Opinions on Tom Randall/Alex Barrows ideas
|
Been looking at some training philosophy's from across the pond. |
|
No disrespect to Alex, but isn't "aerobic power" an oxymoron? I guess Shakespeare is from across the pond... |
|
This is just my opinion but surely the limiting factor for most sport climbers is endurance, when they are climbing at onsight or realistic redpoint level? |
|
Aerobic Power "maximizing the proportion of your aerobic capacity which you can output during a route, once we've developed the ability to produce energy with the aerobic system, now we need to ensure we can exploit that to its fullest extent" |
|
Quick read- looks like 6 months of power endurance training. |
|
Mark E Dixon wrote:Quick read- looks like 6 months of power endurance training. Lots of differences from conventional wisdom, at least in US. Kind of think he's not up to date with respect to lactic acid, but that's a minor quibble.I really like their ideas, and I'd disagree with your statement. Its all just a different take on periodization, but not that different. The spinning plates idea de-emphasizes strict linear periodization, but is far from radical. So to compare, their base phase is: a) "aerobic capacity"--> e.g. low enough intensity that you aren't swamping your muscles in lactic acid, think 20 minutes moderate ARC if you are a RockProdigy person. b) and anaerobic capacity--> high intensity, but with short enough duration and enough rest that you don't get pumped; think along the line of RockProdigy repeaters. Barrows admits this to being a "hard systems work" workout. Indeed. So essentially you start with a long phase emphasizing these two components... Same as what the RPTM suggests (repeaters with ARC after). Barrows claims to be weak and suggests doing strength workouts all the time as well as energy systems work. He also suggests that high end anaerobic capacity training also improves strength... just like the RP approach. The end of their cycle prior to performance is lactic acid tolerance/power endurance work, same again as RP. I'm a bit confused by the how the names Aerobic Power and Anaerobic Power relate to the energy systems and how they are leading to failure, but the difference is essentially if you are powering out or pumping out. I'd say the main difference between this UK born philosophy and the RP approach is that the latter emphasizes a long period of isolated anaerobic capacity work (hangboard repeaters) with complete rest between workouts, and thus features lower volume in the base phase. Makes sense, given that Barrows seems to prefer modern steep pumpfests. I've also starting regularly mixing in the 20 x (30s on/30s off) suggested in Barrows trainingbeta podcast into my base phase ARCing, and think it is brilliant; your aerobic systems has to work at its capacity, and you don't get pumped (but get close to powering out by the end), but you still get to work the anaerobic system at level it needs to operate at on a route. |
|
nerdlet wrote: I've also starting regularly mixing in the 20 x (30s on/30s off) suggested in Barrows trainingbeta podcast into my base phase ARCing, and think it is brilliant; your aerobic systems has to work at its capacity, and you don't get pumped (but get close to powering out by the end), but you still get to work the anaerobic system at level it needs to operate at on a route.I'm still a little confused as to the level of effort/intensity they are recommending for this style of workout. Are you sticking to a 20 min ARC intensity level or stepping it up a bit given the more frequent rest periods? |
|
jackson wrote: I'm still a little confused as to the level of effort/intensity they are recommending for this style of workout. Are you sticking to a 20 min ARC intensity level or stepping it up a bit given the more frequent rest periods?The intensity level of the climbing is much higher. I don't know what the Brits feel is the right level, but I am just about failing by powering out at the end of the last 30 s set, and am not significantly pumped. I'd estimate the difficultly of moves is around the same as a consistent 40 ft route that might be at or just below my onsight limit. As the workout progresses past the initial sets, each 30s set ends with the beginning feeling of powering out, but after 30 s I have recovered enough so that lactic acid is not accumulating. I'd view the workout as tying together how much work the anaerobic system is capable of doing in the 30s along with how well the aerobic system can mop up in the 60 s. |
|
It looks like they had really good results using their program to achieve their goals (Erra Vella & Century Crack). I believe Tom Randall said during the podcast that he hangboards nearly every day. |
|
nerdlet wrote: I've also starting regularly mixing in the 20 x (30s on/30s off) suggested in Barrows trainingbeta podcast into my base phase ARCing, and think it is brilliant...So what do you do for these (sorry if I missed it)? Are you doing hangboard repeaters or "bouldering repeaters", i.e. 30 seconds climbing, 30 seconds off, for about 20 minutes? |
|
evan h wrote: So what do you do for these (sorry if I missed it)? Are you doing hangboard repeaters or "bouldering repeaters", i.e. 30 seconds climbing, 30 seconds off, for about 20 minutes?I'm using an adjustable angle Treadwall, climbing on routes set with similar sized holds and similar difficulty movement. If the intensity is off on a given day I change the angle during the rest. Bouldering is what Barrows proposes I think, though difficult to find suitable terrain in a lot of modern gyms. |
|
Interesting, I might give this a try. At least it can break up the ARC monotony a bit. |
|
