years and years, 3-5 times per week, until you are very tired, in order to endow yourself with the sought after steel like finger cables.

yes, climbing friend ondra has the crushing grip of iron fist, and he also has the body of a dwarf freshly emerged from a nazi death camp, so he may excel at his difficult, bold, yet enjoyable flash.

Tim Lutz wrote:If this were true, many would have been doing v8s and 10s in the 70s. Or the route grade equivalent of 13+/14-. Fun to think that climbing has a clueless Ayn Rand figure now. Sure, everyone can pull up by their bootstraps to be millionaire, make bold v8 flash, and make fun Euro dance party!

I almost choked on my tongue laughing at the above regarding the clueless Ayn Rand part.

That kind of generalization can not have any kind of scientific back up. V8 seems kind of arbitrary at the exclusion of all other factors. The speaker is trying to downplay his physical advantages and offer that it is his great technique and your poor technique that allows him to climb up to a certain level.

Along the same lines people who say it's ALL about mental strength not physical are basically telling you that you have weak mental character if you can't climb hard. The mind is important to maximize what we have to work with, but we live in a world where the laws of physics apply.

The extra 45 + lbs I carry up the rock with me on a shorter frame compared to him requires a little more than mediocre strength to send V8s

That's more weight than a 5 gallon bucket full of water

Ana Tine wrote: I almost choked on my tongue laughing at the above regarding the clueless Ayn Rand part. That kind of generalization can not have any kind of scientific back up. V8 seems kind of arbitrary at the exclusion of all other factors. The speaker is trying to downplay his physical advantages and offer that it is his great technique and your poor technique that allows him to climb up to a certain level. Along the same lines people who say it's ALL about mental strength not physical are basically telling you that you have weak mental character if you can't climb hard. The mind is important to maximize what we have to work with, but we live in a world where the laws of physics apply.

Would you like to be being my climbing friend? And host euro-dance-party of most fun type?

I agree that technique comes with repetition but repetition just isn't fun sometimes.
how about the mediocre strength climber that tries a V8 650 times and finally 'climbs V8' but still couldn't onsight a v4

I think he gets a little carried away when he's trying to put his thoughts into words. He stumbles in mid-sentence a lot.

ondra's comment reminds me of when michael jordan tried his hand at coaching...

yes, climbing friend, he is a silly-man. You must have at least some pretty serious crushing grip strength of eagle claw type to climb the V8. I would be thinking you also need to be having the technique of the floating lotus style as well to climb these grades.

Bbhhulllshhitt!

Jake Jones wrote:Are you entirely sure he wasn't referring to drinking a V8?

This was a beautiful post

Jake Jones wrote:Are you entirely sure he wasn't referring to drinking a V8?

God bless this.

"Mediocre" is not the same as "bad". It just means average or unexceptional. If you are an out of shape trad dad that climbs a couple pitches of 5.8 every other weekend -- no, you're not going to send V8 off the couch. That's a ridiculous claim even for Ondra.

I think his point is more along the lines of: if you are plateauing at moderate grades, try focusing on your technique rather than jumping on the campus rungs, hangboard, etc. I know for my part I find myself thinking I need to get stonger a lot when in reality getting better is more likely to do the trick.

That being said I would have said V4/5 to be more along the lines of the highest grade you could "technique your way up". But my technique is admittedly shit so what do I know.

How many of the doubters here actually boulder on a regular basis? Just because you've spent the last N years climbing routes does not mean you even have the more rudimental bouldering techniques. Fact is good bouldering technique is pretty rare & I've not seen many (grown-ups) who can't boulder V8 possess what I'd consider good bouldering techniques (the few exceptions include a guy who was probably 30 lbs overweight but still had the grace of a ballerina).

Yes, a lot of route climbers know how to find good rests, get into certain body positions, and even have decent lock-off strength, but they lack the movement quality of a kid that has been climbing for less than a year.