|
kansasclimber
Feb 11, 2005, 2:19 AM
Post #1 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 21, 2002
Posts: 541
|
I have been told by many people if you want to be a very good climber, then you must be lucky enough to have the genetics to do so. Is this true? Not all are creatd equally in this sense? Now the thing that comes to mind is the defenition of "good". Well I would have to say 5.13's consistant. Or V10 or so. But thats just my def. of good. What do you think. If you have the passion to be one of the best, can you do it;
regardless???
Stephen
|
|
|
|
|
bb
Feb 11, 2005, 2:58 AM
Post #2 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 31, 2004
Posts: 33
|
Genetics is huge! I think Dave Graham was repointing high 13's his first year climbing. That is all genetics. Yes definitley. You can train your ass off and get better but superior genes will get you further
|
|
|
|
|
vegastradguy
Feb 11, 2005, 3:03 AM
Post #3 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 28, 2002
Posts: 5919
|
i would say that to be a climber who pushes the envelope of what is possible takes some genetics or at least an extraordinary amount of talent.
all it takes to be a good climber is the mindset of having fun and challenging yourself. (obviously, my definitiion of 'good' is not even remotely close to your definition)
|
|
|
|
|
tattooed_climber
Feb 11, 2005, 3:11 AM
Post #4 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 13, 2003
Posts: 4838
|
....i think it has to do more with being Well-rounded....well-rounded in you climbing and personality
in the terms of your climbing, to be well experienced in may styles of climbing and knowledge (sport, trad, alpine, aid, bouldering, mountaineering, gym, Ice, Mixed, first-aid, self-rescue, knots, running, working out at weight gyms, gear, routes, etc etc etc.) benifits of eachone of these can make you a better climber....
exp: if you a sport climber, and the bolts are ran-out, it would help to know how to place a nut..OR if at the crux of a trad route and your pumped out, to A0 out of it.
i don't consider good climbers to climb harder grades, but ussualy this is the case
Who is a better climber? someone who can do a one handed, one pinkie pull up and only climbs sport??? OR someone who climbs trad and sport and works at a gear shop and does some other stuff????
...neither, cus its all opinionated....and my opinion is to be well rounded (and in general is great too cus no one whats to climb with an asshole)
|
|
|
|
|
socalbolter
Feb 11, 2005, 3:26 AM
Post #5 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 27, 2002
Posts: 796
|
Genetics can definitely speed up the improvement curve, but I know of several climbers (including myself) who have gotten better through sheer desire and working our asses off. If you want it bad enough, and try hard enough, eventually you will succeed.
As I tell people often:
If you throw yourself at a route enough times, sooner or later the route will give up.
|
|
|
|
|
collegekid
Feb 11, 2005, 4:03 AM
Post #6 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 7, 2002
Posts: 1852
|
That's not true...some routes will just leave you injured. Imagine the average climber trying out Action Direct and blowing some finger tendons.
The human body has physical limitations, some moreso than others. Same goes for mental aspects of climbing, if you're a wuss like me, you'll never be "well-rounded" to the point that you climb trad, alpine, etc.
If your definition of "good" was lowered to onsighting 5.11, I think the average person could attain this...5.11 is pretty respectable, since it usually requires a combination of good technique and some strength to make it up. Most people can't onsight 5.11, so that is a reasonable benchmark for "good".
|
|
|
|
|
skecthballer
Feb 11, 2005, 4:10 AM
Post #7 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 14, 2003
Posts: 123
|
I think anyone can become the climber they want to achieve, they just have to train hard enough to get to that point.
|
|
|
|
|
socalbolter
Feb 11, 2005, 4:15 AM
Post #8 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 27, 2002
Posts: 796
|
OK, point taken.
I thought that a certain amount of common sense was implied, but let me clarify. If you are somewhat realistic in your expectations and plan on making incremental difficulty gains, what I said above is very accurate.
