By Kat A
From Bart and Lisa Ville, CO
Feb 14, 2008
| Richard Radcliffe wrote: I wouldn'y worry asbout going off-topic. Many of these threads get really interesting when they go off-topic, as long as the "off" doesn't turn into a flame-fest.
Agreed! | 
FLAG |
By Beached Nuts
From Bermuda bitches
Feb 15, 2008
| Kateri Ahrendt wrote: Agreed!
When it turns into a flame fest, let me know. I've got an itchy post-whore finger. |
FLAG |
By Tony B
From Boulder, CO
Feb 15, 2008
| Kevin Stricker wrote: As for decreased recruitment helping climbing performance, I will say it again...Decreasing a muscles recruitment can actually HELP climbing performance. In most route climbing maximal recruitment take a backseat role to power endurance and vascularity. When you increase a muscles ability ro recruit it's fibers you also increase the propensity for complete capilary contraction from this highly recruited state. As psychological factors also come into play, the ability to "crush" a hold can make you pumped much faster than if you hold with minimal effort.
I always thought recruitment's main determining factor was genetic?
Funny what Kevin mentions here because I was always the guy that, though fairly small, had reasonable big power... and got flamed really quickly. And then never depumped.
On a side note, I never really warm up much or stretch, not for running or for climbing. And I've always find that I compete best 'fresh.'
On a second side note- Stretching my forearms once pumped always seems to make me weaker. Maybe has something to do with compartment syndrome, maybe doesn't. From everything I've read about compartment syndrome (right down to the failure to warm up & many hours to depump) I've got a richeous case of it. |
FLAG |
By NjC
Feb 15, 2008
| Thanks for the articles, E of G. I haven't had time to really look them over, but have bookmarked them. Thanks also for your differing viewpoint and your concern for the original post being "a bit on the negative side", Kevin. I'm comfortable with differing opinions, but flame fests are tiresome (stay away from that keyboard, John!)
The group that does bring in money as a spectator sport and also seems closest to climbers are gymnasts. I wonder what their current practices are in regard to warm-ups in general and pre-workout stretching to relieve tightness from past injuries. Any climber/gymnasts out there?
|
FLAG |
By Aerili
From Reno, NV
Feb 15, 2008
| Kevin Stricker wrote: Aerili, I find it interesting that you took that position based on the research you provided. Maybe we are saying the same thing, but to me ROM stretching is still stretching, and it was listed in one of the articles as believed to decrease the risk of injury. Also working a joint through its ROM helps in the release of synovial fluid does it not? So are you saying that ROM stretching does not have a positive effect or do you not consider this stretching?
Well, I take my position not just based on reading a study here and there but also based on what the leading authorities, both researchers and applied practitioners, present in conferences I attend and in printed articles in journals I receive. Also, I've certainly found in my own experience and with clients that eliminating static stretching prior to activity and keeping with a good warm up only + dynamic ROM exercises makes for very successful training sessions.
But actually, I'm getting confused by what you're saying here... I think you think I don't believe in ever doing static stretching, which is not the case. I do feel people should stretch in muscle groups that are tight, but I feel the most optimal time is to do this after aerobic workouts as the end to the cool down, and/or at a separate time (like people who do yoga).
I believe whatever was stated about ROM stretching decreasing injury in one of the articles was regarding a separate static stretching program over the long term, not acute stretching. (Don't remember for sure, I would have to look at it again.)
Kevin wrote: As I said, the effect of deep static stretching decreasing your recruitment is not something I disagree with. Also when I was studying Kinesiology ( 15 years ago) the spindle reflex was believed to be tied to the golgi reflex. Sounds like maybe research has seperated their functions? I do have degrees in both Biology and Chemistry and have read many texts related to climbing performance, so I am not ignorant in regards to this subject, but do not claim to be an expert by any means. As for decreased recruitment helping climbing performance, I will say it again...Decreasing a muscles recruitment can actually HELP climbing performance. In most route climbing maximal recruitment take a backseat role to power endurance and vascularity. When you increase a muscles ability ro recruit it's fibers you also increase the propensity for complete capilary contraction from this highly recruited state. As psychological factors also come into play, the ability to "crush" a hold can make you pumped much faster than if you hold with minimal effort. This is why people who spend a large ammount of time bouldering often get spanked on routes that technically should be very easy for them.
I am not aware of the spindle and GTO being tied together in their functions.
What I know about recruitment is that more highly trained individuals recruit motor units more efficiently and in greater numbers with the first stimulus vs untrained or lesser trained individuals. This results in greater performance, typically. However, better trained individuals also recruit units preferentially--that is, I do not believe they recruit more than they need at any given time, which may not happen in lesser trained people (I admit I'm going off memory here). Further, I don't think someone would be less likely to "overgrip"/over-recruit because they statically stretched beforehand (is that what you were saying?). This is more about psychological control, in my mind. From what I glean, researchers think static stretching's effect is on the viscoelastic properties of muscle-tendon unit, which I am not aware affects motor recruitment, but probably rather stored energy.
