Does being taller make climbing easier? Answering this question with data!

Not Not MP Adminwrote:

Are you just chatGPT’ing your replies now? 

While there isn't a single "ideal" height for a male climber, most experts agree that average height (around 5'9" - 5'11") is considered beneficial for most climbing styles as it provides a good balance between reach and agility, allowing climbers to adapt to various climbing situations without significant disadvantages; however, climbers of all heights can excel with proper technique and training tailored to their body type.

 

David Draperwrote:

Folks, the original question here is does height help climbing? . . . all of the data of elite climbers shows average males to range between 5ft 7 and 5 ft 9. If height helped climbing, then the worlds best would look like the American basketball associations.  The ideal morphology for any sport is shown in the best of that sport. Olympic male gymnast are 165 cm and 55kg,. . .

Interestingly, back in the 1950s John Beckner was the top American gymnast, at 6' tall. Over the years difficulty rose in that sport and most appropriate height evolved to 5'5" for men. For women gymnasts, Larisa Latymina was 5'3" in the the 1950s. Simon Biles is 4'8". 

I would say that for climbing shorter is better than taller. During the late 1950s Chouinard and I bouldered together. He was 5'4" I think and I was 6'1". He called us "Mutt & Jeff". At that difference in height it was hard to compare our climbing abilities.

Li Huwrote: While there isn't a single "ideal" height for a male climber, most experts agree that average height (around 5'9" - 5'11") is considered beneficial for most climbing styles as it provides a good balance between reach and agility, allowing climbers to adapt to various climbing situations without significant disadvantages; however, climbers of all heights can excel with proper technique and training tailored to their body type.

 

This is why you can never trust robots, clearly the experts (read: jabronis arguing on MP) say it’s 5’7” to 5’9”!!!!!! 

John Gillwrote:

Interestingly, back in the 1950s John Beckner was the top American gymnast, at 6' tall. Over the years difficulty rose in that sport and most appropriate height evolved to 5'5" for men. For women gymnasts, Larisa Latymina was 5'3" in the the 1950s. Simon Biles is 4'8". 

I would say that for climbing shorter is better than taller. During the late 1950s Chouinard and I bouldered together. He was 5'4" I think and I was 6'1". He called us "Mutt & Jeff". At that difference in height it was hard to compare our climbing abilities.

Really cool!

You and Yvon were/are my inspirations. I used all your techniques and bouldered using your grading system. Trained with your methods.  

Never pictured you and he as “Mutt and Jeff”    

Not Not MP Adminwrote:

This is why you can never trust robots, clearly the experts (read: jabronis arguing on MP) say it’s 5’7” to 5’9”!!!!!! 

Its fun when someone demonstrates that they have poor points in their argument by making ad hominem attacks. Keyboard courage is alive and well on MP

David Draperwrote:

Its fun when someone demonstrates that they have poor points in their argument by making ad hominem attacks. Keyboard courage is alive and well on MP

I didn’t have the courage to correct this…  

Back on topic, seems like we’re bickering over very minute differences. As far as I’m concerned, 5’7” to 5’11” is average height range? That’s only a roughly +/-3% total range. I don’t consider that difference being tall or short?

Does being 6’10” make it easier to climb than being 5’4”? That’s the question I was pondering when I first read the original post. From my casual observations, I’ve not seen that it has.

One lady climber I know is 4’10” or thereabouts, was once complaining that she’s too short to climb some of the sets, and just then a little girl barely 3’6” prances up the three climbs she claims to have struggled on and danced up a few more. I mentioned that she has over a foot of reach on that little girl. We both laughed.

I’ve not seen that being taller (6’5”+) really helps that much unless we’re talking about beginners?

bro if you're taller than 6'5 you're playing basketball, not rock climbing

Kai Lightner and Dean Potter seemed to do alright at climbing, no?

