Kimmo

yeah 3 identified muscle types, methinks. my training might look like this: AM power session, which might just be 10 or 20 moves at max intensity and speed, maybe some more, lately analogous to particular climbs. if i feel fresh, i might then do maximum strength. repeaters on crimps on steep wall, 5 sec on 5 sec off repeats, where 3 to 5 reps takes me to failure. maybe 5 sets each hand. various other max strength things might get thrown in, like mono hangs, lock offs, underclings, wide grip stuff, particular moves of a route.... afternoon, intervals. this can take various forms, from repeats on boulder problems, to single move repeats on a 5 second cycle. usually the work period is from 30 secs to 3 minutes (ugh!), depending on what i'm working. usually closer to 30. let's say it's 45 secs work period, then rest will be 45 secs. then work, rest, aiming for about 5 repeats per set. close to failure at the end of work period at 3 reps, then perhaps failing on rep 4 and 5 close to end of 45 secs. the work period can consist of various repeats, just single moves, or even simply straight arm hangs on a 3/4" edge on my steep wall (55 degrees), switching every 5 secs. very quantifiable and qualifiable. and very painful. i like to train these with friends cuz it's much easier to get siked for the pain (especially for the longer intervals). i might rest 20 minutes and do another set. and then again in the evening, i might do another set of intervals, or power, or strength, depending on how i'm feeling. i might have this type of day two or three days in a row, and usually by then i'm really needing a rest day. if i go 4 or 5 days, i notice i start to get sniffles and be on the edge of getting sick, plus i get cranky and life starts to suck. it's a fine line between maximum training and over-training. dave macleod talks about this in interesting detail, and how he skirts this line continually at times. and all of the above gets varied quite a bit. i rarely have identical weeks.

we as humans with this conceptualizing mind of ours love to break things into tiny little pieces, with "multiple muscle characteristics" being an example of this proclivity (i'm not getting on you; i do this too!). then we think these different characteristics are somehow exclusive of each other, not realizing that they are all connected. sport climbing a 60 foot pitch at one's limit doesn't usually call just one "muscle characteristic" into play, so why should training? perhaps we will soon discover that training maximum one rep strength for one set followed immediately by 2 minutes of the highest intensity movement one is capable of for that 2 minutes is the next miracle training for, say, that which is called "stamina", or "strength endurance". i'm no paradigm of high standard virtue, but i'll quite often train burn, power and strength in the same session, or at least in the same day. i seem to be able to do this, with all three performed at quality execution level, so i keep at it (i wouldn't necessarily suggest this as a standard approach (although i wouldn't try to dissuade someone); it works for me). the reason i do this is because, for the climbs i am trying, it makes no sense to work one area for a while, drop it and work on something else, and then have to build the other area back up again. all three (which are not separate in any absolute sense) are needed by me on the same climb, so it makes sense to continually, at the highest intensity, work these areas all the time as much as my body can handle. if one area is called for more than the other, or if one is a weakness, then i'll adjust the training accordingly. another reason i do this is because i don't have the time or the DESIRE to hang out at the crags all day, climbing on my projects. might this be good training in general? sure, but i much prefer training at home, in my gym, in my own space, on my own schedule, listening to leonard cohen and meshuggah and the wipers on my stereo.

for sure, that's part of it. experiment. experiment intelligently. try different things out. don't jsut read a book and then become a slave to the prescripts. i'm not saying this won't help getting you strong/climbing harder (if that's your goal): there's no doubt in my mind that following Performance Rock Climbing or Horst's book or others will improve your climbing if you follow the workouts and actually do them for a few months (depending on where you are in your climbing); trying hard to the best of your abilities etc. but is it the "best" approach, the quickest approach, the most inspiring approach, the only approach? of course not. my reason for posting was simply cuz i like talking about this shit. i like musing about different training ideas, different workouts, etc. and finding out what others do and how it's worked for them in their discipline (preferrably sport climbing or bouldering, since that's my discussion!). hearing their theories, and being able to articulate REASONING, not just a bunch of regurgitated theories that they can't explain/defend. actually, i don't even care about the last point; hearing about any theory is cool. it's all up for discussion.

i think adam ondra falls into the "climb all the time on really hard routes" camp, but i'm not sure. i do seem to remember reading that many days will go by before any rest days. he has freakishly large hands. his pinky looked as big as my index finger. in the foto i saw.

you are a perfect establishment tool. what is your skill set? i might be able to use you.

and periodization is inferior in the above situation, with no evidence of its superiority or preferrability in any situation.

that could be a valid point. i don't know if i agree or not, but i read that the soviet's approach actually required more anabolics and hormones because of the immense volume of their training. and that furthermore, the bulgarians were pretty lean lifters, dominating in the middle weights, whereas the soviet middle-weight lifters bulked up and passed into the heavy-weights because of both the sheer volume of lifting and the amount of drugs..... who knows, not i.

i think he's a bit of a "periodizer", whereas ondra's approach seems closer to a bulgarian powerlifter.

maybe i'm missing something here, and if i am, please tell me what it is!

jon, you do not seem to understand that the soviets were also "doped to the gills", yet the bulgarians consistently beat them, at least during the period that abadziev coached them. do you see the relevance of this? both the soviet periodization approach and the bulgarian max intensity approach used drugs (which leveled the playing field), yet the bulgarians won. what does this seem to indicate? it seems to indicate the superiority of one approach over the other, yes? tell me how this doesn't make sense.

basically. if not more often.