Other than that, the little I understand about recruitment and vascular perfusion (a rather specialized topic) is that higher recruitment apparently equals higher perfusion.
Kevin wrote: As for your argument that "Kinetics drives Kinematics" this is quite obvious another oversimplification. In this one dimentional world, the strongest climbers would be the best climbers, which is obviously not the case.
No, you've definitely mis-interpreted my point and I feel you didn't read or understand what I stated later to clarify it.
I have never said or believed that the ABSOLUTE strongest climbers are the best. In body weight sports, the RELATIVELY strongest individuals typically have higher performance (with high level skill/technique being a given here).
Kevin wrote: I think the fact that k I can also tell you from personal experience that I have seen increases in my climbing ability when I have decreased my focus on climbing strength. I obviously do not think this holds true all the time, but climbing is primarily a technical sport.
I agree; I have never believed strength (even relative strength) exists in a vacuum. Without fundamental attention paid to the skill training side of things, a "good" climber cannot be had. However, at the same time, all the technique in the world will not alone get you through a move that also requires a minimum amount of strength to be successful (like a roof move). If your strength is not adequate, you won't be able to do the technical move that gets you through. Otherwise, we would be seeing upper body strength-deficient women climbing through powerful terrain as easily as men, given that their technique is equally good.
Other than that, I also agree with you that Pilates is a fine, dynamic form of exercise...and it even builds strength! :-O
I always thought recruitment's main determining factor was genetic?
Funny what Kevin mentions here because I was always the guy that, though fairly small, had reasonable big power... and got flamed really quickly. And then never depumped.
Tony, I think you are thinking of muscle fiber composition. Motor recruitment is something that can be improved with training or can get worse with both aging and detraining.
You sound like a fast twitch-dominant genetic type to me. |
FLAG |
By Richard Radcliffe
From Louisville, CO
Feb 15, 2008
| Tony Bubb wrote: I always thought recruitment's main determining factor was genetic? Funny what Kevin mentions here because I was always the guy that, though fairly small, had reasonable big power... and got flamed really quickly. And then never depumped.
Eyes Of Green wrote: Tony, I think you are thinking of muscle fiber composition. Motor recruitment is something that can be improved with training or can get worse with both aging and detraining. You sound like a fast twitch-dominant genetic type to me.
Although I don't know for certain, I'd be incredibly surprised if recruitment does not have a genetic component. For example, some people will have a genetic predisposition towards more effective recruitment (through training) than others.
TB- if you ever figure out how to deal with your fast-flame-no-depump issue, let me know. I've got the same problem.
Good stuff. |
FLAG |
By Kevin Stricker
From Evergreen, CO
Feb 15, 2008
| The funny thing about the internet is two people can be saying the exact same thing and both understand something completely different. I was saying that ROM stretching is still stretching and should be performed before maximal effort to insure a proper warmup. It seems you do not consider this stretching, so maybe you can tell me what the proper term to use is? My original contention with your post was you stated: " I never recommend people stretch before climbing (or any other performance activity) anyway--the majority of the literature coming out in the last 5+ years shows strong evidence that people suffer profound DECREASES IN POWER AND STRENGTH when they stretch prior to physical activities." This to me is an oversimplification, if you would have said "deep static stretching" we could have cut out a whole page of replies!
I personally am not a big fan of deep static stretching, probably because I suck at it, but also because I find I tend to injure myself with it. I agree that the only time to use deep static (or CHRS) stretching is post workout or on a different day after a good warmup. I have read that light static stretching can be beneficial to healing tendonosis because it helps increase blood flow to the effected tissue. Unfortunately I cannot find that reference right now. My personal experience with this is that too much stretching of injured tissue only inflames it more, and I find that light massage to a muscle body to be more effective.
As for the recruitment piece, this was documented in PRC (Neumann Goddard) and I have also seen it in others and experienced it in my own climbing. You cannot separate the psychological element in climbing, and the ability to recruit more fibers can be a double edged sword. Also referenced in PRC was the decrease in capillarity with power(recruitment) training.
Tony, as for your question, recruitment and fiber type are both genetic but recruitment can be increased through specific training to a point. As for your condition, I would say your best bet is to avoid the pump as much as possible. Increasing your maximum strength could help with this as you would use less of your max on any given hold. The lower percentage of fibers being recuited the greater your bloodflow to the area and the greater your ability to flush lactic acid from the tissue. Also training your lactate threshold should benefit you as well as it will train your muscles to better deal with high acidity. The goal being to sustain a mild to moderate pump while avoiding the big whammy. |
FLAG |
By kerwin lee klein
Feb 15, 2008
| NjC wrote: The group that does bring in money as a spectator sport and also seems closest to climbers are gymnasts. I wonder what their current practices are in regard to warm-ups in general and pre-workout stretching to relieve tightness from past injuries. Any climber/gymnasts out there?
