Getting Yoked.

Well, not really yoked, but I stumbled across this training method geared towards bouldering. To me, it makes sense for someone who is breaking into hard bouldering, but lacks the physical strength to execute some of the moves. Climbing technique will stay honed with the volume sessions twice a week and your body will get a great fundamental strength base.

I know that everyone says technique, technique technique but does this program make sense for someone who has years of high level and varied climbing experience and is now just focused on bouldering?

My background: Bouldering and Sport climbing 50/50 for about 6 years with the last year moving more towards bouldering. Sport: 13a o/s, 13c best rp. Bouldering:V7 o/s V9 consistent rp....with a couple choice 10's thrown in there.

Meh. I'm no training expert, but I'd skip all the traditional weight lifting (except maybe some opposing muscle group work to maintain balance). Campusing, weighted bouldering, fingerboarding, seem like better options to me unless your limiting factor really, truly is your inability to do dips (note: highly unlikely).

For good reading, check out Dave MacLeods two blogs: davemacleod.blogspot.com/ and onlineclimbingcoach.blogspo…; and Will Gadd's blog: gravsports.blogspot.com/.

That would be the standard thought process but the theory challenges that in a couple ways

A)The muscles you train will be stronger. Period. Which can transfer to climbing during the
B)Transition phase....taking your upgraded physical conditioning and applying it to campusing and working hard boulder problems...

Its really all about transferability...

You wouldn't really be training dips for dips sake...but to strengthen your triceps, chest, whatever..

It also makes me think that your body will be able to handle a higher level of hard climbing training afterwards.

I have already done the weighted this that and the other to a pretty high degree...I mean, not to be an ass, but I climb V9 in a day....im not a gumby...I have just always felt that my physical conditioning was my weak spot, and my finger strength, mental strength and technique were my strong points.

Fair enough. I can understand looking for some new ideas. And I get that the weights are just for weights' sake, but I'm not a big fan of traditional weight training in general (booooooring!), so programs like the one you linked don't appeal to me at all.

And if you're sending V9 in a day, I bet you could send harder with some concerted effort. It might be that you don't need different training, you just need the right project. Of course, if you enjoy training and want to try something new, I say give that program a whirl and report back here on how it works. I'd be psyched to hear about it.

EDIT TO ADD: There are plenty of skinny, non-weight-lifting climbers out there who crush, including the obvious freaks (Robinson, Graham).

Wow. With a screen name like 'Hella' and a post with the word 'yoked' in it... damn my friend, you are inviting all sorts of assorted 'yeah bra' comments. I'll try to be nice though and assume you are not one of those Cali folks on Broverload.

J. Albers wrote:Wow. With a screen name like 'Hella' and a post with the word 'yoked' in it... damn my friend, you are inviting all sorts of assorted 'yeah bra' comments. I'll try to be nice though and assume you are not one of those Cali folks on Broverload.

Haha...no, i'm not. Im glad you caught it though...it is just me poking fun at the area where I live. I don't wear evolves.

Hey,

So, a bit of background on me (so you know where my comments come from): I am a Certified Strength and Conditioning Specialist (NSCA) and undergrad degree in exercise science, a number of years of working in the fitness/training field under my belt, including various levels and disciplines of athletes.

It is interesting to me that the blog poster specifies his cycle as 'the Tudor Bompa cycle' in particular, although Dr. Bompa is fairly well known in the exercise science field as one of the godfathers of research and development of traditional periodization techniques (which is and has been used on a case-by-case basis by climbers [i.e. there is no research on it for climbing]).

Unlike Julian, I support weight training for climbers, mostly as prehab and correctional exercise. (I mean, come on, great athletes of all other disciplines utilize strength training techniques to condition; climbers are not physiologically different.) Although, climbers should recognize that ALL climbing is de facto "weight training."

Most of what I saw as the exercise examples given in the blog poster's outline for his cycles are simple pushing exercises (which I would mostly define as 'prehab stuff') + some compound pulling exercises and a few isolation pulling exercises thrown in.

My advice: pushing exercises are fine. They may or may not help you get stronger to execute certain moves, however. You can lift them at high load/low volume. The exception might be dips; without rotator cuffs made of steel, doing dips at 90%+ seems like a really bad idea to me! Probably should go no higher than 80% of 1 rep max.

The pulling compound exercises are okay and very basic stuff.

I would forget about the isolation pull exercises for the arms, i.e. all curls that involve biceps/brachialis. You get more than enough of that in climbing and this is rarely the weak link in pulling a move.

Try adding upper body plyometrics, like explosive push-ups. I think this could help with certain overhung moves, possibly.

What about core strength? Posterior chain strength (low back, glutes, hams, calves) for steep moves, toe hooking, and heel hooking? Shoulder stabilizer strength (especially lower trapezius)? The poster does not include specifically but I would do so.

I disagree with one thing Dr. Bompa states: "Finger flexors (gripping) are essential. You can use hand grip dynamometers and anything else that allows you to flex and extend the fingers. ... Certaily, you can use isometric training but fingers flexion is very beneficial."

I do not believe grip dynamometers would do much for climbing grip strength. Finger flexion is a small, small part of what happens when a climber uses their hands; isometrics is the bulk. I think climbers have generally figured this out.

Hella wrote:To me, it makes sense for someone who is breaking into hard bouldering, but lacks the physical strength to execute some of the moves.

Here it would be important to know specifically where the physical strength is lacking in order to correct it with traditional resistance training. This would be case-dependent.