[video:youtube]

this is the frequency of lifting with the "bulgarian method": Session 1 (Mon, Wed, Fri) Time Exercise 9:00-9:30 Front Squat 9:30-10:00 Break 10:00-11:00 Snatch 11:00-11:30 Break 11:30-12:30 Clean and Jerk 12:30-13:00 Front Squat Session 2 (Mon, Wed, Fri) 16:30-17:30 Clean and Jerk 17:30-18:00 Break 18:00-19:00 Snatch 19:00-19:30 Front Squat 19:30-20:00 Pulls Session 2 (Tue, Thu, Sat) 9:00-9:30 Squat 9:30-10:00 Break 10:00-10:45 Power Snatch 10:45-11:15 Break 11:15-12:00 Power Clean 12:00-12:30 Front Squat 12:30-13:00 Pulls so they are doing front squats 6 days a week, up to three times a day. and the other lifts multiple days in a row. and these are not light weights: you can see them lifting on youtube; intense. usually close to 100% of their max.

hey...fuggoff...i resemble that...what are you? Swedishghey or Norwegianlutefishfucker?? you really know how to kick a guy when he's finn.

who cares about "standards"? i'm more interested in challenges than standards. and there would be a heck of a lot less of them without bolting. i kinda doubt watts was too concerned with "standards" either, although i don't know. i'd imagine he simply saw walls of potential climbing that would have been unclimbable without bolts. talk about a kid in a candy store!

Looking for the punchline of an anti-Semitic joke? Poached right from another topic on cc.com: A real knee-slapper! Proud of yourself? B-bye! anti-semitic? care to tell me how that is "anti-semitic"? oh lordy, your anality extends way past rock climbing, doesn't it? plus, everyone knows judaism is pretty much the world religion equivalent of sport climbing. if one can't make fun of the jews, then one can't make fun of the finns. where would that leave us?

dwayner, i thought you were done here at cascadeclimbers.com? i guess i don't understand someone who keeps posting when the only thing they have to offer are incessant complaints and negativity? oh btw, what do you call 1/2 price bacon? buahahahahhaaaaaa funny shit!

Why bother? You've obviously already made your mind up that anyone is wrong that doesnt agree with you. Classic cc.com: pose a question and then shit all over anyone who attempts to contribute to an actual climbing related topic. That's some weak sock puppetry there Kimmo wrongo dude. you think i should simply agree with anything said? there are plenty of posts i've agreed with, and plenty i haven't agreed with. if you were to actually EXPLAIN some of your assertions, then we have a discussion. my feeling is though that you CAN'T explain the above contradiction, so you pull out the sock puppet argument. nice dodge. but honestly, i would like to hear an explanation of "rest" being the actual mitigating factor in bulgaria's dominance.

in fact, i would guarantee that the above interval workout would produce a faster miler than doing a buncha multi-mile runs a week below race-pace.

now that's a truism there, right? but i betcha a person who can run six or eight 50 second 400s with a minute rest in between can run a pretty damn fast mile without ever having run one, dontcha think? especially if they do this interval program for a few months, yes?

interesting info: from what i've read, roger bannister, first sub 4 minute miler, only ran 27 miles a week in prep for his record. most of it was high speed intervals, 400 repeats at around 50 secs a lap. he didn't have time for much more since he was a full-time med student! again, high intensity, lower volume.

smith rocks is an awesome venue for super fun climbing and challenging test pieces still, and i'm super appreciative to everyone who put in the time and vision and passion to make it happen. alan watts is obviously at the center of it, although it could have, and WOULD have, happened regardless; just a natural evolution of the sport. regardless, thanks alan.

I couldn't agree more. The bulgarian teams from the '80s/'90s -- and I actually know one of them from my life overseas -- couldn't pass a modern piss test to save their lives. hehe, nice change of the original quote, but it doesn't change shizzle cuz the soviets were just as heavily into drugs as anyone else, maybe more so (witness the bulk of soviet lifters vs bulgarians? maybe a clue?), and the bulgarians still kicked their arses. and john still hasn't explained his original quote about "understanding of rest days".

hate is the new love. i don't know how often it would result in injuries, cuz i'm not sure this specific approach has been adopted by many, if any, boulderers. is the injury potential high? it seems like it might be, so yeah you'd have to pay hella attention to body.

the hate has been explained. and look on the previous page: an excellent approach more in line with my previous bulgarian style of training. 5 days a week, only high quality moves relevant to one's goals.