|
|
|
|
sungam
Aug 3, 2011, 6:58 PM
Post #226 of 273
(4992 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
flesh wrote: I want to hear what people are passionate about, I don't care how they say it.
No one is persecuting him. Well, okay. A small minority are. But most of the comments here have been trying to correct him. We just want him to take the time to type readable posts. If we didn't care what he had to say we would just killfile him and be done with it.
No one is shocked or horrified that you have been successful without going to college or high school. Hell, rrrADAM is a nuclear plant maintanace dude and he didn't pass highschool either. It's not a miracle, no one is gasping. I'm psyched for you that you're doing well and not regretting your decisions, though.
I would say "back to the discussion" but this thread has had so many subject drifts it's unreal.
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
Aug 3, 2011, 7:10 PM
Post #227 of 273
(4980 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
sungam wrote: I would say "back to the discussion" but this thread has had so many subject drifts it's unreal.
I believe we were discussing the annoyances of skinny climbers and how much easier they have it.
|
|
|
|
|
Kartessa
Aug 3, 2011, 7:15 PM
Post #228 of 273
(4978 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 18, 2008
Posts: 7362
|
sungam wrote: I want to be able to understand what they are saying. Reading gibberish is a waste of my time. If someone has something worth contributing isn't it worth proof reading?
A waste of your time? If you were so concerned about how you spend your time, would you really be on RC.com?
c'mon
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Aug 3, 2011, 7:24 PM
Post #229 of 273
(4971 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
Kartessa wrote: sungam wrote: I want to be able to understand what they are saying. Reading gibberish is a waste of my time. If someone has something worth contributing isn't it worth proof reading? A waste of your time? If you were so concerned about how you spend your time, would you really be on RC.com? c'mon
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
Aug 3, 2011, 7:26 PM
Post #230 of 273
(4969 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
sungam wrote: Kartessa wrote: sungam wrote: I want to be able to understand what they are saying. Reading gibberish is a waste of my time. If someone has something worth contributing isn't it worth proof reading? A waste of your time? If you were so concerned about how you spend your time, would you really be on RC.com? c'mon Allah lanet Lanet olsun, K, mən bir lanet iş sonunda əldə lanet bok Kapa Lanet olacaq!
I'd say nice try, but you fell way short of that.
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Aug 3, 2011, 7:28 PM
Post #231 of 273
(4967 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
sungam wrote: Kartessa wrote: sungam wrote: I want to be able to understand what they are saying. Reading gibberish is a waste of my time. If someone has something worth contributing isn't it worth proof reading? A waste of your time? If you were so concerned about how you spend your time, would you really be on RC.com? c'mon Allah lanet Lanet olsun, K, mən bir lanet iş sonunda əldə lanet bok Kapa Lanet olacaq!
Jainkoaren fucking Cogida, K, ondo fucking kaka maldita Cogida I get fucking lan bat azkenean!
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Aug 3, 2011, 7:29 PM
Post #232 of 273
(4964 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
sungam wrote: sungam wrote: Kartessa wrote: sungam wrote: I want to be able to understand what they are saying. Reading gibberish is a waste of my time. If someone has something worth contributing isn't it worth proof reading? A waste of your time? If you were so concerned about how you spend your time, would you really be on RC.com? c'mon Allah lanet Lanet olsun, K, mən bir lanet iş sonunda əldə lanet bok Kapa Lanet olacaq! fukken rc.com not showin the lənətləmək characters. Jainkoaren fucking Cogida, K, ondo fucking kaka maldita Cogida I get fucking lan bat azkenean!
|
|
|
|
|
Kartessa
Aug 3, 2011, 7:45 PM
Post #233 of 273
(4940 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 18, 2008
Posts: 7362
|
Hab SoSlI' Quch!
|
|
|
|
|
Learner
Aug 3, 2011, 8:06 PM
Post #234 of 273
(4931 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2011
Posts: 187
|
Holding strength and technique constant, a skinnier you is a better climber than a fatter you.
(This post was edited by Learner on Aug 3, 2011, 8:07 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
Aug 3, 2011, 8:59 PM
Post #235 of 273
(4907 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
Learner wrote: Holding strength and technique constant, a skinnier you is a better climber than a fatter you.