In your example of Action Directe, my theory would be fine and hold true for someone that was conditioned for climbing on small pockets and monos and was already climbing 14a's or so. Someone with that strength and fitness level could certainly climb 14d with persistence and desire.
Whatever level you are climbing at now could certainly jump a few grades if you were to step up your training and the intensity of your efforts on harder projects.
Again, don't expect to go from 10+ to 14+ based on "wanting it" alone. Rather expect to go from 10+ to 11+ and then solidify before trying to go forward from there.
I've personally seen regular folks get psyched and jump 3-4 letter grades in a single season. If you want it and work for it, it will happen for you too.
|
|
|
|
|
onbelay007
Feb 11, 2005, 4:30 AM
Post #9 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 20, 2004
Posts: 107
|
Steve Prefontaine was a truly amazing distance runner back in the late 60s and early 70s. He probably would have been the best runner the world has ever seen if it wasn't for a tragic car accident that ended his life. Pre and others recognized that he was born with certain abilities to give him an advantage over his competitors. However, if you were to ask Pre why he never lost he respond: "I can endure more pain than anybody I have ever met." Genetics certainly can help but desire, will power, and perseverance will make you the climber you aspire to be. :idea:
|
|
|
|
|
crag_shwagger
Feb 11, 2005, 5:12 AM
Post #10 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 11, 2005
Posts: 142
|
Hmmm... intersting thought my Pops was a climber and i was born into it. I didnt start off so hot but i worked my way up. but him1 on the other hand well hes 53 and Bouncin 5.10s like it going outta style
|
|
|
|
|
bandidopeco
Feb 11, 2005, 5:58 AM
Post #11 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 17, 2004
Posts: 257
|
ahh, the old Genius Vs Hard Work debate. I would say that with climbing genetics probably pre-dispose you to a certain type of climb. How long do you think it'll be before someone redpoints both Action Direct and The Nose?
There was a good article in the Alpinist about Tommy Caldwell's youth in Estes Park. I think that definitly helped him become one of the great climbers. Damn, maybe I should have my kids in some badass mountain town.
|
|
|
|
|
rocklife
Feb 11, 2005, 6:25 AM
Post #12 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 17, 2003
Posts: 3
|
I think that to be at or close to the limits of any sport, its easier to have genetics that support the activity that you are doing.
But then comes the question of limits and the mental aspects of rock climbing. You also have to question what a "good" climber is. If you think that a good climber is one that can pull consistent 5.13 and v10, then I think that you have your standards a little out of whack. For me, the best climber on any given day is the one that tries the hardest and refuses to accept defeat. Somedays that can be a new climber who throws themselves at a v1 until they are bleeing so much they can't grasp the holds anymore. This person sounds like a much better climber to me than the stuck-up elitist v13 climber who refuses to work on some problem because the conditions aren't "perfect". Then comes the question of the falseness of grades and the superficial values that are assigned to them. Thirty years ago, a v10 would have looked out of the question to almost all climbers, except for the elite few who were extremely famous in their time. Nowadays, their is a large percentage of the climbing community that can crank v10 and 5.13's. Even little 10 year olds are doing it. v10 is starting to seem a little less hard, still pretty hard, but a little less so when you compare it to how hard it seemed thirty years ago. In another thirty years we'll all be warming up on 5.12's and v5's. This has a lot to do with human evolution, but it has a lot more to do with mental progress.
So, I think that it helps to have genetics that support your activities because it makes it easier to mentally progress. However, I don't think that in order to be pushing the limits of our sport you need to have good climbing genetics. ***Look at that british dude, cranking hard 5.14/5.15 with a massive beer-belly***
Stop Making Excuses and Try HArder!
