Strength: who needs it?

[colt45]

Any thoughts on what difficulty level the average person can achieve before strength becomes important?

 

Example: I have climbed with a dude who can crank out a couple of 1-arms but has trouble sending 5.10. Meanwhile another buddy of mine is not strong at all, but is motivated and has solid footwork: he onsights 5.12a.

 

Basically I am wondering if training ever helps for climbing (more than just getting out and climbing some more!)--how far can ya go on footwork alone??

[Mtguide]

Strength in rock climbing is most important in terms of the ratio of grip-strength to bodyweight.This is why people like Katie Brown and Chris Sharma have great advantage over bigger,more heavily muscled climbers.Someone built like Arnold Schwarzenegger(who is something of an occasional rock climber,I've heard)may have tremendous grip strength many times that of Sharma,but if his body weight is too great for his grip strength,the huge arms,chest,back, etc.,will do him little good in the effort to crank 5.12.I've experienced this personally(not that I was ever the size of Arnold).The first time I ever went to the Rock Gym here in Portland,I was a well built and muscular 205 lbs. at 6' tall.The place was full of geeky pencil necks with arms like pipe cleaners, clambering all over the place upside down like a bunch of spiders;I had a hard time getting up the stiffer 5.8 &5.9.In the years since I've stayed in shape,but lost about 20 lbs;I'm still no 5.12 climber,but find it much easier to climb up to about 5.10c,and feel much more secure at a consistent 5.8-5.9 level.Balance and technique are far more important than sheer strength,but of course to climb 5.12 and above you must have strength,in spades,just in the right ratio to your size and body weight.Basic physics.What was Alex Lowe,about 6'0",155 lbs or so? Another perfect example.Pretty scrawny by musclehead standards,but all that meat can definitely keep you earthbound.Look at the women:Steph Davis,Josune Bereziartu,Lynn Hill(nice small fingers,perfect for cracks)Kitty Calhoun,Araceli Segarra,Sue Nott,etc.Light,slender,with hands and fingers of steel.

[colt45]

So would 5.12 be the point where strength becomes necessary?

 

When I started climbing I was stronger (overall, and for my size) than I am now.

 

And every time I have wanted to bump up my climbing grade, I initially thought that I would need to just get stronger. But moving to 5.9, then 5.10, then 5.11, seemed to involve a simple improvement in my footwork and sense of body positioning.

 

So once again, I anticipate that if I want to move on to being comfortable consistently sending 5.12 or even 5.13 I will need to get stronger--and I am wondering if, once again, I can get there just through a better understanding of the subtleties of footwork & technique. I don't know many people who climb at this level so I don't know what to expect. But has anyone gotten up there and found a "limit of technique" where gaining physical strength is REALLY what is necessary to move on? I realize there is a mix of technique and strength that will be required at higher levels of climbing, and that certain types of routes will inherently require a lot of power. But at what difficulty (if any) does the "strength component" become overwhelmingly important???

[Mtguide]

colt45 said:

So would 5.12 be the point where strength becomes necessary?

 

When I started climbing I was stronger (overall, and for my size) than I am now.

 

And every time I have wanted to bump up my climbing grade, I initially thought that I would need to just get stronger. But moving to 5.9, then 5.10, then 5.11, seemed to involve a simple improvement in my footwork and sense of body positioning.

 

So once again, I anticipate that if I want to move on to being comfortable consistently sending 5.12 or even 5.13 I will need to get stronger--and I am wondering if, once again, I can get there just through a better understanding of the subtleties of footwork & technique. I don't know many people who climb at this level so I don't know what to expect. But has anyone gotten up there and found a "limit of technique" where gaining physical strength is REALLY what is necessary to move on? I realize there is a mix of technique and strength that will be required at higher levels of climbing, and that certain types of routes will inherently require a lot of power. But at what difficulty (if any) does the "strength component" become overwhelmingly important???

 

First of all,not being(well,never having been) a 5.11 or 5.12 climber myself,I simply can't speak from personal experience,regarding what,if any changes or increases in strength might be required to get to that level.I myself have noticed that improvement in technique and balance have had for more to do with progressing than strength,but grip strength,combined with dropping some bodyweight,has certainly seemed to be part of the equation,at least for me.I don't think I necessarily meant to say that 5.12 is any kind of biomechanical threshold of climbing physics ,at which,or beyond which there's some kind of required increase in strength in order to progress.Furthermore,I think that because everyone is physically and biomechanically different,that it's relative;one person may simply need to work on technique,someone else may actually need to improve strength.The grip strength to body weight ratio does seem to be a constant,however; something measurable and significant in terms of hard physics,regardless of individual differences in build,or even, in some cases,technique.And at higher grades,(5.13 +)where climbers are using one-finger pockets,miniscule crimps and dynos,there's a pretty obvious training and conditioning requirement,a foundation in which strength is certainly a necessary component.From witnessing the skills of my friends who are solid 5.11/5.12 climbers,it does seem that there is a definite strength/endurance requirement.Hangboards,campus walls and weights all have their effects on strength and endurance,and I do think that conditioning has direct benefits to enabling improvements in technique.