No need for the fatter part. If you're just as strong, there's no need for muscle either.
|
|
|
|
|
JoeHamilton
Aug 3, 2011, 11:56 PM
Post #236 of 273
(4865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 16, 2011
Posts: 815
|
Wouldn't it really come down to the individual person, and technique? The weight argument is hard to understand, you walk all day. So your legs hold you up. So how does weight play in? Compararitive to say short vs tall.
|
|
|
|
|
jakedatc
Aug 4, 2011, 12:03 AM
Post #237 of 273
(4864 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 11054
|
muscles still have to move the mass of your body upward against gravity.
in cycling the biggest stat is watts/Kg power to weight ratio. to get the same ratio a bigger person has to put out a lot more watts.
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
Aug 4, 2011, 12:17 AM
Post #238 of 273
(4859 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
JoeHamilton wrote: Wouldn't it really come down to the individual person, and technique? The weight argument is hard to understand, you walk all day. So your legs hold you up. So how does weight play in? Compararitive to say short vs tall.
Ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.
"holding strength and technique constant."
And, honestly, you don't even really need to hold strength constant.
|
|
|
|
|
Learner
Aug 4, 2011, 4:04 AM
Post #239 of 273
(4827 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2011
Posts: 187
|
The Effect of Body Weight on Climbing Performance
Recruit a group of climbers. They must be willing to allow their diet to be manipulated.
HYPOTHESIS
Changes in body weight will be associated with changes in climbing performance.
GROUP 1: CONTROL GROUP
Caloric intake of each participant in this group is maintained throughout the study. Average daily caloric intake is determined, then the participants in this group are instructed to consume that many calories on a daily basis.
GROUP 2: 'SKINNIER' GROUP
Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is decreased considerably. The participants in this group presumably lose weight.
GROUP 3: 'FATTER' GROUP
Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is increased considerably. The participants in this group presumably gain weight.
PROCEDURE
Take a few days to determine caloric intake of each participant. Use this measure as the basis for the manipulation of caloric intake for each participant.
Measures are first taken on all participants on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. Participants are then instructed to continue to climb as they normally would for a certain period of time, while maintaining a diet as instructed above. The reason participants are instructed to climb as they normally would despite individual differences in routines is to allow for the modifications individuals have made to their climbing routines in response to their personal requirements in terms of recovery. It is an indirect way to control for recovery ability. After the duration of the study, each participant is again tested for 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength.
STATISTICAL ANALYSIS
One-way, between-subjects Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) on change in climbing performance. Use measures derived before and after the duration of the study on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, and 3) gripping strength as covariates. This follows the assumption that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. It also accounts for the differences in the degree to which body weight changes between participants. Also explore the potential influence of changes in measures of body composition on climbing performance.
CONCLUSION
If a "skinnier you" is a better (or worse) climber than a "fatter you," significant differences should be detected in change in climbing performance between groups 2 ("skinnier") and 3 ("fatter"). If a "skinnier you" or a "fatter you" is a better (or worse) climber than the you as you are right now, we should derive significant differences in change in climbing performance between group 1 (maintained) and the other two groups ("skinnier" and "fatter").
CURRENT CHALLENGES
Develop a reliable measure for climbing performance. Simply using the grade of routes and/or problems one can send may not be a precise enough measure. There are reliable (and precise) ways to measure grip strength.
ASSUMPTIONS
One assumption of this study is that the effect size depends on the degree to which body weight changes. This is because change in body weight is used as a covariate. Again, we also assume that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability.
Finally, the study assumes that the climbing technique of each participant will not diminish throughout the study. All climbers are allowed to continue to climb as they normally would, which is an attempt to allow climbing technique to atleast maintain its current level. If anything, climbing technique would more likely improve than deteriorate, simply because climbing technique tends to improve with more climbing experience. So, we assume that climbing technique will not decline during this study, as long as the participants' climbing routines are maintained.