, and grades aren't everything, in fact they're nothing!
|
|
|
|
|
jcshaggy
Feb 11, 2005, 7:15 AM
Post #13 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 340
|
Genetics can only get you so far-the rest is up to you. Climbing 5.14's is a whole lot more complicated than that-think of the climber's 'mindset' etc.
|
|
|
|
|
alliwanttodoisclimb
Feb 11, 2005, 1:46 PM
Post #14 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 28, 2005
Posts: 32
|
For clarification, that 'british dude' is John Dunne
I believe that Genetics is only a very small part of it, similiarly to faith, I don't believe in it. I refuse to believe that my destiny is already decided. Which is why I enjoy the freedom of choice and deciding my own destiny...which of course is trad climbing!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
jammer
Feb 11, 2005, 3:11 PM
Post #15 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 25, 2002
Posts: 3472
|
Being built to flash the hardest route does not make anyone a "good" climber. That comes from the heart.
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Feb 11, 2005, 4:12 PM
Post #16 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
good genetics are helpfull but theres more to being a climber than jsut good predispositions.
|
|
|
|
|
keinangst
Feb 11, 2005, 4:31 PM
Post #17 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 1, 2003
Posts: 1408
|
I think the single biggest factor in being a great climber is lack of other responsibilities.
Sure, there's a natural base level that is different for ever person--the grade they climbed their first or second day climbing. Likewise, there is probably a natural cap on the technique/learning curve, beyond which most people won't climb without very regular, regimented training (for example, I am probably V1/V4 on those two scales).
So I submit that the lack of a regular job (hence, responsibility to others) is the biggest single, fundamental factor. So you high school kids--and most of the college folks--keep that in mind. :D
|
|
|
|
|
gat
Feb 11, 2005, 5:26 PM
Post #18 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 3, 2003
Posts: 420
|
In reply to: Steve Prefontaine was a truly amazing distance runner back in the late 60s and early 70s. He probably would have been the best runner the world has ever seen if it wasn't for a tragic car accident that ended his life. Pre and others recognized that he was born with certain abilities to give him an advantage over his competitors. However, if you were to ask Pre why he never lost he respond: "I can endure more pain than anybody I have ever met." Genetics certainly can help but desire, will power, and perseverance will make you the climber you aspire to be. :idea:
Couldn't it be argued that a person's degree of "...desire, will power, and perseverance..." is also partially the result of genetics?
Here is the way I view virtually every human behavior and capability...
I use the bell curve when I think about nature vs. nurture. Based on your genetics, you have upper and lower limits that you are capable of reaching (or falling to). Think of the mid-point as your natural "center". Outside influences (nature) have an effect on you, moving you away from your "center" in one direction or the other. The further from "center" you are, the more difficult it is to keep moving in that direction.
Apply this to climbing...some people could dedicate their life to climbing as hard a grade as possible and never achieve 14d.
|
|
|
|
|
gat
Feb 11, 2005, 5:27 PM
Post #19 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 3, 2003
Posts: 420
|
In reply to: Steve Prefontaine was a truly amazing distance runner back in the late 60s and early 70s. He probably would have been the best runner the world has ever seen if it wasn't for a tragic car accident that ended his life. Pre and others recognized that he was born with certain abilities to give him an advantage over his competitors. However, if you were to ask Pre why he never lost he respond: "I can endure more pain than anybody I have ever met." Genetics certainly can help but desire, will power, and perseverance will make you the climber you aspire to be. :idea:
Couldn't it be argued that a person's degree of "...desire, will power, and perseverance..." is also partially the result of genetics?
Here is the way I view virtually every human behavior and capability...
I use the bell curve when I think about nature vs. nurture. Based on your genetics, you have upper and lower limits that you are capable of reaching (or falling to). Think of the mid-point as your natural "center". Outside influences (nature) have an effect on you, moving you away from your "center" in one direction or the other. The further from "center" you are, the more difficult it is to keep moving in that direction.
