el jefe

watts talks and raindawg goes bark, bark, bark...

this bozo not only wants to turn back the clock, he wants to institute a dress code as well.

monday through friday, dude. it's a secular religion. hey fairweather, do the women in your cult have to wear veils?

ivan, was that 5 empty chambers and one loaded, or one empty and 5 loaded?

johndavidjr, that is just guvmint propergander. you want the real truth, listen to fairweather. his posts are divinely inspired. really. god speaks directly through him. you can tell by the tone that you'll be turned into a pillow of salt if you disergree.

just because the fitness gurus are selling periodization doesn't mean it works. there's lots of theory talk here about different forms of strength, need for recovery and so on but nothing in the way of data that compares results from training using periodization and training without periodization, with the exception of the information kimmo brought in regarding the success of the bulgarian team once they dropped periodization from their program. people have been making a lot of comments regarding whether climbing is or is not comparable to olympic lifting or whether kimmo's routine is effective for a crag climber/boulderer but inadequate for an alpinist, and some of those comments perhaps have some validity. but the fact of the matter is that the efficacy of periodization as a training method for climbers has been assumed rather than proven. in addition, from what i've been able to discern, the books that talk about periodization take training programs developed for other activities (track and field usually) and then try to adapt them to climbing as if all sports were interchangeable somehow. my own experience has been that i get the best results when i go climbing a lot, and that is very different from the track athlete because a 5000m runner who only runs 5000m isn't going to perform as well as one who follows a regimen that includes speed work, etc. my feeling is that this is because climbing involves adapting to a wide number of different but similar moves requiring different applications of isometric strength titrated in such a way as to achieve a balance between tension and relaxation that is itself constantly in flux -- in short, climbing is a technique intensive activity certainly much more complicated technically than trying to run around a 400m oval a dozen or so times. physical fitness and finger-specific exercises are certainly helpful, and periodization may or may not be significant for achieving a base of general fitness (the current craze, crossfit, seems to eschew periodization in favor of randomization) but going climbing a lot is the key to improving as a climber and going climbing on rock is, in my experience, way more effective than going climbing on plastic.

is this for real? if the great majority of climbers are okay with it, then it's okay. the fact that you feel it is an "imposition" on your experience is your deal, no one else's. your feelings are your responsibility. that's the way it works in the world. the rest of us aren't responsible for making your experience better. if the rest of the climbing community is okay with bolted routes then the fact that you consider it an "imposition" is something you need to come to terms with on your own. henry barber never used leg loops and thought camming devices were cheating. should the rest of us be expected to give up leg loops and cams because hot henry finds our use of them an imposition on his experience?

in an interview with 8a.nu in 2004, ondra said: "How often do you climb? During the week I climb two or three times, usually bouldering. My partner is Martin Stranik (second in European Youth Cup 2004). I have a small climbing wall at home, as well. But there is a disadvantage - you have to climb without manesium and your shoes. Weekends we spend in rocks. I prefer rocks." and "Do you have a special program? I haven't got any system, yet. I don't develop up my muscles, only naturally by climbing, I do stretching. I climb when I want and what I want. I did gymnastics for some years, but I didn't compete. Just for fun." so sounds like you're right, he's probably in the "climb all the time on really hard routes" camp. which means periodization is probably not part of his plan.

more like clueless i'd say. am i an american? what are you, a birther? people need to start showing you their birth certificates or what's that shit about, eh amigo mio?

very nice work. anyone got a photo of the face where they can draw us a picture?

so the repugniks were in favor of going into afghanistan when bush was president but now they are against it when obama is president, is this right? just trying to follow the flip flip flip here...