(This post was edited by Learner on Aug 4, 2011, 5:40 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Aug 4, 2011, 4:30 AM
Post #240 of 273
(4812 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
Learner wrote: The Effect of Body Weight on Climbing Performance Recruit a group of climbers. They must be willing to allow their diet to be manipulated. GROUP 1: CONTROL GROUP Caloric intake of each participant in this group is maintained throughout the study. Average daily caloric intake is determined, then the participants in this group are instructed to consume that many calories on a daily basis. GROUP 2: 'SKINNIER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is decreased considerably. The participants in this group presumably lose weight. GROUP 3: 'FATTER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is increased considerably. The participants in this group presumably gain weight. PROCEDURE Take a few days to determine caloric intake of each participant. Use this measure as the basis for the manipulation of caloric intake for each participant. Measures are first taken on all participants on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. Participants are then instructed to continue to climb as they normally would for a certain period of time, while maintaining a diet as instructed above. The reason participants are instructed to climb as they normally would despite individual differences in routines is to allow for the modifications individuals have made to their climbing routines in response to their personal requirements in terms of recovery. It is an indirect way to control for recovery ability. After the duration of the study, each participant is again tested for 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS One-way, between-subjects Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) on climbing ability. Use measures derived before and after the duration of the study on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, and 3) gripping strength as covariates. This follows the assumption that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. It also accounts for the differences in the degree to which body weight changes between participants. (Option: Use MANOVA instead of ANCOVA, in order to also explore the potential influence of changes in measures of body composition on climbing performance.) CONCLUSION If a "skinnier you" is a better (or worse) climber than a "fatter you," significant differences should be detected in climbing performance between groups 2 ("skinnier") and 3 ("fatter"). If a "skinnier you" or a "fatter you" is a better (or worse) climber than the you as you are right now, we should derive significant differences in climbing performance between group 1 (maintained) and the other two groups ("skinnier" and "fatter"). CURRENT CHALLENGES Develop a reliable measure for climbing ability. Simply using the grade of routes and/or problems one can send may not be a precise enough measure. There are reliable (and precise) ways to measure grip strength. ASSUMPTIONS One assumption of this study is that the effect size depends on the degree to which body weight changes. This is because change in body weight is used as a covariate. Again, we also assume that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. Finally, the study assumes that the climbing technique of each participant will not diminish throughout the study. All climbers are allowed to continue to climb as they normally would, which is an attempt to allow climbing technique to atleast maintain its current level. If anything, climbing technique would more likely improve than deteriorate, simply because climbing technique tends to improve with more climbing experience. So, we assume that climbing technique will not decline during this study, as long as the participants' climbing routines are maintained.
Big hint from a professional: make your hypothesis explicit before you try to design your study.
|
|
|
|
|
Learner
Aug 4, 2011, 4:43 AM
Post #241 of 273
(4805 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2011
Posts: 187
|
jt512 wrote: Learner wrote: The Effect of Body Weight on Climbing Performance Recruit a group of climbers. They must be willing to allow their diet to be manipulated. GROUP 1: CONTROL GROUP Caloric intake of each participant in this group is maintained throughout the study. Average daily caloric intake is determined, then the participants in this group are instructed to consume that many calories on a daily basis. GROUP 2: 'SKINNIER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is decreased considerably. The participants in this group presumably lose weight. GROUP 3: 'FATTER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is increased considerably. The participants in this group presumably gain weight. PROCEDURE Take a few days to determine caloric intake of each participant. Use this measure as the basis for the manipulation of caloric intake for each participant. Measures are first taken on all participants on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. Participants are then instructed to continue to climb as they normally would for a certain period of time, while maintaining a diet as instructed above. The reason participants are instructed to climb as they normally would despite individual differences in routines is to allow for the modifications individuals have made to their climbing routines in response to their personal requirements in terms of recovery. It is an indirect way to control for recovery ability. After the duration of the study, each participant is again tested for 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS One-way, between-subjects Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) on climbing ability. Use measures derived before and after the duration of the study on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, and 3) gripping strength as covariates. This follows the assumption that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. It also accounts for the differences in the degree to which body weight changes between participants. (Option: Use MANOVA instead of ANCOVA, in order to also explore the potential influence of changes in measures of body composition on climbing performance.) CONCLUSION If a "skinnier you" is a better (or worse) climber than a "fatter you," significant differences should be detected in climbing performance between groups 2 ("skinnier") and 3 ("fatter"). If a "skinnier you" or a "fatter you" is a better (or worse) climber than the you as you are right now, we should derive significant differences in climbing performance between group 1 (maintained) and the other two groups ("skinnier" and "fatter"). CURRENT CHALLENGES Develop a reliable measure for climbing ability. Simply using the grade of routes and/or problems one can send may not be a precise enough measure. There are reliable (and precise) ways to measure grip strength. ASSUMPTIONS One assumption of this study is that the effect size depends on the degree to which body weight changes. This is because change in body weight is used as a covariate. Again, we also assume that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. Finally, the study assumes that the climbing technique of each participant will not diminish throughout the study. All climbers are allowed to continue to climb as they normally would, which is an attempt to allow climbing technique to atleast maintain its current level. If anything, climbing technique would more likely improve than deteriorate, simply because climbing technique tends to improve with more climbing experience. So, we assume that climbing technique will not decline during this study, as long as the participants' climbing routines are maintained. Big hint from a professional: make your hypothesis explicit before you try to design your study.