Apply this to climbing...some people could dedicate their life to climbing as hard a grade as possible and never achieve 14d.
|
|
|
|
|
horst
Feb 11, 2005, 5:42 PM
Post #20 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 9, 2004
Posts: 19
|
Becoming a "good" climber has nothing to do with genetics--becoming a "great" climber has everything to do with genetics. I've written a lengthy section on this (with research references) in Chapter 1 of Training for Climbing. (If you own the book, tap it for a refresher.) But a couple quick comments on previous posts:
Most folks mention the importance of time, commitment, effort and such, ALL of which are vital to make the most of YOUR genetic potential. However, becoming one of the very best doesn't happen simply by "trying harder" than everyone else. To say that anyone can achieve, say, 5.14 or V14 through disciplined focus and meritorious effort is like saying that anyone can become a 2:20 marathoner or play basketball like Michael Jordan with enough effort.
Also, be careful jumping to hasty conclusions about a "beer belly" equaling "bad genetics." All a beer belly tells you is that a person eat/drinks too much. Some of the most important genetic factors can't be readily seen...such as the location of tendon insertions, which provide massive mechanical advantage and freakish grip strength despite a normal (or pudgy) frame. This, and other, subtle genetic factors make possible the "sends 5.13 in first year of climbing" phenomenon.
Meanwhile, all I can do is dream about that...and train smarter!
|
|
|
|
|
skateman
Feb 11, 2005, 6:10 PM
Post #21 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2003
Posts: 186
|
Well said Eric! Let's hear a hurrumph for the beer belly toting folks such as myself!
S-man
|
|
|
|
|
stardrivin
Feb 11, 2005, 6:27 PM
Post #22 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 7, 2005
Posts: 25
|
if one's goal is to become a media poster child then genetics is very important. that being said, this trait must be cultivated (proper mix of enivormental factors) for it to be maifested.
if one's goal is to be mentally "good," the degree of genetic predisposition may be negligible. (as this type of strength relies relies heavily on environmental influences)
in summation....
1) depends on how you define "good"
2) there is a deal deal of overlap between genes and environment on phenotype
|
|
|
|
|
gunked
Feb 11, 2005, 6:41 PM
Post #23 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2002
Posts: 615
|
Sorry Eric,
Gonna have to disagree with you here. There's one major flaw in your argument: "Good" and "Great" are relative terms!
That said, genetics has little to do with the equation, unless your commitment level is genetically pre-disposed.
In any arena, there are going to be the examples of genetically pre-disposed physical wonders such as Sharma, Caldwell, etc... But what does their performance have to do with me being a "great" climber. We're dealing with some amazingly subjective terms here!!!
-Climber - What type of climbing denotes a 'climber'?
-Great - I promise you all that Eric Horst's (just using you as an exampleof a higher-end climber) definition of great is quite different than mine as is the average gym rat ogleing a 5.13 gym climber on lead.
-Good - same thing!
-Genetics - Physical? mental? emotional?, etc... Which ones? A combination of all three? What about an amazing physical specimen that's too scared to go out of his house?
I submit to you all that COMMITMENT has far more to do with be a "great" climber.
In my world, anybody that uses "Genetics" as an excuse for not being what they consider to be "great" in any aspect of life is using it as an EXCUSE for not being their best! PERIOD! :wink:
My 2 cents
-Jason :D
|
|
|
|
|
jw11733
Feb 11, 2005, 7:01 PM
Post #24 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 27, 2004
Posts: 65
|
OK folks, I't pretty clear what good and great mean in the context of this discussion. I totally agree with what Eric is saying here. I think an interesting related question is what genetic factors make the biggest difference, and how can you compenstate. Eric listed tendon insertion as one important one; not much one can do about that! Height on the other hand also plays an important role, but technique can compensate. What else?
|
|
|
|
|
stardrivin
Feb 11, 2005, 7:08 PM
Post #25 of 56
(5641 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 7, 2005
Posts: 25
|
lactic acid threshold (genetic and environment)
# of muscle fibers (predetermined)
VO2 max (gentic cap w/ environmental influences beneath that cap)
inhibition level (genetic and environment)
strength of connective tissue (genes and enviro)
time to train (environment)
muscle fiber recruitment (environment)
etc........
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
