Mountain Project Logo

Physical Fitness Assessments Specific to Rock Climbers

David B · · Denver, CO · Joined Apr 2011 · Points: 205

I think you're wasting your time by dorking out over training general fitness. tbh it seems like you just want numbers you can boast about

If you're training for climbing hard, your weaknesses should be pretty clear after spending time on rock, injury-wise and strength-wise.

Rui Ferreira · · Boulder, CO · Joined Jul 2003 · Points: 903

My information is based upon research conducted by Stuart McGill and some of his interviews where he speaks about the concept of "super stiffness" and clearly indicates that you need to modulate your muscle toning in other optimize movement.

Regarding climbing movement a simple test that might illustrate my point is to reach a top shelf in your cupboard while keeping your "core tight", repeat the exercise maintaining the core relaxed throughout the movement, which one provides you with more reach? Most people will find that maintaining a relaxed core will allow for extension through the mid-section and provide the greater reach. However when one is not using the correct muscles such as the diaphragm, the transverus abdominis and the multifidus to stabilize the spine and ribs this extension might be compromised - leading to the need to distinguish between inefficient core stability strategies versus a fundamental lack of core strength. When global mobilizers are being used to stabilize the spine and the pelvis this leads to an inability to efficiently move the lower and upper extremities and inhibits overall climbing movement.

This is all coming back to sit-ups, Stuart McGill is dead set against them and while I might be less opposed to them in general, I find them of little use for climbing fitness and even less as a benchmark.

From an overall climbing perspective my opinion is that practicing efficient movement is preferred instead of adding strength on top of muscular dysfunction.

Aleks Zebastian · · Boulder, CO · Joined Jul 2014 · Points: 175
D B wrote:I think you're wasting your time by dorking out over training general fitness. tbh it seems like you just want numbers you can boast about If you're training for climbing hard, your weaknesses should be pretty clear after spending time on rock, injury-wise and strength-wise.
Climbing friend,

I agree yes. Also train your super stiffness so you are better at thrusting up!
Brendan N · · Salt Lake City, Utah · Joined Oct 2006 · Points: 405
Rui Ferreira wrote:From an overall climbing perspective my opinion is that practicing efficient movement is preferred instead of adding strength on top of muscular dysfunction.
This is pure gold. Climb well to avoid injury rather than applying "gymnastic fitness" to poor technique.
slim · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Dec 2004 · Points: 1,103
SKA wrote: Do you agree that a solid strong core will improve your climbing? Static Control? I am not stating that the number of sit-ups one can do in a minute is an indicator of ones climbing ability, but it is a measurement of core strength. I can't even remember the last time I did sit-ups and do not use them in my training, but I have a weekly TRX workout. Though, increasing ones core strength will increase the number of sit ups they can do in a minute. I did my first 1-minute sit-up test on Monday. I was able to do 51. I did more during the Presidential physical fitness test in 4th grade. ~SKA
the term 'core strength' is so vague and general that it is practically useless for training discussions. in reality, i think more people suffer from a loss of concentration during movement than they do from some sort of weak core issue.

i think a lot of people have some sort of misconception that learning how to plank will magically translate to this mysterious core strength, which will in turn improve their climbing by a couple number grades. i think it is more coincidence than anything if a strong climber can plank, etc.
that guy named seb · · Britland · Joined Oct 2015 · Points: 236
slim wrote: the term 'core strength' is so vague and general that it is practically useless for training discussions. in reality, i think more people suffer from a loss of concentration during movement than they do from some sort of weak core issue. i think a lot of people have some sort of misconception that learning how to plank will magically translate to this mysterious core strength, which will in turn improve their climbing by a couple number grades. i think it is more coincidence than anything if a strong climber can plank, etc.
Agreed planks are mostly useless, toe to bar, windscreen wipers and front levers, now that's good core.
Mark Paulson · · Raleigh, NC · Joined Sep 2010 · Points: 141

The methodology you're pursuing is flawed. It seems you're looking for non-climbing metrics that you can use to then compare yourself to other climbers, the value of which is suspect at best. For example, if you want to get better at baseball, making sure you can do as many pushups and sit-ups as A-Rod is going to have virtually zero effect on your baseball skills. I think you would be better served using a _climbing-based_ metric for your benchmarks such as the campus board or hangboard (or climbing grade!) if climbing performance is your goal. A couple points:

Not all muscle is the same. There are plenty of videos on youtube of bodybuilders trying (and failing) to do simple gymnastic maneuvers. Building bulk strength through simple movements is nowhere near as useful in a skill-based sport as building that same strength though exercises that mimic the timing and complexity of the real thing. Neural pathways and synaptic timing need to be developed _in tandem_ with muscular development- not after the fact. Right now I can guarantee lat strength is _not_ your weak link. Any time spent doing weighted pull-ups is time better spent on the campus board.

Climbers bodies are different. Look at Ashima vs Jimmy Webb (or John Dunne vs Lynn Hill)- two _very_ different body types with what I'm assuming would be very different "general fitness" benchmarks. Yet both are at the very forefront of the sport. It's a testament to the unique nature of the demands of climbing that simple fitness metrics fail to predict climbing ability.