HYPOTHESIS
Changes in body weight will be associated with changes in climbing performance.
(This post was edited by Learner on Aug 4, 2011, 4:47 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Aug 4, 2011, 8:56 AM
Post #242 of 273
(4777 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
Instead of reducing the calorific intake "considerably" why not reduce it a normal amount for weight loss?
If you drop it "considerably" then not only will they likely see performance loss but they will see a lot of other problem asscoiated with crash diets, too.
Are you going to get them to keep a normal training schedule?
|
|
|
|
|
Kartessa
Aug 4, 2011, 12:55 PM
Post #243 of 273
(4764 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 18, 2008
Posts: 7362
|
sungam wrote: Instead of reducing the calorific intake "considerably" why not reduce it a normal amount for weight loss? If you drop it "considerably" then not only will they likely see performance loss but they will see a lot of other problem asscoiated with crash diets, too. Are you going to get them to keep a normal training schedule?
Back to eating disorders... looks like this thread has come full circle.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Aug 4, 2011, 3:13 PM
Post #244 of 273
(4732 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Learner wrote: jt512 wrote: Learner wrote: The Effect of Body Weight on Climbing Performance Recruit a group of climbers. They must be willing to allow their diet to be manipulated. GROUP 1: CONTROL GROUP Caloric intake of each participant in this group is maintained throughout the study. Average daily caloric intake is determined, then the participants in this group are instructed to consume that many calories on a daily basis. GROUP 2: 'SKINNIER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is decreased considerably. The participants in this group presumably lose weight. GROUP 3: 'FATTER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is increased considerably. The participants in this group presumably gain weight. PROCEDURE Take a few days to determine caloric intake of each participant. Use this measure as the basis for the manipulation of caloric intake for each participant. Measures are first taken on all participants on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. Participants are then instructed to continue to climb as they normally would for a certain period of time, while maintaining a diet as instructed above. The reason participants are instructed to climb as they normally would despite individual differences in routines is to allow for the modifications individuals have made to their climbing routines in response to their personal requirements in terms of recovery. It is an indirect way to control for recovery ability. After the duration of the study, each participant is again tested for 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS One-way, between-subjects Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) on climbing ability. Use measures derived before and after the duration of the study on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, and 3) gripping strength as covariates. This follows the assumption that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. It also accounts for the differences in the degree to which body weight changes between participants. (Option: Use MANOVA instead of ANCOVA, in order to also explore the potential influence of changes in measures of body composition on climbing performance.) CONCLUSION If a "skinnier you" is a better (or worse) climber than a "fatter you," significant differences should be detected in climbing performance between groups 2 ("skinnier") and 3 ("fatter"). If a "skinnier you" or a "fatter you" is a better (or worse) climber than the you as you are right now, we should derive significant differences in climbing performance between group 1 (maintained) and the other two groups ("skinnier" and "fatter"). CURRENT CHALLENGES Develop a reliable measure for climbing ability. Simply using the grade of routes and/or problems one can send may not be a precise enough measure. There are reliable (and precise) ways to measure grip strength. ASSUMPTIONS One assumption of this study is that the effect size depends on the degree to which body weight changes. This is because change in body weight is used as a covariate. Again, we also assume that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. Finally, the study assumes that the climbing technique of each participant will not diminish throughout the study. All climbers are allowed to continue to climb as they normally would, which is an attempt to allow climbing technique to atleast maintain its current level. If anything, climbing technique would more likely improve than deteriorate, simply because climbing technique tends to improve with more climbing experience. So, we assume that climbing technique will not decline during this study, as long as the participants' climbing routines are maintained. Big hint from a professional: make your hypothesis explicit before you try to design your study. Changes in body weight will be associated with changes in climbing performance.
My hypothesis is that both those who gain a lot of weight and those who lose a lot will have higher injury rates than your control group.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
Aug 4, 2011, 3:29 PM
Post #245 of 273
(4724 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
Learner wrote: The Effect of Body Weight on Climbing Performance <snip>
This study seems rather pointless, IMO. It's not even what I've been talking about. Nobody is going to argue that a non-negligible increase in body fat will have no effect on a climber.