Anyway, there are very short climbers who climb very hard…I know a few. However, try this on for a thought experiment…how would a short climber fare on a route with a really long reach to a bad crimp or a bad sloper, or any mandatory use of a wide pinch, or very low feet?  They’d probably get completely shut-down. Now, take the example of a lanky climber on a route with a move in a small box or a mandatory two-finger hold that they can only get one finger on/in. Yes, it would make things harder, perhaps significantly so, but they would not be out of options.

Didn’t Michaela Kirch project some 12a at the RRG and say afterward that it felt mid 14?

David Draperwrote:

Its fun when someone demonstrates that they have poor points in their argument by making ad hominem attacks. Keyboard courage is alive and well on MP

It’s more fun when someone makes poor points and is completely oblivious. Keep in mind this could be anyone    

Frank Steinwrote:

Kai Lightner and Dean Potter seemed to do alright at climbing, no?

Don’t forget about Glassberg, Gill, Jimmy Webb, Fultz, Sharma, Jan Hojer, Jorg Verhoeven, Ondra, and all the other ogres over 6’

Anyway, there are very short climbers who climb very hard…I know a few. However, try this on for a thought experiment…how would a short climber fare on a route with a really long reach to a bad crimp or a bad sloper, or any mandatory use of a wide pinch, or very low feet?  They’d probably get completely shut-down. Now, take the example of a lanky climber on a route with a move in a small box or a mandatory two-finger hold that they can only get one finger on/in. Yes, it would make things harder, perhaps significantly so, but they would not be out of options.

Didn’t Michaela Kirch project some 12a at the RRG and say afterward that it felt mid 14?

Unsure about Michaela Kirsch, but I seem to recall an incident with Katie Brown, back in day at the NRG or RRG, not being able to reach some holds on a 12a. This was right after she had sent something much, much harder. I don’t think it was the route “Take that Katie Brown”, but may have been. It’s been a long time since I’ve heard the story tbh

Anecdotally, I know a climber (roughly around 5’4”) who has sent numerous V13’s and V14’s and ticked a local V7 as V10/11 on his 8a. Grades are weird if we take them at face value. 

Go Back to Super Topowrote:

Don’t forget about Glassberg, Gill, Jimmy Webb, Fultz, Sharma, Jan Hojer, Jorg Verhoeven, Ondra, and all the other ogres over 6’

Unsure about Michaela Kirsch, but I seem to recall an incident with Katie Brown, back in day at the NRG or RRG, not being able to reach some holds on a 12a. This was right after she had sent something much, much harder. I don’t think it was the route “Take that Katie Brown”, but may have been. It’s been a long time since I’ve heard the story tbh

Anecdotally, I know a climber (roughly around 5’4”) who has sent numerous V13’s and V14’s and ticked a local V7 as V10/11 on his 8a. Grades are weird if we take them at face value. 

I am familiar with Take that Katie Brown, a .13b, but I do recall that after sending several .14s at the RRG, Kiersch sessioned some notoriously reachy .12a. 

Frank Steinwrote:

I am familiar with Take that Katie Brown, a .13b, but I do recall that after sending several .14s at the RRG, Kiersch sessioned some notoriously reachy .12a. 

Are you talking about Dogleg?

Sean Bailey at 5’4” V17/9a

All the “tall” climbers quoted here are still very close to average height. 5’10” versus 6’1” isn’t hugely different? I’d still say 5’7” to 5’11” is roughly average male height.

However, the population of short climbers sending difficult climbs is much higher than the population of “tall” climbers sending difficult climbs.

To be perfectly honest, I thought Sean was 6’ from the video, only to be corrected by a buddy of mine. He’s so thin, probably 125 pounds?

Go Back to Super Topowrote:

Are you talking about Dogleg?

That’s the one!

Li Huwrote:

Sean Bailey at 5’4” V17/9a

All the “tall” climbers quoted here are still very close to average height. 5’10” versus 6’1” isn’t hugely different? I’d still say 5’7” to 5’11” is roughly average male height.

