Kimmo

you're such a love-bird. that's what i hate about you!

it's how i express love. i know it's not the best way to do it, but i hate you, rocky joe.

if you adopt the above scheduling, don't go until exhausted. if you have the v6 wired, and it's at your limit, you'd maybe do it a few times in the morning, with a nice 10 minute break between goes; then a few times in the early afternoon, same breaks, then in the late afternoon, and then in the evening. this way you recover well between efforts, you stay relatively fresh, and can give really good efforts every time. but not many have that type of time. i would also take day 3 and day 7 off. as a matter of fact, this is what i would recommend for hafilax, but on v4's. i would also have maybe 4 boulder problems i would use, and maybe one day would be devoted to a harder project, doing just individual moves and small linkage (again not going to exhaustion; maybe just a half hour session, 15 or 20 moves). after two or three weeks, i would start cycling new boulder problems into the routine, replacing the old ones. after a month or so, up the difficulty a little.

i'm here to change the world, starting at cascade climbers.

i have time on my hands. plus, there seem to be at least 3 people interested.

if you adopt the above scheduling, don't go until exhausted. if you have the v6 wired, and it's at your limit, you'd maybe do it a few times in the morning, with a nice 10 minute break between goes; then a few times in the early afternoon, same breaks, then in the late afternoon, and then in the evening. this way you recover well between efforts, you stay relatively fresh, and can give really good efforts every time. but not many have that type of time. i would also take day 3 and day 7 off. as a matter of fact, this is what i would recommend for hafilax, but on v4's.

i adapted to multiple days on by simply doing it. warm-ups i think are key. and perhaps limiting your climbing to an hour or hour and a half per session, although it's a little vague to put a time on it cuz two people can do vastly different things in an hour. but it can depend on other things too, like how long you've been climbing, your current level. i think it simply takes some time for the body to adapt to lots of climbing, and every body might adapt a little differently. being siked to climb is the biggest thing though. if you're hurting and not siked to climb, then you probably shouldn't (until you're experienced enough to push into this territory without crippling yourself). nothing wrong with a one on one off schedule though, especially if you stay siked and injury free, methinks.

plus, moon would break ondra's arm in an arm wrestling match.

a standard "periodization" program might fail entirely to get one as strong as they can be. and, strength is relative. strength is a HUGE issue for the person trying a route with moves that are hard for them, whether it's 5.9 or 5.14. climbing is a strength sport (along with other things).

dude, you asked from me for a sample routine that might get you, as a v4 climber, stronger. you can call this a mesocycle in a periodization program if you like, but i call it preparation to climb harder. btw, there is actually NO power work there, just strength, since most moves are done statically. there is no doubt that, beyond the fun i had climbing statically, this time of climbing helps my climbing to this day, so that's why i would recommend it to someone climbing at your level. are there other things you could do that would improve you? you betcha. almost anything that makes some sense and is done religiously and wisely for a solid chunk of time (at least two months) will improve you. mine was a small small slice from all the options, given because you asked. if it doesn't make sense, or you really don't like it, then don't do it, but if you want to improve, do SOMETHING. (but always work on finger strength, cuz that's the body/rock interface). in the end, of course aspects of "periodization" make sense, in certain situations. i'm just not a fan of adopting one religion and declaring it the end-all. that's just dumb, numb, blind idolatry! and my "program" for myself? power, strength, and stamina. with focus on what i'll be needing for a particular project.

depends on what you mean by stronger. i have no doubt that moon was and perhaps is stronger on certain types of moves. i seriously doubt ondra could campus 1 5 9 for example. he's a skinny kid who complains about being weak.

shoot, you know what happened? our tendons didn't know they were supposed to wait 4 years, cuz your articles hadn't come out yet.

you sir, are mad. one must follow proper training protocols, as spelled out in the proper training manuals. you seem to be on the verge of losing control or something.

i think research will show that tendons never strengthen, becoming the first body tissue that does not respond to stimulus. actually, you know i kid. everyone knows that tendons spend their time looking at the calendar, biding their time....just waiting for that magical moment when they, too, can be strong. (in 4 year's time.)

it only makes sense that the body would take 4 years to begin adapting to stresses. bodies are so smart that way. good night, rocky. sleep well.