What I'm talking about, is that I think WEIGHT--either fat OR muscle--can go and have a positive impact. Look at the skinny bastards that climb strong--Dave Graham, Adam Ondra, Paul Robinson, Daniel Woods, etc. Hypertrophied muscle is just useless, honestly. Look at how much smaller Chris Sharma got. The only muscular climber that I can think of is Dani Andrada, and it doesn't mean he wouldn't climb stronger if he lost the muscle mass.
The main benefit I've ever had from being a semi-muscular climber is that I haven't ever had much issue with a muscular imbalance.
The one undeniable benefit to losing muscle mass (without gaining fat in its place) is decreased stress on the fingers. In addition to my earlier belief: Finger injuries will decrease among any group that is climbing and/or training at its limit if they're losing any weight--fat or muscle.
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
Aug 4, 2011, 3:33 PM
Post #246 of 273
(4721 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
cracklover wrote: Learner wrote: jt512 wrote: Learner wrote: The Effect of Body Weight on Climbing Performance Recruit a group of climbers. They must be willing to allow their diet to be manipulated. GROUP 1: CONTROL GROUP Caloric intake of each participant in this group is maintained throughout the study. Average daily caloric intake is determined, then the participants in this group are instructed to consume that many calories on a daily basis. GROUP 2: 'SKINNIER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is decreased considerably. The participants in this group presumably lose weight. GROUP 3: 'FATTER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is increased considerably. The participants in this group presumably gain weight. PROCEDURE Take a few days to determine caloric intake of each participant. Use this measure as the basis for the manipulation of caloric intake for each participant. Measures are first taken on all participants on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. Participants are then instructed to continue to climb as they normally would for a certain period of time, while maintaining a diet as instructed above. The reason participants are instructed to climb as they normally would despite individual differences in routines is to allow for the modifications individuals have made to their climbing routines in response to their personal requirements in terms of recovery. It is an indirect way to control for recovery ability. After the duration of the study, each participant is again tested for 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS One-way, between-subjects Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) on climbing ability. Use measures derived before and after the duration of the study on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, and 3) gripping strength as covariates. This follows the assumption that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. It also accounts for the differences in the degree to which body weight changes between participants. (Option: Use MANOVA instead of ANCOVA, in order to also explore the potential influence of changes in measures of body composition on climbing performance.) CONCLUSION If a "skinnier you" is a better (or worse) climber than a "fatter you," significant differences should be detected in climbing performance between groups 2 ("skinnier") and 3 ("fatter"). If a "skinnier you" or a "fatter you" is a better (or worse) climber than the you as you are right now, we should derive significant differences in climbing performance between group 1 (maintained) and the other two groups ("skinnier" and "fatter"). CURRENT CHALLENGES Develop a reliable measure for climbing ability. Simply using the grade of routes and/or problems one can send may not be a precise enough measure. There are reliable (and precise) ways to measure grip strength. ASSUMPTIONS One assumption of this study is that the effect size depends on the degree to which body weight changes. This is because change in body weight is used as a covariate. Again, we also assume that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. Finally, the study assumes that the climbing technique of each participant will not diminish throughout the study. All climbers are allowed to continue to climb as they normally would, which is an attempt to allow climbing technique to atleast maintain its current level. If anything, climbing technique would more likely improve than deteriorate, simply because climbing technique tends to improve with more climbing experience. So, we assume that climbing technique will not decline during this study, as long as the participants' climbing routines are maintained. Big hint from a professional: make your hypothesis explicit before you try to design your study. Changes in body weight will be associated with changes in climbing performance. My hypothesis is that both those who gain a lot of weight and those who lose a lot will have higher injury rates than your control group. GO
You're talking about finger injuries? Why do you believe that those losing weight will have more finger injuries? As long as their diet is still well-balanced, what's the issue?
