Anyone can climb V10/5.14-

Frank Steinwrote: the panel is in consensus that given an athletic disposition, and adequate training, time, diet and rest, any average climber can attain the level of V10/5.14-. Obviously these guys have some experience with training weekend warrior type climbers, so what do you think? Makes me feel like a weak, lazy chuffer...Which I am.

People often make the distinction between current level of fitness ( "trained vs untrained")  and genetic potential ("elite vs. non-elite"). Eg, lance armstrong at his peak was a trained, elite athlete. If he stayed on the couch for a year, he would be an untrained, elite athlete.

So, if I understand correctly, this group of experts thinks that the performance limit of a non-elite, trained rock climber is about V10/5.14-. This doesn't seem unreasonable. 

This is quite different from saying that a climber randomly picked off the street, if trained properly, would on average attain V10/5.14- performance. The sport tends to be highly injury-inducing, and most people don't live anywhere near a climbing area with v10/5.14- climbs,  so a significant number of people who could theoretically  reach V10/5.14- performance will never get there.

 

5.14 is much harder in the U.S. than V10 mostly due to location. There are a ton of large bouldering areas with sufficient boulders in the v7-v11 range and up into the V12/13 range. One should be able to get more than enough rock time given that bouldering has less logistics than sport climbing in many cases. If you live in the Southeast, most parts of CA, WA, etc then you can likely get on a shitload of boulders.  It's impressive the number of people you will meet at any large US crag that has found a V10 in their style and climbed it.  Sport routes are longer with more moves and beta so it probably takes longer to find a 5.14 that suits you, but people get really good at things like kneebars and do it at Jailhouse or Rifle. Or crimping, pockets, and techy vert at Smith or something.

Now if you live near the Red and have a good partner it's probably the same case. Both rely on proximity to a large amount of climbs and styles.  If one is able to refine technique and identify their own personal/mental/recovery/psych limits then both are obtainable.  This is assuming no massive outliers in any one area of physical performance. I have definitely met boulderers that barely climb on a rope that have ticked off a 14a that was bouldery with great rests that they had the beta for.

Overall the average climber probably doesn't pay enough attention to their process to readily identify how to get there.  After reading anything and everything about training I have noticed climbers that hit lower grade plateaus often develop bad habits and then pile on training that only compound those habits. Their quality days on rock (sending or making progress) per year is often fairly low, they usually lack power, usually are 10-15lbs heavier than they easily could be, often prioritize socially based trips with loose grade objectives, and often think their technique is way better than it really is.

I'm 5'5" with a -3 ape index and weight almost 180 lbs.   Technically I'm "obese".   I climb with a friend who is 5'8' who's 100 lbs wet and we climb at roughly the same grades - easy 12s or V4/5s.   I have more strength and power than him, but for me to get to 5.14 means I'll need to lose at least 30-40 lbs for my height while he actually needs to gain weight/muscle/power.   Guess who'll have an easier time getting into the 13s let alone 14s?    Genetics plays a huge role.  The amount of dedication/training for me will be at the limits of human endurance while it'll be much easier for him.   Before you say anything I wrestled in high school so I know a few things about weight gain/loss and performance.    It's possible for a 20 year old to +/- 20lbs or maybe 30 lbs to their body - outside of going into absolute starvation for weeks or do the appalachian trail, what chance do I have to have the amount and intensity of training with diet that I'll need to get there?   I got 2 kids, a mortgage, etc, etc.   All the usual suspects.   I'm glad that I can even climb as hard as I can - and this is putting in 3 sessions every week, which is the most I can do.

Losing 30-40lbs is easy you're just making excuses for yourself, which is why you fall into the camp of people that will never climb those grades. People that climb those grades do the work and don't make excuses.  I've gained and lost that amount of weight over the course of my adult life and it ain't that crazy with a few basics in place. Honestly it's easier than having to gain anything so long as your net strength stays roughly the same.

I agree with Karl. Ming, it sounds like you're in an excellent position to make huge improvements in your climbing. With your skill level where it's at and your current body comp, I think you could make a big progression by losing the weight you described while simply maintaining or even improving finger strength. It'd be great to hear you breaking into 13s a year from now with just some small changes. I bet you could do it. 

Steve Guardwrote: I agree with Karl. Ming, it sounds like you're in an excellent position to make huge improvements in your climbing. With your skill level where it's at and your current body comp, I think you could make a big progression by losing the weight you described while simply maintaining or even improving finger strength. It'd be great to hear you breaking into 13s a year from now with just some small changes. I bet you could do it. 