Skeletal muscle adaptations and biomechanical properties of tendons in response to jump exercise in rabbits1 F. Gondret*,2, P. Hernandez, H. Rémignon and S. Combes * Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), Unité Mixte de Recherche (UMR) 1079 Systèmes d’Elevage Nutrition Animale et Humaine (SENAH), 35590 Saint Gilles, France; and Institute for Animal Science and Technology, Polytechnic University of Valencia, PO Box 22012, 46022 Valencia, Spain; and INRA, Université de Toulouse, UMR 1289, Tissus Animaux, Nutrition, Digestion, Ecosystème et Métabolisme (TANDEM), Chemin de Borde-Rouge, Auzeville, BP 52627, 31326 Castanet-Tolosan Cedex, France 2 Corresponding author: Florence.Gondret@rennes.inra.fr Pen housing has been proposed in rabbits as an alternative to standard-sized cages. Rabbits reared in pens show greater physical activity. This study investigated whether jump exercise could modify body composition, muscle biochemical and histological characteristics, and some meat quality traits, including the biomechanical properties of tendons. Male weaned rabbits of similar BW (793 ± 11 g) were either reared in giant collective cages and had to jump over obstacles to get food and water for 35 consecutive days (EXE), or confined in small isolated cages (SEDN). Rabbits were weighed weekly to determine ADG (n = 79 EXE; n = 46 SEDN) and ADFI (n = 9 cages in EXE; n = 46 cages in SEDN). At approximately 10 wk of age, rabbits were slaughtered in 2 series. After overnight chilling, carcasses in the first series (n = 30 EXE; n = 27 SEDN) were divided into fore, intermediate, and hind parts. Color and ultimate pH were recorded in the biceps femoris (BF) and LM. The Achilles tendon and patellar ligament were dissected from the legs and cooked. Muscles [semimembranosus proprius, semimembranosus accessorius (SMA), and BF] were harvested from the legs in a subset of animals from the second series (n = 10 in EXE; n = 9 in SEDN). Both ADG and ADFI were slightly reduced (P < 0.10) in EXE rabbits compared with SEDN rabbits. Exercised rabbits showed a greater (P = 0.01) proportion of hind parts than SEDN rabbits. Enzyme activities of 3-hydroxyacyl-CoA dehydrogenase and citrate synthase, which play key roles in fatty acid oxidation and the terminal oxidative degradation of nutrients, respectively, were increased in the semimembranosus proprius, SMA (except citrate synthase), and BF muscles of EXE rabbits compared with SEDN rabbits. Only SMA exhibited a decreased (P = 0.05) activity of the glycolytic enzyme, lactate dehydrogenase, in EXE rabbits compared with SEDN animals. Total lipid content, mean diameter of perimysial adipocytes, and activities of core lipogenic enzymes in the SMA and BF muscles did not differ between EXE and SEDN rabbits. Meat color in BF was shifted toward greater a* (red; P = 0.001) and b* (yellow; P = 0.02) values in EXE rabbits compared with SEDN rabbits. Cooked Achilles tendon and patellar ligaments in the legs had greater stiffness (P 0.05) in EXE rabbits compared with SEDN rabbits. This experiment demonstrates that rabbit muscles turn to a more oxidative metabolic pattern in response to jump exercise. The quality of attachment of cooked meat to bone is also improved in active rabbits.

Expression of collagen and related growth factors in rat tendon and skeletal muscle in response to specific contraction types K. M. Heinemeier1, J. L. Olesen1, F. Haddad2, H. Langberg1, M. Kjaer1, K. M. Baldwin2 and P. Schjerling3,4 + Author Affiliations 1Institute of Sports Medicine, Bispebjerg Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark2Department of Physiology and Biophysics, University of California, Irvine, CA, USA3Department of Molecular Muscle Biology, Copenhagen Muscle Research Centre, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark4Department of Biomedical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Denmark Corresponding author K. M. Heinemeier: Institute of Sports Medicine, Bispebjerg Hospital – Building 8, 1st floor, 23 Bispebjerg Bakke, DK-2400 Copenhagen NV, Denmark. Email: katjaheinemeier@hotmail.com Abstract Acute exercise induces collagen synthesis in both tendon and muscle, indicating an adaptive response in the connective tissue of the muscle–tendon unit. However, the mechanisms of this adaptation, potentially involving collagen-inducing growth factors (such as transforming growth factor-β-1 (TGF-β-1)), as well as enzymes related to collagen processing, are not clear. Furthermore, possible differential effects of specific contraction types on collagen regulation have not been investigated. Female Sprague–Dawley rats were subjected to 4 days of concentric, eccentric or isometric training (n = 7–9 per group) of the medial gastrocnemius, by stimulation of the sciatic nerve. RNA was extracted from medial gastrocnemius and Achilles tendon tissue 24 h after the last training bout, and mRNA levels for collagens I and III, TGF-β-1, connective tissue growth factor (CTGF), lysyl oxidase (LOX), metalloproteinases (MMP-2 and -9) and their inhibitors (TIMP-1 and 2) were measured by Northern blotting and/or real-time PCR. In tendon, expression of TGF-β-1 and collagens I and III (but not CTGF) increased in response to all types of training. Similarly, enzymes/factors involved in collagen processing were induced in tendon, especially LOX (up to 37-fold), which could indicate a loading-induced increase in cross-linking of tendon collagen. In skeletal muscle, a similar regulation of gene expression was observed, but in contrast to the tendon response, the effect of eccentric training was significantly greater than the effect of concentric training on the expression of several transcripts. In conclusion, the study supports an involvement of TGF-β-1 in loading-induced collagen synthesis in the muscle–tendon unit and importantly, it indicates that muscle tissue is more sensitive than tendon to the specific mechanical stimulus.