|
|
|
|
|
Kartessa
Aug 4, 2011, 3:47 PM
Post #247 of 273
(4713 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 18, 2008
Posts: 7362
|
spikeddem wrote: cracklover wrote: Learner wrote: jt512 wrote: Learner wrote: The Effect of Body Weight on Climbing Performance Recruit a group of climbers. They must be willing to allow their diet to be manipulated. GROUP 1: CONTROL GROUP Caloric intake of each participant in this group is maintained throughout the study. Average daily caloric intake is determined, then the participants in this group are instructed to consume that many calories on a daily basis. GROUP 2: 'SKINNIER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is decreased considerably. The participants in this group presumably lose weight. GROUP 3: 'FATTER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is increased considerably. The participants in this group presumably gain weight. PROCEDURE Take a few days to determine caloric intake of each participant. Use this measure as the basis for the manipulation of caloric intake for each participant. Measures are first taken on all participants on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. Participants are then instructed to continue to climb as they normally would for a certain period of time, while maintaining a diet as instructed above. The reason participants are instructed to climb as they normally would despite individual differences in routines is to allow for the modifications individuals have made to their climbing routines in response to their personal requirements in terms of recovery. It is an indirect way to control for recovery ability. After the duration of the study, each participant is again tested for 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS One-way, between-subjects Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) on climbing ability. Use measures derived before and after the duration of the study on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, and 3) gripping strength as covariates. This follows the assumption that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. It also accounts for the differences in the degree to which body weight changes between participants. (Option: Use MANOVA instead of ANCOVA, in order to also explore the potential influence of changes in measures of body composition on climbing performance.) CONCLUSION If a "skinnier you" is a better (or worse) climber than a "fatter you," significant differences should be detected in climbing performance between groups 2 ("skinnier") and 3 ("fatter"). If a "skinnier you" or a "fatter you" is a better (or worse) climber than the you as you are right now, we should derive significant differences in climbing performance between group 1 (maintained) and the other two groups ("skinnier" and "fatter"). CURRENT CHALLENGES Develop a reliable measure for climbing ability. Simply using the grade of routes and/or problems one can send may not be a precise enough measure. There are reliable (and precise) ways to measure grip strength. ASSUMPTIONS One assumption of this study is that the effect size depends on the degree to which body weight changes. This is because change in body weight is used as a covariate. Again, we also assume that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. Finally, the study assumes that the climbing technique of each participant will not diminish throughout the study. All climbers are allowed to continue to climb as they normally would, which is an attempt to allow climbing technique to atleast maintain its current level. If anything, climbing technique would more likely improve than deteriorate, simply because climbing technique tends to improve with more climbing experience. So, we assume that climbing technique will not decline during this study, as long as the participants' climbing routines are maintained. Big hint from a professional: make your hypothesis explicit before you try to design your study. Changes in body weight will be associated with changes in climbing performance. My hypothesis is that both those who gain a lot of weight and those who lose a lot will have higher injury rates than your control group. GO You're talking about finger injuries? Why do you believe that those losing weight will have more finger injuries? As long as their diet is still well-balanced, what's the issue?
I think its in reference to the considerable decrease in calorie intake - will probably leave the person with a nutritional deficit
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Aug 4, 2011, 4:45 PM
Post #248 of 273
(4690 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
spikeddem wrote: cracklover wrote: Learner wrote: jt512 wrote: Learner wrote: The Effect of Body Weight on Climbing Performance Recruit a group of climbers. They must be willing to allow their diet to be manipulated. GROUP 1: CONTROL GROUP Caloric intake of each participant in this group is maintained throughout the study. Average daily caloric intake is determined, then the participants in this group are instructed to consume that many calories on a daily basis. GROUP 2: 'SKINNIER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is decreased considerably. The participants in this group presumably lose weight. GROUP 3: 'FATTER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is increased considerably. The participants in this group presumably gain weight. PROCEDURE Take a few days to determine caloric intake of each participant. Use this measure as the basis for the manipulation of caloric intake for each participant. Measures are first taken on all participants on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. Participants are then instructed to continue to climb as they normally would for a certain period of time, while maintaining a diet as instructed above. The reason participants are instructed to climb as they normally would despite individual differences in routines is to allow for the modifications individuals have made to their climbing routines in response to their personal requirements in terms of recovery. It is an indirect way to control for recovery ability. After the duration of the study, each participant is again tested for 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS One-way, between-subjects Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) on climbing ability. Use measures derived before and after the duration of the study on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, and 3) gripping strength as covariates. This follows the assumption that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. It also accounts for the differences in the degree to which body weight changes between participants. (Option: Use MANOVA instead of ANCOVA, in order to also explore the potential influence of changes in measures of body composition on climbing performance.) CONCLUSION If a "skinnier you" is a better (or worse) climber than a "fatter you," significant differences should be detected in climbing performance between groups 2 ("skinnier") and 3 ("fatter"). If a "skinnier you" or a "fatter you" is a better (or worse) climber than the you as you are right now, we should derive significant differences in climbing performance between group 1 (maintained) and the other two groups ("skinnier" and "fatter"). CURRENT CHALLENGES Develop a reliable measure for climbing ability. Simply using the grade of routes and/or problems one can send may not be a precise enough measure. There are reliable (and precise) ways to measure grip strength. ASSUMPTIONS One assumption of this study is that the effect size depends on the degree to which body weight changes. This is because change in body weight is used as a covariate. Again, we also assume that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. Finally, the study assumes that the climbing technique of each participant will not diminish throughout the study. All climbers are allowed to continue to climb as they normally would, which is an attempt to allow climbing technique to atleast maintain its current level. If anything, climbing technique would more likely improve than deteriorate, simply because climbing technique tends to improve with more climbing experience. So, we assume that climbing technique will not decline during this study, as long as the participants' climbing routines are maintained. Big hint from a professional: make your hypothesis explicit before you try to design your study. Changes in body weight will be associated with changes in climbing performance. My hypothesis is that both those who gain a lot of weight and those who lose a lot will have higher injury rates than your control group. GO You're talking about finger injuries? Why do you believe that those losing weight will have more finger injuries? As long as their diet is still well-balanced, what's the issue?