I had to reread and review other sources to try and better grasp the terminology and training intentions. The energy systems paradigm I’ve held is wrong. I thought this was informative: Repeated-Sprint Athletes: Energy Systems & Training |
|
climbing friend, |
|
Aleks Zebastian wrote:climbing friend, the real question, myah, is how would one build up the necessary levels of sexual frustration, yes, and boredom with life in general, myah, in order to be able to follow a periodized training program, yes, and/or hangboard on meticulous schedule, myah?Aleks: I've learned in life that sometimes it is difficult to understand the motivation of people you don't know well. For example, I've often thought the things you listed above as motivating your posts. Anyway, as everyone else here knows, 99% of people posting in the training section are middle-aged and have a job, wife/husband and kids. Hangboarding in the garage after the little ones go to sleep (or at 5 in the morning) is what they look forward to all day. I fully understand how weird that must seem to someone not in those circumstances. So there you go, you can try the above training plan out (get a job, get married, have kids), though it may take a few years or decades to get yourself in that "position". Best of Luck. |
|
Brendan N. (grayhghost) wrote:had a very productive 7 day trip to the Red River Gorge. This was after a RockProdigy hangboard cycle, skipping campusing in favor of more Aerobic and Anaerobic training.That's what you would expect though, no? You went for specificity, which we kick around as one of the prime components of athletic training. I say that, because my limited experience in the Red was that I never, ever lacked the power or strength to do any individual moves or sequences, it was always a question of long anaerobic endurance. I listened to the podcast, and while I do like some of Tom's approach of trying to benchmark certain physical attributes to see what the 'weak link' is, so you know what to focus on is a good one, I wasn't quite on board with their anaerobic protocols and how much emphasis they put on it. As always, I'd prefer to look at the results of people they've trained, rather than their personal results, and I haven't seen any of that. My personal experience is that anaerobic capacity trains up quickly and you don't make much in gains after about 3-4 weeks of training it. I also find it's the most injury-prone type of training for me. I think it was Bechtel that used the "cake/icing" analogy, where power endurance is the icing. |
|
Will S wrote: My personal experience is that anaerobic capacity trains up quickly and you don't make much in gains after about 3-4 weeks of training it. I also find it's the most injury-prone type of training for me. I think it was Bechtel that used the "cake/icing" analogy, where power endurance is the icing.I don't think An Cap is power endurance in their lingo, the power endurance still goes at the end as the icing. Their suggested AnCap is 8-12x(30-50 s on/2-3 min off), so translated to RP lingo it would similar intensity to the HYP/strength phase. Barrows does suggest doing it for twice as long as the RP approach though (up to 8 weeks), and primarily not on a hangboard. |
|
nerdlet wrote: Aleks: I've learned in life that sometimes it is difficult to understand the motivation of people you don't know well. For example, I've often thought the things you listed above as motivating your posts. Anyway, as everyone else here knows, 99% of people posting in the training section are middle-aged and have a job, wife/husband and kids. Hangboarding in the garage after the little ones go to sleep (or at 5 in the morning) is what they look forward to all day. I fully understand how weird that must seem to someone not in those circumstances. So there you go, you can try the above training plan out (get a job, get married, have kids), though it may take a few years or decades to get yourself in that "position". Best of Luck.Climbing friend, Marriage does seem excellent way for the building of the sexual frustration. Also, perhaps you should divorce and sell children if hangboarding at 5 am in cold dark garage is what you most look forward to all day. |
|
nerdlet wrote: don't think An Cap is power endurance in their lingo, the power endurance still goes at the end as the icing. Their suggested AnCap is 8-12x(30-50 s on/2-3 min off), so translated to RP lingo it would similar intensity to the HYP/strength phase. Barrows does suggest doing it for twice as long as the RP approach though (up to 8 weeks), and primarily not on a hangboard.Ah, gotcha. I'm sleep deprived and not thinking especially clearly at the moment. In any case, I think you've milked the steep part of the gains curve in any aspect of training within 4 weeks and should switch up. I won't let the kids I coach train the same thing more than ~3.5 weeks before changing focus. They still do some of each, just the bulk of the training changes, (for example, if we've been training power, and switch to AE, I still have them boulder up to a few project level attempts as part of their warmup, in an attempt to retain the power from the prior phase while they are focused on the new AE phase). |
|
someone, *ahem* nerdlet, definitely needs to eat more fish heads. |
|
I'm intrigued by their program and exercises. One little gripe I have with Barrows' write-up is the lack of an example program, e.g. mocked up on a calendar. He provides a "rough example plan" in section 4.2, but to be honest I find it a little too vague to be helpful and winds up just opening more questions than it answers. I appreciate the desire not to get too prescriptive, but at the same time, I find it really helpful to have some sort of template as a starting point, and then be able to tweak it and experiment based on my own needs and understanding of the theory. |