J. Albers wrote:Wow. With a screen name like 'Hella' and a post with the word 'yoked' in it... damn my friend, you are inviting all sorts of assorted 'yeah bra' comments. I'll try to be nice though and assume you are not one of those Cali folks on Broverload.

And here I thought 'yoked' was meaning yer getting married' soon., thus the yoke around the neck and limited climbing access in the future. Sorry.

Thanks for the post Aerili. I totally agree about the value of "prehab" strength training, I just question whether strength training in general translates to climbing performance.

Aerili wrote: I disagree with one thing Dr. Bompa states: "Finger flexors (gripping) are essential. You can use hand grip dynamometers and anything else that allows you to flex and extend the fingers. ... Certaily, you can use isometric training but fingers flexion is very beneficial." I do not believe grip dynamometers would do much for climbing grip strength. Finger flexion is a small, small part of what happens when a climber uses their hands; isometrics is the bulk. I think climbers have generally figured this out.

I keyed on the same thing. When I read training BS, I like to look for 'tells', i.e., an obvious indication that the source has no clue what s/he is talking about. Bompa is a pioneer in his field, but climbers need to accept how much our sport differs from the traditional olympics sports. The similarities are limited, so we can;t expect a genius in training olympic dead-lifters will understand the subtleties of climbing.

A side note for Aerili, a good friend of mine & highly knowledgeable climbing training guru did some experimentation on forearm hypertrophy and found that finger flexion was far more effective (at creating hypertrophy) than isometric training. Of course, we all realize that doesn't mean the hypertrophy gains will result in improved climbing ability. Based on what I've learned, I will stick with isometric contractions until someone proves another method is more effective.

Monomaniac wrote:A side note for Aerili, a good friend of mine & highly knowledgeable climbing training guru did some experimentation on forearm hypertrophy and found that finger flexion was far more effective (at creating hypertrophy) than isometric training. Of course, we all realize that doesn't mean the hypertrophy gains will result in improved climbing ability. Based on what I've learned, I will stick with isometric contractions until someone proves another method is more effective.

It would be interesting to run a periodization cycle wherein one uses isotonic finger flexion exercises in the hypertrophy phase (first phase) and then switches over to isometric exercises during the strength et al cycles. I wonder what would happen.

JulianM wrote:I just question whether strength training in general translates to climbing performance.

Is preventing injury and correctional exercise not somehow related to performance? I think it is.

Aerili wrote: It would be interesting to run a periodization cycle wherein one uses isotonic finger flexion exercises in the hypertrophy phase (first phase) and then switches over to isometric exercises during the strength et al cycles. I wonder what would happen. I think it is.

I've experimented with this, although it wasn't very well controlled, even by climbing standards: I spent ~6 weeks doing "Heavy Finger Rolls" (in addition to other upper extremity exercises) while I was in a walking boot (from sesamoiditis), then I went straight into hangboarding. Usually I ARC prior to hangboarding, and I found my hangboard performance was severely diminished, so I after two workouts, I went back to ARCing for a 10 day period, then went back to hangboarding. At that point, my hangboard phase was pretty typical. The resulting performance phase was relatively sub-par, but I was just coming back from my foot injury, which was the limiting factor, IMO. I did do some of the hardest plastic bouldering I had done to that point.

Anyway, my conclusion was that Heavy Finger Rolls are probably not the most effective way to train for climbing.

I was also curious about the hyperflexion with isometric and tangential tendons that converged on the primal digit when implementing a continuously divergent dynamo-meter training, switched with a cordial cyclic training every 3rd lunar cycle of course.

Of course you would need to use the 'Rockwell Automation's Retroencabulator' for that.

Tim C wrote:...when implementing a continuously divergent dynamo-meter training...

Nice math reference. I always wondered what the point of those effing series were. Now I know.

(Of course, what kind of series would you have to use here? I would say an infinite series put in power representation form. Please be ready with an appropriate equation next time you log in, plebe!)

Plebe? PLEBE?!?! Its on now!

But your right, we should skip the continuously divergent isometric reflex training in favor of a more integrated routine. How about a multi dimensional training regime that would incorporate strength/endurance/rest days/and power days into a 4 dimensional matrix? Then its a simple matter to figure out what to do on each day based on a tensor integration of the matrix with the boundaries being defined from the total length of the program modified by how 'Yoked' you are that day. Also keeping in mind that we might have to evaluate the result with Riemann if we end up with a non trivial zero.
Then you simply apply that to an Identity matrix to get the work out for the day.
I don't have a program that can write math notation so I can't provide an equation, sorry.

I don't know of any data to support this, but I have always "felt" like isotonic finger exercises were more risky than isometric exercises. From a mechanical engineering standpoint, the potential for tendonitis is much greater with the tendons moving through the pulleys under load.

I've always avoided it for that reason.

I agree, my ring-finger A1 pulleys always felt tweaked when doing heavy finger rolls; particularly on the concentric contraction.

Tim C wrote:I don't have a program that can write math notation so I can't provide an equation, sorry.

WEAK SAUCE!!!!

Mike Anderson wrote:From a mechanical engineering standpoint, the potential for tendonitis is much greater with the tendons moving through the pulleys under load.

Please expand on this concept.

(If you can include an infinite series sum notation in power representation form, even better.)

Well, as I tell my 4 year old, everything in the world can be explained by gravity, momentum and friction (not true, but it keeps him from incessantly asking "why"?...I just list one of those three and he leaves me alone.)

In this case, friction.