I don't coach anymore, but the gyms I am familiar with still use passive and active stretches during warm-ups. Typically a light aerobic warm-up, followed by handstands or easy scales, and then stretches. Gymnastics is different from climbing, though, in that certain "passive" positions, like the side splits, are also moves you will be expected to use in a routine.
EoG is correct about the direction of recent research tending away from pre-workout passive stretching, though.
Personally, I am pretty disciplined these days about doing my stretches (after climb/training and on rest days) and my rotator cuff exercises, because I pay a real price if I go off the wagon. |
FLAG |
By Aerili
From Reno, NV
Feb 15, 2008
| Damn, my quote function just won't work anymore!! I even tried to fix my Tony Bubb quote in my last post and it just won't activate.
Kevin, I guess we are misunderstanding terminology here. Apparently what you consider "ROM stretching" is what I know as dynamic stretching. But like I said, when most laypeople see an example of dynamic flexibility exercises, they wouldn't consider it "stretching" at all. So it was with that in my mind that I made my original statement, and especially because soooo many people think of and implement static stretching as a "warm up." (Which it isn't.)
By all means, I endorse dynamic stretching as part of a warm up. Your term "ROM stretching" was confusing to me... mainly because it prompts me to envision exercises that increase a joint's passive ROM (which is usually what we think of in that sense and what is typically measured as a joint's actual range of motion (even though of course a joint also possesses a separate, active ROM).
Stretching an injured joint or musculotendinous unit that is 1) not acute and 2) has become shortened and restricted is standard therapy as far as I know. But again, this is for correcting passive ROM problems in CHRONIC injuries, not necessarily to increase blood flow. I believe that other modalities (like ultrasound, e-stim, and hot packs) are implemented for increasing blood flow.
There is new controversy about lactate threshold training. I don't really have a "stance" on the new theories yet, especially since I find standard anaerobic threshold training valuable. If you are interested, Kevin, I can send you some information over email. |
FLAG |
By Tony B
From Boulder, CO
Feb 15, 2008
| Kevin Stricker wrote: You cannot separate the psychological element in climbing, and the ability to recruit more fibers can be a double edged sword. Also referenced in PRC was the decrease in capillarity with power(recruitment) training. Tony, as for your question, recruitment and fiber type are both genetic but recruitment can be increased through specific training to a point. As for your condition, I would say your best bet is to avoid the pump as much as possible. Increasing your maximum strength could help with this as you would use less of your max on any given hold.
And therein lies the problem- the smaller the holds, the harder I grip. It's psychological and physical. If I were much stronger, I'd probably grip harder.
A female friend once told me "don't crush it, hold it as gently as possible to maintain control, as if it is a breast. Gentle, gentle." I replied, hanging from a big sloper: "Are these real? They don't feel real..."
I have to learn NOT to hold on tighter, but as with everything else, climbing is a microsm of life, and I heve to remeber that I can not be a slave to security- to hang loose instead.
As for oppostion muscle work- Bench, incline, decline, and military presses are what I was saying is good antagonist muscle work for the shoulders, Lat-flies as well... I used to go through cycles of over-use. That was how I always dug back out before getting lasy and getting out of balance again. When I worked I the rail yard (jacking up train cars for a living) I could curl more than bench, and do more pull-ups than push ups... My shoulders got out of whack and I had to go to PT. |
FLAG |
By Kat A
From Bart and Lisa Ville, CO
Feb 15, 2008
| Just saw an orthopedic doctor today and there doesn't appear to be a rotator cuff tear. I'm told I can climb cautiously, avoiding moves which trigger the shoulders. PT starts next week and Lauri's pilates book is on order.
Ok, carry on with the interesting discussions... |
FLAG |
By NjC
Feb 15, 2008
| Eyes Of Green wrote: Tony, You sound like a fast twitch-dominant genetic type to me.
Tony, I don't know you other than from your posts, but this sounded just too funny to let slide by. Does it fit?
Good news from the doc, Kateri! |
FLAG |
By Livia
From Colorado Springs, CO
May 23, 2008
| Avery Nelson wrote: So, I am curious to learn more about this -- as it contraticts what we were raised to believe. In some aspects, it also contradicts some of the proposed benefits of long-term stretching such as yoga. Can you cite the sources so we can locate and read the articles ourselves?
I believe that many types of yoga, especially power yoga, are dynamic stretching. |
FLAG |
|
[ Forums > Training Forum ]
RSS Feed