I suppose it even becomes,after a certain level of difficulty,a sort of chicken-and-egg syndrome,and depending on the individual climber,traceable or measurable only in terms of where each person starts from.I think there's no question that anyone who climbs is going to get stronger,and that technique will improve with practice,training, persistence and experience.Whether the sequence is technique develops endurance and strength,or vice-versa is a little hard to say.My guess would be that few who start climbing have natural inborn technique,so that strength would be likely to develop first,eventually taking you to a point where you realize that there has to be more to it than mere strength.Strength will take you only so far.From that point (anywhere above 5.9) it seems that,at least from my own personal experience,improvements in technique and strength go pretty much hand in hand. Hope I haven't confused the issue.

[StickBoy]

Hi Colt.

Although I think strength can be important on 5.12s and up I would probably try also working on the mental aspects of the climbing game such as controlling stress and tension before the climb and on the climb, thinking positively, differential relaxation, ect. To climb at harder levels than I was used to, I had to work on my physical, technical, and mental performance.Just didn't want strength training to be your only focus in your quest to improve your climbing. Peace

[Mtguide]

StickBoy said:

Hi Colt.

Although I think strength can be important on 5.12s and up I would probably try also working on the mental aspects of the climbing game such as controlling stress and tension before the climb and on the climb, thinking positively, differential relaxation, ect. To climb at harder levels than I was used to, I had to work on my physical, technical, and mental performance.Just didn't want strength training to be your only focus in your quest to improve your climbing. Peace

-----------------------------------------

"Relax your mind,relax your mind,you got to relax

your mind...."

-Country Joe and the Fish

[scott]

10d

[Dr_Flash_Amazing]

It really depends on what sort of climber you are (i.e. your strengths and weaknesses) and what sort of climbing you're doing. e.g. a person who has been climbing lots of slabby Smith Rock routes and wishes to try a route such as Latin Lover will probably not need to build much strength. If the same slab voyager was looking to do Torrid Zone or Crack Babies, it might behoove them to hit the pullup bar or the bouldering cave for the big, muscly moves. And, of course, if you're coming from Red Rocks or someplace that is likewise steep and juggy, and your biceps are huge from slogging up Yaak Crack and you wanna take a crack at some crimpy techfest, you're going to be very disappointed when you discover there's nothing to pull on and even less to stand on. Time to jump on some easy .10s and .11s and hone the footwork!

 

Really, though, that's oversimplifying things. There's never really just one thing one needs to work on to progress, and ideally, to really keep improving and doing well as a climber, it's best to take a more holistic approach. Climbing routes of all different styles to expose you to different kinds of technique and movement, doing a bit of bouldering to push yourself in the power department (and 'cause it's fun!), training for endurance and stamina; all the pieces should be in place. The broader the base of your climbing and training, the bigger the pool you can draw from as you try to progress and push yourself, and the more natural your progress will be.

[RuMR]

PULL HARDER...worx for everything!!!!!

[Courtenay]

And don't forget to add some strength endurance in the opposing muscle groups (rhomboids from horizontal pulls, triceps for manteling, core strength, and reverse curls/Thor hammer wrist exercises) in order to balance out the body, enabling you to climb harder and longer because you're able to prevent injuries from instabilities. In my experience, high 5.11-5.12 seems to be the threshold where strength becomes of higher importance, BUT you need a good base of general full body strength, whoever you are, to get tendons, ligaments and joints (not to mention muscles) ready for added strain of climbing. Depends on what your goals are and your definition of strength, but there are MANY advantages to having a good solid base, whoever you are and whatever your goals.

[Eerie]

Colt,

 

Short answer: No. No reason to lift weights if you are climbing often enough.

 

Long answer:

The one climber I personally know that climbs in the range you mentioned never lifts weights. He'll go for the occasional mtn bike ride if he feels like he needs a little more endurance....or run laps on mid-range 5.12s. From my own personal experience the only limitation you should have of reaching your goals is time. It takes time and lots of it to climb in that high a range of ratings. You've gotta be able to get out and climb outside as often as you can and then some. No, I don't mean every single day. The other thing you've gotta do is climb everything you can that is right at your highest level that you can. Everything. The more you do that the better endurance you'll have and the better prepared you will be for the easier parts of the harder climbs...leaving you better prepared for the harder parts of those climbs as well.

[layton]

don't forget that "stregnth" doesn't mean gaining weight. For most of us, we can do as many sessions in the gym as we want, and not hypertophy an ounce. So it doesn't hurt EVER to be stronger unless you're the type that balloon up like Hans and Franz.

I've always been strong for my weight, but couldn't hold onto to the rock on lots o' climbs. Turns out my intrinsic hand muscles (esp my opponens pollicus) were weak. Try grip stregnth training without involvement of your forearms for that added ooomph.

[colt45]

Thanks for all the input! Here's an interesting article on the topic a friend sent me (it's from Will Gadd's website):

 

article

 

Even for jug hauls I think there is still a lot of technique involved. An example that comes to mind is a guy I knew in Chicago who used to be a 5.12 onsight climber, messed up his elbows and didn't climb at ALL for ~4 years. Then he joined some friends of mine on a trip to the red river gorge, where he decided to try a route--and totally walked a sustained 100' 5.11d endurance fest with no technical crux (it's called the Return of Chris Snyder for those interested). I had tried this route while in fairly decent shape and got completely shut down (half-dozen falls due to the pump!!) He was able to finagle a rest almost anywhere and pulled it off without trouble.

 

Of course he probably had some residual strength from his past climbing, and as mentioned earlier: as long as technique doesn't suffer, it makes a lot of sense that more strength is always a good thing.