Many researchers study the mechanical characteristics of mammalian tendons [3-8] and have yielded insight into the baseline elastic and viscoelastic properties in both animals and humans. Typical elastic tendon properties are characterized by Young's modulus and stiffness. Young's modulus is classically defined as the modulus of elasticity (E) of a material calculated by the rate of change of stress with strain and is an intrinsic property. Stiffness is the resistance of an elastic body to deformation by an applied force, typically defined by the ratio of change in tensile force with change in length of the material, thus an extrinsic property. Repetitive mechanical loading can predispose tendons to injury with damage initiation occurring in the extracellular matrix [9-11]. The accumulation of micro-damage in tendons tends to degrade their mechanical properties, and may ultimately lead to failure. However, tendons can adapt to mechanical usage as evidenced by increases in stiffness and the Young's modulus after strength training or a combination of resistance and stretch training that were commensurate with muscle strength and size gains in humans [3,12] and in animals [10]. Also, tendon stiffness and ultimate strength have also increased in response to endurance training [6,13]. Viidik examined the response of rabbit tibialis anterior and Achilles tendon to 40 weeks of treadmill exposure and reported an increased stiffness of 10% in both tendons [13]. Nielsen et al. [14] also studied the effects of 18 months of treadmill training on rat limb muscle tendons and found that exercise had no effect on the biomechanical properties of the tibialis anterior tendon. Simonsen et al. [6] investigated whether tendon would respond differently to resistance or endurance training regimens in rats. Their results indicated that strength training did not result in increases in ultimate strength; however, swim-trained rats did have tendons with significantly higher ultimate strength than age-matched controls. The authors suggested that tendon may respond more favorably to the number of cycles of loading rather than the magnitude of loading [6]. This was supported by findings from Buchanan and Marsh where treadmill exposure for 8–12 weeks was found to increase tendon stiffness in the Achilles tendon of guinea fowl [10]. This result was reinforced in humans where long distance runners exhibited significant increases of approximately 20% in vastus lateralis stiffness compared to control subjects [15]. However, exposure to stretch training alone did not increase stiffness in human tendons [16]. As we age, it is not surprising that tendon properties such as stiffness and Young's modulus can change along with other physiological changes [7,17,18]. There is an increase in tendon strength up to a certain age, where tendon properties then start to degrade [19]. In fact, investigators found that the strength of 23 month-old rat tail tendons was higher than those from 5 month-old rats [19]. In another study, Nielsen and colleagues found that aging rendered the rat tibialis anterior tendons stiffer and reduced the strain to failure [14]. In contrast to the findings by Viidik et al. and Nielsen et al., Simonsen and colleagues found that aging reduced the ultimate failure force and yield point in rat Achilles tendon [6]. However, tendons in aging subjects have been shown to be highly responsive to training. Specifically, resistance training increases stiffness and Young's modulus [7,8,17,18,20], and decreases hysteresis [18] in older humans. These results in humans were supported by studies conducted in rats [21]. Also, Simonsen found that swim training counteracted the negative influence of aging on Achilles tendon strength [6]. In contrast, chronic running exercise did not benefit the musculo-tendon unit in aged runners [22]. Stretch-shortening cycle (SSC) exercise effectively introduces resistance exercise to skeletal muscle [23] via reciprocal concentric and eccentric muscle actions which are physiologically representative of natural muscle function used in common activities such as locomotion, and in athletic and occupational environments [24,25]. Additionally, SSCs also produce muscle injury due to the eccentric component of the loading cycles [26-30], which provides an improved physiologically relevant exposure model over the traditional eccentric-only injury model [24,31]. Recently, a chronic exposure (14 exposures) of repetitive SSCs was shown to produce skeletal muscle hypertrophy and significant muscle performance gains in young rats (12 weeks age) while inducing substantial performance deficits and a lack of muscle hypertrophy in old rats (30 months age) after 4.5 weeks of exposure [23]. This study showed that muscles from aging rats did not tolerate exposure to repetitive mechanical loading that is beneficial in their younger counterparts. Thus, it would be interesting to investigate whether tendon from aging rats also does not tolerate this repetitive loading protocol that resulted in muscle maladaptation. To date, there is little known about the effects of resistance exercise and ageing on tendon mechanical properties. The resistance training paradigms studied in humans [7] and animals [21] thus far have resulted in improvements in both muscle and tendon; however, the biomechanical loading was not controlled or recorded during the exposures. In addition, the results from previous studies are not equivocal. Thus, it is important to study tendon response to a chronic exposure of repetitive maximal SSCs, shown to produce muscle maladaptation in aged animals, where the biomechanical loading signature is controlled, and muscle response is recorded in real-time. The purpose of this study is to determine if aging affects the ability of tendon to respond to repetitive high-force mechanical exposures. This inquiry will help determine if tendon adaptation is coupled with skeletal muscle response. We hypothesize that tendons from old rats not exposed to repetitive loading will have lower stiffness, Young's modulus, and total strain at failure than their younger counterparts. In addition, we hypothesize that exposure to repetitive mechanical loading will increase the stiffness, Young's modulus, and strain at failure in both old and young tendons.