Yup. Likewise. I recently spoke to a guy who was acquainted with John Dunne, a big boy who weighed about 230 and also sent .14+. He said that when Dunne was sending hard, he’d get down to about 175. He’d still look like a potato, but a 50 pound lighter potato. 

So the real question is what separates V11/5.14- climbers from V12/5.14 climbers?
You can apply this line of thinking to anything: nunchucks, cage fighting, or computer jacking skills. But we’re all just too busy playing patty cake when we could be out there making some sweet moolah. We’d rather spin the Rolodex of excuses than cut out sugar and Netflix binge nights.
A line from Flannery O’Connor comes to my mind, If you’re so smart, how come you ain’t rich?

Discussions like this are always all over the place, because everyone’s definition of “average” climber is based on their small group of friends, rather than on any sort of real statistics. People tend to climb with others of approximately their own ability level.

If Adam Ondra started climbing at the age of 30, 10years later he probably would still be a lot stronger than other climbers who started at 30. But he wouldn’t be as strong as Ondra who started as a kid was, after 10 years of climbing.

For any real discussion, you do need to standardize for the age when climbing started, the number of years climbed, and you need a real representation of the climbing population, to find the “average” climber. You can’t even get people to agree on who constitutes a “climber”, and get an accurate count of the number. The climbing ability estimation would always be an extrapolation from a small group of people that keeps track of their climbing, records it somewhere, and is willing to either share this info in a survey, or a public database.

So there is no point in trying to pretend that a statement, such as heard on Power Company podcast, is aiming for any sort of statistical accuracy. It isn’t. It simply means that if you walk into a random gym and randomly point at someone, you can be pretty much guaranteed that a statement “this person doesn’t climb nearly as hard as their genetics/biology allows” would be correct.

Karl Walterswrote: Losing 30-40lbs is easy you're just making excuses for yourself

Spoken like someone who can lose weight easily. Genetics plays a hug role. For example some heavy people with heavy parents can eat well and get a lot of exercise and still be "overweight". Some thin people with thin parents can eat like crap, not get much exercise and still be skinny. I don't think anyone yet knows how important the different factors are: quicker metabolism, at what blood sugar level your hunger response kicks in, how many calories you burn for the same amount of exercise, etc. Anyone can lose weight and if you really want to anyone can do it. But how easy it is to lose the weight and keep it off varies widely.

Karl Walterswrote:

Overall the average climber probably doesn't pay enough attention to their process to readily identify how to get there.  After reading anything and everything about training I have noticed climbers that hit lower grade plateaus often develop bad habits and then pile on training that only compound those habits. Their quality days on rock (sending or making progress) per year is often fairly low, they usually lack power, usually are 10-15lbs heavier than they easily could be, often prioritize socially based trips with loose grade objectives, and often think their technique is way better than it really is.

Have you been stalking me for all these years?
 I know my technique sucks for harder climbing though.

Gloweringwrote:

Spoken like someone who can lose weight easily. Genetics plays a hug role. For example some heavy people with heavy parents can eat well and get a lot of exercise and still be "overweight". Some thin people with thin parents can eat like crap, not get much exercise and still be skinny. I don't think anyone yet knows how important the different factors are: quicker metabolism, at what blood sugar level your hunger response kicks in, how many calories you burn for the same amount of exercise, etc. Anyone can lose weight and if you really want to anyone can do it. But how easy it is to lose the weight and keep it off varies widely.

From my understanding (and I could be wrong), genetics/metabolism/etc. usually does not vary enough to have much of an effect on weight loss. As long as you have a caloric deficit, you're going to lose weight. Get the myfitnesspal app, track your calories, and make sure you have a deficit. It might not be comfortable to eat less than you're used to, but it can definitely be done. From what I've read in the past, people seem to overplay the differences between metabolic rates, etc.

With the exception of reboot, are there any V10/5.14 climbers posting on this thread?

Mark E Dixonwrote: With the exception of reboot, are there any V10/5.14 climbers posting on this thread?

i've climbed a few, but i hardly think of myself as a V10 climber.  more of a V7 climber who's climbed as hard as V10.  

you're a whatever you can consistently do in an hour climber.

Schuyler Baerwrote:

From my understanding (and I could be wrong), genetics/metabolism/etc. usually does not vary enough to have much of an effect on weight loss. As long as you have a caloric deficit, you're going to lose weight. Get the myfitnesspal app, track your calories, and make sure you have a deficit. It might not be comfortable to eat less than you're used to, but it can definitely be done. From what I've read in the past, people seem to overplay the differences between metabolic rates, etc.

So how many calories do you burn every day? I mean you personally, not in a general sense. How many do I burn every day? Without a reasonably accurate estimate the phrase “just be in a caloric deficit” has no meaning.