Potential causes off the top of my head:
- Muscle imbalances, as those muscles not recruited in climbing lose mass more quickly.
- Epicondylitis issues, as the tissues see almost equal stress, but have less available to repair them.
- Tendon, tendon pulley, and tendon sheath issues in the hand and fingers. These don't have a blood supply, and my understanding is they get most of their nutrition from what they can get out of the synovial fluid. A limited diet might mean less fluid, and less nutrition in the fluid.
People with more of a medical background could probably triple the number of reasons I came up with. I'm simply making what I consider a pretty educated guess.
Essentially, you're putting severe stress on some pretty small structures - a level of stress that can cause injury even in the best of times - while depriving them of nutrients.
Think about it - let's say, in a best case scenario, losing ten pounds enabled you to climb two letter grades harder. Consider what that means for the holds, the angle of the climb, and the dynamic nature of the climbing, and what those differences would mean for the small structures taking the brunt of those repetitive forces.
If one were to lose weight more gradually, perhaps the above wouldn't be an issue, or not as much of an issue. Who knows.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
granite_grrl
Aug 4, 2011, 5:01 PM
Post #249 of 273
(4679 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 15084
|
Kartessa wrote: spikeddem wrote: cracklover wrote: Learner wrote: jt512 wrote: Learner wrote: The Effect of Body Weight on Climbing Performance Recruit a group of climbers. They must be willing to allow their diet to be manipulated. GROUP 1: CONTROL GROUP Caloric intake of each participant in this group is maintained throughout the study. Average daily caloric intake is determined, then the participants in this group are instructed to consume that many calories on a daily basis. GROUP 2: 'SKINNIER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is decreased considerably. The participants in this group presumably lose weight. GROUP 3: 'FATTER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is increased considerably. The participants in this group presumably gain weight. PROCEDURE Take a few days to determine caloric intake of each participant. Use this measure as the basis for the manipulation of caloric intake for each participant. Measures are first taken on all participants on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. Participants are then instructed to continue to climb as they normally would for a certain period of time, while maintaining a diet as instructed above. The reason participants are instructed to climb as they normally would despite individual differences in routines is to allow for the modifications individuals have made to their climbing routines in response to their personal requirements in terms of recovery. It is an indirect way to control for recovery ability. After the duration of the study, each participant is again tested for 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS One-way, between-subjects Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) on climbing ability. Use measures derived before and after the duration of the study on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, and 3) gripping strength as covariates. This follows the assumption that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. It also accounts for the differences in the degree to which body weight changes between participants. (Option: Use MANOVA instead of ANCOVA, in order to also explore the potential influence of changes in measures of body composition on climbing performance.) CONCLUSION If a "skinnier you" is a better (or worse) climber than a "fatter you," significant differences should be detected in climbing performance between groups 2 ("skinnier") and 3 ("fatter"). If a "skinnier you" or a "fatter you" is a better (or worse) climber than the you as you are right now, we should derive significant differences in climbing performance between group 1 (maintained) and the other two groups ("skinnier" and "fatter"). CURRENT CHALLENGES Develop a reliable measure for climbing ability. Simply using the grade of routes and/or problems one can send may not be a precise enough measure. There are reliable (and precise) ways to measure grip strength. ASSUMPTIONS One assumption of this study is that the effect size depends on the degree to which body weight changes. This is because change in body weight is used as a covariate. Again, we also assume that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. Finally, the study assumes that the climbing technique of each participant will not diminish throughout the study. All climbers are allowed to continue to climb as they normally would, which is an attempt to allow climbing technique to atleast maintain its current level. If anything, climbing technique would more likely improve than deteriorate, simply because climbing technique tends to improve with more climbing experience. So, we assume that climbing technique will not decline during this study, as long as the participants' climbing routines are maintained. Big hint from a professional: make your hypothesis explicit before you try to design your study. Changes in body weight will be associated with changes in climbing performance. My hypothesis is that both those who gain a lot of weight and those who lose a lot will have higher injury rates than your control group. GO You're talking about finger injuries? Why do you believe that those losing weight will have more finger injuries? As long as their diet is still well-balanced, what's the issue? I think its in reference to the considerable decrease in calorie intake - will probably leave the person with a nutritional deficit