Langberg et al.[17] have found that the human peritendinous Achilles tendon tissue reacts with a reduced collagen synthesis immediately after exercise, followed by a dramatic increase in subsequent days.[17] However, the changes occurring immediately after strength training observed in the present study cannot be explained by metabolic effects. It is interesting to speculate over how the acute response to training involving increased tendon volume (and increased cross-sectional area) at exercise affects the biomechanics of the tendon. In terms of force transfer, a thick tendon may be advantageous, as there would be a decrease of the average force per area, thereby lessening the potential risk for injury. However, this may only be adequate if the water retaining capacity of the noncollagenous matrix contributes to the mechanical properties. Further, fluid may act as a lubricant at the endotenon, thereby reducing the intratendinous shear forces

and one last thing (whew, hard work here): if allayou haters check my first post, i said "if your body can handle it" and "experiment". Damn. it's not like i was saying to go out and start effin yourself up and ignoring your body.

aw man, i can't just be ignorin' ya when you got so much to say and i'm so lonely! but yeah, it matters how hard you climb, sure. would i go to some poor dude livin in the gutter for financial advice? well maybe actually, he might have some really good advice, come to think of it. so i guess it doesn't matter that much that you only climb 5.9, but it does matter that you act like you are such an expert, making claims about how EVERYONE will blow their tendons if they go hard all the time (false), and how tendons don't START to strengthen until 4 years down the road (false), and how i make claims that one move defines the difficulty of all boulder problems (false) etc etc etc. get the picture? probably not.... and as far as explaining how my "theory" is bunk, you might have "explained" it to yourself, but hell, i don't think you even know what my theory is. do you? hmmm i think you're having that reading comprehension problem again, cuz you ain't making any sense. "because many (in fact most) boulder problems have one crux move that rock climbing must therefor be one repetitive motion that all climbers must learn." you seem to make things up about what i'm saying, my friend. what on earth are you talking about? Can take up to 4 years? and what, then it magically stops? and before the 4 years, no strengthening occured? dude, just start pasting your articles directly here, cuz something's getting lost in translation yo. earlier you said it was impossible to climb hard all the time. hmmm. now it seems you think one can. hmmmmm. it's your use of absolutes that is so silly, rocky. and one last thing (again): tendons are strong. way strong. think of what they do on a regular basis in your body. think, man.

well heck. and all i wish for you is the best. but i hope you aren't right. been pretty good about avoiding injuries, even though this last year is the first year in my life that i've really climbed and trained hard pretty close to full time: multiple days in a row, monos, campusing, one arms, intense stuff and quite a bit of it. i'd like to keep that going!

Except that you are wrong again. Just because you crux out on one move in a route or problem does not mean that all climbing (as your language suggests) boils down to one move. you see that "many" word up there? see it? i know it's kinda hard to figure out what words mean sometimes, but that one isn't cryptic, it's pretty straight-forward: "numerous" is a good synonym. and yes, once you get out and do a little climbing, you'll come across boulder problems which have their difficulty defined by one move. ONE move. yes, one, less than "numerous", but more than "none", which in this case is "one". ok, back to "ignore" with ya.