Average male height worldwide is 5ft 7.5in according to a very quick google search. American male average is 5ft 9in. 

However, the population of short climbers sending difficult climbs is much higher than the population of “tall” climbers sending difficult climbs.

How exactly did you come to this conclusion? You might be surprised to see how the top climbers’ height pans out. For example, two of the strongest sport climbers in Sharma and Ondra are both 6ft or taller, with Seb Bouin being 5’11” and the rest of the field basically all being 5’7”. Conversely, of the top 10 boulderers in the world, half of them are over your 5’10” threshold (Graham, Webb, Fultz, Ondra, Cameroni). Once again, showing height is merely one, small, factor is climbing. 

Jonathan Walker wrote:

All the tall people on here trying to self-protect by counter-claiming height isn't an advantage.

Meanwhile, being average height and going to a number of reachy crags (both local and remote) with partners who have all been above 6', I can assuredly tell you that height has its advantages.

Not to mention all the anecdotal evidence at gyms, where taller people don't have to cut feet on further moves...and can actually reach the holds.

I've seen dyno problems set by setters who were *all* above 6 feet. The length of the dyno was absurd.

Natural rock fares much more "equal", but hate to break it to all you tall people, there are plenty of crags out there that are still biased against the average height climber who doesn't pull 5.14.

Those are all great anecdotes, but for every “reachy” crag there is a cave somewhere that caters towards the 5’5” ex-wrestler, V6 gym bro. As you inadvertently pointed out, climbing comes in different styles catering towards differing heights, body styles, and strengths. 

climbing-history.org lists 48 men who have climbed 9b and above.

Height data is freely available for about half of them including most of the top 20. 

Mean height was 172.7 (SD 6.3) cm or 5' 8". Ondra is an outlier: +3 cm taller than Sharma who in turn is +3cm taller than anyone else with data available. Removing Ondra makes the mean 171.7 cm or 5' 7" and a bit. I couldn't find data for Matt Futz and Dave Graham who, if included, might bump the mean up a little but also missing are a lot of southern europeans and east asians who are likely to pull it back down. 

Elite male rock climbers seem to be a similar height or slightly shorter than the general population of the countries they hail from. If being tall conferred a large advantage these results would be unlikely. 

Someone else can do the women and boulderers.

Edit: updated link to strongest women. Thanks JW.

The only climbing styles where height has an across the board advantage are aid climbing and beginner gym climbing 

duncan...wrote:

climbing-history.org lists 48 men who have climbed 9b and above.

Height data is freely available for about half of them including most of the top 20. 

Mean height was 172.7 (SD 6.3) cm or 5' 8". Ondra is an outlier: +3 cm taller than Sharma who in turn is +3cm taller than anyone else with data available. Removing Ondra makes the mean 171.7 cm or 5' 7" and a bit. I couldn't find data for Matt Futz and Dave Graham who, if included, might bump the mean up a little but also missing are a lot of southern europeans and east asians who are likely to pull it back down. 

Elite male rock climbers seem to be a similar height or slightly shorter than the general population of the countries they hail from. If being tall conferred a large advantage these results would be unlikely. 

Someone else can do the women and boulderers.

Those are weird lists man, they only list the male's single hardest ascent, but then list all of the hardest females ascents and allows for multiples? 

My idiot brain processes this info much easier, as well as this one (though it's quite outdated). 

Jonathan Walker wrote:

Totally agree. I'm not claiming climbing as a whole is harder for shorter people. I just find it amusing when certain people can't admit that certain styles are obviously intrinsically easier for them than others without the same advantages to the situation.

Until people evolve looking and weighing like beanpoles with the strength of body builders, it’s going to be this way.

Overall, I think it’s weight more than height that has the advantage. Shorter people tend to weigh less, and, in general, have an inherent advantage over taller people.

I’ll give tall people the advantage when they’re as I’ve described above.