People do have differing metabolic rates; it is also true that people tend to lean on this fact more than is reasonable. It’s also worth mentioning that putting yourself in a calorie deficit is generally not compatible with increased athletic performance so you may want to take more action than simply getting a calorie calculator. 

Nate Awrote:

So how many calories do you burn every day? I mean you personally, not in a general sense. How many do I burn every day? Without a reasonably accurate estimate the phrase “just be in a caloric deficit” has no meaning.

People do have differing metabolic rates; it is also true that people tend to lean on this fact more than is reasonable. It’s also worth mentioning that putting yourself in a calorie deficit is generally not compatible with increased athletic performance so you may want to take more action than simply getting a calorie calculator. 

If you enter your daily calories and weight into myfitnesspal, it'll calculate your specific maintenance calories. You can also lose weight without losing much strength if you do it right. I would argue that, if you're overweight, losing weight is going to increase your climbing performance more than strength gains in the same amount of time anyways.

Schuyler Baerwrote:

From my understanding (and I could be wrong), genetics/metabolism/etc. usually does not vary enough to have much of an effect on weight loss. As long as you have a caloric deficit, you're going to lose weight. Get the myfitnesspal app, track your calories, and make sure you have a deficit. It might not be comfortable to eat less than you're used to, but it can definitely be done. From what I've read in the past, people seem to overplay the differences between metabolic rates, etc.

This does not sound remotely correct. My sister only eats 1000-1100 calories a day and struggles with her weight. I eat 3x that much and have been the same weight since I was 20 years old. 

Doug Chismwrote:

This does not sound remotely correct. My sister only eats 1000-1100 calories a day and struggles with her weight. I eat 3x that much and have been the same weight since I was 20 years old. 

I'm talking difference between two people of the same size/weight/sex/age. Obviously you're going to need to eat more than your sister to maintain your weight. 

Edit: to clarify, there is going to be a huge difference in calories to maintain weight between an active 250 lbs man and an inactive 120 lbs woman. But the difference between two people of the same size, age, sex, activity level is going to be negligible.

Schuyler Baerwrote:

I'm talking difference between two people of the same size/weight/sex/age. Obviously you're going to need to eat more than your sister to maintain your weight. 

Edit: to clarify, there is going to be a huge difference in calories to maintain weight between an active 250 lbs man and an inactive 120 lbs woman. But the difference between two people of the same size, age, sex, activity level is going to be negligible.

She is 2" shorter and 1 year older, same weight. I personally dont think your statement is correct, I believe there are vast differences in individual metabolism. But thats just like my opinion man. 

Everyone's resting metabolism is different. My best friend of the last 60 years & I are about the same size he can eat 2-3x what I eat lay around all day & not gain weight.
Life is 95% psychological & the other 50% is mental!!!

Karl Walterswrote: Losing 30-40lbs is easy you're just making excuses for yourself, which is why you fall into the camp of people that will never climb those grades. People that climb those grades do the work and don't make excuses.  I've gained and lost that amount of weight over the course of my adult life and it ain't that crazy with a few basics in place. Honestly it's easier than having to gain anything so long as your net strength stays roughly the same.

As a former wrestler and someone who owned a gym, I think I know a few things about weight loss over my decades of experience.   I'm 44 years old.   Age changes things - give it 10 years and revisit this thread if you like or we go for some coffee.   If you re-read what I wrote I know how to lose weight.  It's a much trickier balance when you are older and am built with a lot of muscle  - the power curve can go down much faster than the weight and it is alot harder to build the muscles back up after a loss cycle when you are older.   Best ways I have seen in losing weight but maintaining power is load up on weight bearing endurance cross training mix with usual climbing training - hence my hiking the Applachian Trail as a thru-hike comment.   One physical consequence of being squatty (the -3 ape index - my friends compare me to a fire hydrant) is that my center of gravity is MUCH lower than the average climbers - on overhang walls I have to pull harder and be more dynamic than my friend who's 3 inches taller and 80 lbs lighter.   What this means is that the possible 5.14s that I could do even if I am 30lbs lighter is simply a smaller subset than what he can do - so the chance of me finding the right project is smaller.      

The two factors in training (discounting diet/nutrition for a minute) - time and intensity, are just not available to me at the moment.   It's it an excuse?   Yes, but it is also real life.   The fact of the matter is anyone can be president, yet most never do.

Hopefully you'll beat the odds.   Sounds like you got the stoke and the desire.   By all means go for it.   I am personally stoked to send a 12C if the crags ever open around me.  The celebratory beer would certainly be just as tasty and rewarding as if sent a 5.14.