"progression" actually presents an interesting juxtaposition between how patxi trains for the world cup and sharma trains to send jumbo love: patxi follows a strict, intense training regimen while sharma just goes out and does stacks of hard routes. to me this points out how little we really know for certain regarding training to improve climbing performance: both these guys are amazing climbers who've reached a similar level of performance via completely different paths. in this regard, i think kimmo has raised an interesting question about whether the periodization scheme touted by the training guide authors really is the best way to improve.

my guess is that he was including the gorge in that trad/sport ratio comment. there are a lot of really quality routes in the gorge.

gotta agree with ivan, alan would be a great addition to this here on line community. i hope he sticks around and links us to some of the smith history.

a world without finnish jokes is a world that wouldn't be worth living in...

these cranks like to talk about "dubious tactics", yet whenever they do so they reveal their own ignorance of the actual history of the sport. use of chalk was once deemed a "dubious tactic" as was the use of leg loops (rather than just a swami belt) or the use of camming devices (considered "cheating" when they were first introduced). the truth is that climbing tactics have evolved and changed throughout the history of the sport, with the usual story being those who went before decrying the "dubious tactics" of those who came after. to arbitrarily pick a point in time and declare all the tactics prior to that point acceptable and all tactics after that point unacceptable is mere chauvinism, not a rational argument of some sort. cue the stock images of care bears and crowbars and the "little man" insults.

alan, i was surprised by the same thing when i started looking at this website a couple of years ago, and i've been active in the climbing scene. raindawg and pope are just a couple of internet cranks. the whole "sport vs trad" issue is over for all intents and purposes. they are just different styles of climbing, like alpine and bouldering are different styles. your contribution to climbing speaks for itself. anyone who has sampled some of your classic smith routes knows this. thanks for all you've done.

another point: depending on the climb of course, but climbing can be broken down into some basic movements; get strong at these, and climbing is much easier. so in a sense, training is developing the strength to pull a somewhat limited repertoire of specific movements, making every climb somewhat rehearsed 9finger strength this was the old "system board" idea, i think, popularized by the hubers back in the 90s. interesting thread for sure. kimmo, could you be more specific re: what you mean by "periodization"? are you referring to the "endurance-power-power endurance" type of phase training that the manuals talk about, or would you consider any variation of intensity of training effort "periodization"?

exactly.

Since you brought it up,........ Does that mean that all sportos can lead trad at the same grade they clip at? Or,...what was your point? i didn't think my comment was all that complicated but evidently i've over-estimated bug's acumen. my point was that according to the rhetoric of the anti-bolt wingnuts hiding out in the pacific northwest rainforests, clipping bolts induces a peculiar palsy of the intellect that renders one incapable of deciphering how to drop a stopper into a constriction or mastering the complicated machinery of spring loaded camming devices, yet mr haston's achievement vis-a-vis his onsight of "greenspit" would seem to contradict this rhetoric, just as it would also seem to contradict the notion that bolt-clipping causes the testicles to atrophy and thus render the climber incapable of upward movement in the absence of bolts. i never made any assertion regarding the abilities of sport climbers to climb trad in general, only that sport climbing well didn't seem to preclude someone from also climbing trad well. or is my interpretation of haston's achievement incorrect?

guess sport climbing doesn't undermine one's trad skills after all..

i'm puzzled by montypiton's take on all of this. i understood rumr's point at the outset being that age is no excuse for poor performance when lack of effort was the real cause. from what i've read here, monty is another example (along with manolo and haston) of an old fart who is out killing it because he still wants to, with the difference being that monty performs in the alpine while the other two perform at the crags. different goals yield different results. i don't think the point was that we should all be out pulling 9a but rather that we should be honest with ourselves about what we really want to do and not make excuses like "i'm too old" or "too busy" or "i have kids now" when the real reason is "i like beer and pork rinds" or "exercise makes me sweaty and sore" or "i can't miss this episode of 'survivor'", etc.

this sounds like exercise-induced rhabdomyolysis. drink lots of water after exercise helps. dehydration was likely a contributing element.

another old guy with a "memory like a hawk"

700 kcal/day = a croissant with a cup of espresso for breakfast, 2 gauloise and a small glass of red wine for dinner. it takes dedication.