|
|
|
|
|
Kartessa
Aug 4, 2011, 5:54 PM
Post #250 of 273
(4652 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 18, 2008
Posts: 7362
|
granite_grrl wrote: Kartessa wrote: spikeddem wrote: cracklover wrote: Learner wrote: jt512 wrote: Learner wrote: The Effect of Body Weight on Climbing Performance Recruit a group of climbers. They must be willing to allow their diet to be manipulated. GROUP 1: CONTROL GROUP Caloric intake of each participant in this group is maintained throughout the study. Average daily caloric intake is determined, then the participants in this group are instructed to consume that many calories on a daily basis. GROUP 2: 'SKINNIER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is decreased considerably. The participants in this group presumably lose weight. GROUP 3: 'FATTER' GROUP Daily caloric intake of participants in this group is increased considerably. The participants in this group presumably gain weight. PROCEDURE Take a few days to determine caloric intake of each participant. Use this measure as the basis for the manipulation of caloric intake for each participant. Measures are first taken on all participants on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. Participants are then instructed to continue to climb as they normally would for a certain period of time, while maintaining a diet as instructed above. The reason participants are instructed to climb as they normally would despite individual differences in routines is to allow for the modifications individuals have made to their climbing routines in response to their personal requirements in terms of recovery. It is an indirect way to control for recovery ability. After the duration of the study, each participant is again tested for 1) body weight, 2) body composition, 3) climbing ability and 4) grip strength. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS One-way, between-subjects Analysis of Covariance (ANCOVA) on climbing ability. Use measures derived before and after the duration of the study on 1) body weight, 2) body composition, and 3) gripping strength as covariates. This follows the assumption that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. It also accounts for the differences in the degree to which body weight changes between participants. (Option: Use MANOVA instead of ANCOVA, in order to also explore the potential influence of changes in measures of body composition on climbing performance.) CONCLUSION If a "skinnier you" is a better (or worse) climber than a "fatter you," significant differences should be detected in climbing performance between groups 2 ("skinnier") and 3 ("fatter"). If a "skinnier you" or a "fatter you" is a better (or worse) climber than the you as you are right now, we should derive significant differences in climbing performance between group 1 (maintained) and the other two groups ("skinnier" and "fatter"). CURRENT CHALLENGES Develop a reliable measure for climbing ability. Simply using the grade of routes and/or problems one can send may not be a precise enough measure. There are reliable (and precise) ways to measure grip strength. ASSUMPTIONS One assumption of this study is that the effect size depends on the degree to which body weight changes. This is because change in body weight is used as a covariate. Again, we also assume that grip strength and body composition influence climbing ability. Finally, the study assumes that the climbing technique of each participant will not diminish throughout the study. All climbers are allowed to continue to climb as they normally would, which is an attempt to allow climbing technique to atleast maintain its current level. If anything, climbing technique would more likely improve than deteriorate, simply because climbing technique tends to improve with more climbing experience. So, we assume that climbing technique will not decline during this study, as long as the participants' climbing routines are maintained. Big hint from a professional: make your hypothesis explicit before you try to design your study. Changes in body weight will be associated with changes in climbing performance. My hypothesis is that both those who gain a lot of weight and those who lose a lot will have higher injury rates than your control group. GO You're talking about finger injuries? Why do you believe that those losing weight will have more finger injuries? As long as their diet is still well-balanced, what's the issue? I think its in reference to the considerable decrease in calorie intake - will probably leave the person with a nutritional deficit I lurve my nutritional deficit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