If you've gotten into ultra-running in the past, I'm sure you possess some level of exercise addiction or exercise-related neuroses (nothing wrong with that per se). However, while these traits may have served you in the past, they can be anathema to the injury-prevention you say you want to develop, particularly in climbing. For instance, doing 1-rep maxes after a 2 hour bouldering session smacks of poor decision making, especially for one possessing a 45 year old body. The campus board has gotten a reputation for injury through similar means- people jump on it after a long climbing session, trying to show off for their buddies (rather than make it the centerpiece of their workout), and end up getting hurt (I'm speaking from personal _and_ anecdotal experience). Proper warmup and cooldown become critical, and more is not always better. If Jan Hojer only trains 14 hours a week, 12-15 should be plenty for you... if you're doing it efficiently, that is.

slim · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Dec 2004 · Points: 1,103
that guy named seb wrote: Agreed planks are mostly useless, toe to bar, windscreen wipers and front levers, now that's good core.
good for what? building up a sweat?
reboot · · . · Joined Jul 2006 · Points: 125
slim wrote: good for what? building up a sweat?
It would be quite an accomplishment to be able to do enough of them to build up a sweat. Some of these are applicable to specific movements in climbing, but so do sit-ups. Good/strong climbers do tend to have strong core, but only because good climbing movement patterns exercise the core. But as you say, it's a pretty weak climbing level indicator.
that guy named seb · · Britland · Joined Oct 2015 · Points: 236
slim wrote: good for what? building up a sweat?
palm+face
SKA · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jan 2016 · Points: 5

Well, reviewing my original question and the purpose of my post, evaluating overall physical fitness specific to rock climbers, I feel it went way off direction. Climbers have different strengths and backgrounds, a gymnast, runner, or non-athlete will bring different strengths weaknesses to the table. I was just fishing for climber’s thoughts on the value of evaluating ones overall physical fitness specific to climbing. Personally, I am just trying to better understand my strengths and weakness, versus what I feel most people do, blindly follow coaches and/or internet training programs.

Peter Beal · · Boulder Colorado · Joined Jan 2001 · Points: 1,825

Start with the connective chain from finger to shoulders to abdominal "core" and consider how to assess that chain and discover weak links. My gold standard would be a one-hand hang from a single pad edge for bouldering. More points for the pull-up. That tests everything that I want to improve. Between that and max ladders on a campus board you have everything you actually need covered and nothing you don't.

Sean McAuley · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jan 2013 · Points: 10
SKA wrote:Well, reviewing my original question and the purpose of my post, evaluating overall physical fitness specific to rock climbers, I feel it went way off direction. Climbers have different strengths and backgrounds, a gymnast, runner, or non-athlete will bring different strengths weaknesses to the table. I was just fishing for climber’s thoughts on the value of evaluating ones overall physical fitness specific to climbing. Personally, I am just trying to better understand my strengths and weakness, versus what I feel most people do, blindly follow coaches and/or internet training programs.
Well you kind of got the right answer pretty quickly but it's now been lost in the discussion on gymnastic/general fitness.

Tom Randall and his lattice training team have gotten this down to a science. They evaluate finger strength, scapular stability, and forearm metabolic function using a variety of testing protocols and provide a pretty good overall picture of where you're strengths and weaknesses lie as a climber. You asked for climbing specific fitness evaluation and that's exactly what their specialty is. Plus they can evaluate what you need to do to get to the next level, and can usually point out weaknesses you never knew you had.
David B · · Denver, CO · Joined Apr 2011 · Points: 205
Peter Beal wrote:Start with the connective chain from finger to shoulders to abdominal "core" and consider how to assess that chain and discover weak links. My gold standard would be a one-hand hang from a single pad edge for bouldering. More points for the pull-up. That tests everything that I want to improve. Between that and max ladders on a campus board you have everything you actually need covered and nothing you don't.
This is def true for the majority of climbing, but if you want to climb big roofs, big over-the-head underclings, etc, hangboards will not get you all the way. My mega-sore deltoids can attest to this.
slim · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Dec 2004 · Points: 1,103
that guy named seb wrote:
ummm, like i said. what are these exercises good for? everybody assumes that a front lever is oh so helpful for climbing steep stuff, but those aren't really the muscles that are keeping your feet from skating off.
that guy named seb · · Britland · Joined Oct 2015 · Points: 236
slim wrote: ummm, like i said. what are these exercises good for? everybody assumes that a front lever is oh so helpful for climbing steep stuff, but those aren't really the muscles that are keeping your feet from skating off.
Yes they are.
reboot · · . · Joined Jul 2006 · Points: 125
slim wrote: everybody assumes that a front lever is oh so helpful for climbing steep stuff, but those aren't really the muscles that are keeping your feet from skating off.
They are for putting your feet back on :)
slim · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Dec 2004 · Points: 1,103

maybe if you are just holding your feet up in space and hoping they stay in contact with the rock.... if that's the case you might as well let your feet drop and just campus the moves. way easier...

if you are actually USING your feet on a steep overhang it is your hamstrings and lower back that are doing the work, not so much your abs.

slim · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Dec 2004 · Points: 1,103
reboot wrote: They are for putting your feet back on :)
sort of, but again it is easier just to let them drop and then swing them up, instead of hover and paste...
reboot · · . · Joined Jul 2006 · Points: 125
slim wrote: sort of, but again it is easier just to let them drop and then swing them up, instead of hover and paste...
If it's a jug, but otherwise, some body control is required to place the foot back on precisely. The upper body part of front lever (which is harder for a lot of people) isn't that useful in this instance. I guess something like the "dragon flag" would be more applicable as that's less upper body strength limiting.
Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

Training Forum
Post a Reply to "Physical Fitness Assessments Specific to Rock C…"

Log In to Reply

Join the Community

Create your FREE account today!
Already have an account? Login to close this notice.

Get Started.