|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
Nov 30, 2006, 3:40 PM
Post #26 of 81
(5282 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 6087
|
collegekid wrote: Example: T-Pushups. Holding two light dumbells, do a standard pushup. At the top of the pushup, lift one hand until you make a T with both of your arms (at the same time, turn your hips to the side). The combination of pressing, twisting, and holding your body as flat as possible creates a great abs workout. These are incredibly taxing due to the number of muscles worked.
Hey, that's yoga! Side-plank pose :) Want to make it harder? Then lift the top leg perpendicular to the floor once you get into the pose. Or better yet, drop the dumbell and grap your toe with the top hand while streightening the leg.
Overlords mention of Pilates made me feel like Duh, I should have been thinking about that, it is all core work, I should know since I used to teach it... But all this talk about strength training to failure made me not think about Pilates. Still, it is a DIFFERENT kind of core work...
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Nov 30, 2006, 8:46 PM
Post #27 of 81
(5257 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
granite_puller wrote: Movement training is important, and it takes time to devlop it, but once it is developed to a certain degree the returns that you get out of "just climbing" (i am unsure what movement training as you call it really entails beyond climbing) start diminishing.
Movement training is not just climbing, and it is just as important at the higher levels of climbing than the lower levels. If you want to know more about the subject read The Self-Coached Climber.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
dfoote07
Nov 30, 2006, 8:59 PM
Post #28 of 81
(5258 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2006
Posts: 50
|
I was looking at the body strength section, specifically at the Levers and panche workouts. They look good and start off easy, so everyone can work up to them. They are only one minute a day too.
Derek
|
|
|
|
|
zakadamsgt
Dec 1, 2006, 2:31 AM
Post #29 of 81
(5230 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2006
Posts: 110
|
is Performance Rockclimbing a book? Where can I get it? I didnt see it amazon. Please let me know.
Thx
Zak
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Dec 1, 2006, 8:34 AM
Post #30 of 81
(5218 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
yes, performance rock climbing is a book.
as for amazon, here you go.
|
|
|
|
|
fluxus
Dec 1, 2006, 10:22 PM
Post #31 of 81
(5201 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 3, 2003
Posts: 947
|
On topic:
1) The core or trunk of the body plays an important role in many climbing moves not just in roofs. When people talk about core strength they often talk about feet cutting off and getting the feet back on. I think this is the wrong emphasis. What should be considered first is what the trunk is doing while the feet are on the rock, as we are moving.
2) To know what muscles to strengthen you need to know what joints are involved and their specific actions. even the most basic evaluation of climbing movement suggests that extension, laterial flexion and rotation, and plain old stabilazation of the trunk are common features of climbing movement. In addition, the movement of the hip joints is critical as well, specifically hip extensioin and adduction.
Staying focused on the trunk, this means that we want to strengthen the Erector Spinae, the Quadratus Lumborum, Inner and outer Obilques, transverse abdominus, as well as the Abs. As I have stated previously the abs role in climbing appears to be to stableize the pelvis in moves of trunk extension and to assist in laterial flexion.
So what does this mean? it means that in order to most directly address the issue of "core strength" in climbing one needs to find activities that work the muscles mentioned above through the ranges of motion mentioned above.
Something that I consider to be a bit of a mistake is doing activities that emphasize hip flexion for ab strengthening. A good number of ab activities engage the hip flexors such as anchoring the feet during crunches, or doing activities that emphasize the "L" position. How much of a "mistake" is this? Well, for people who have lower back pain it can be a real issue, for everyone else its probably not that big of a deal, but I like to mention it because I see climbers doing this every single day I go to the gym and its not the best simulation of how we use the abs in climbing.
To get a better simulation of climbing I think its probably best to focus on activities that isolate the use of the abs from the hip flexors. This may reduce the chance of lower back pain, and provide a better focus on on the abs. The "roll up" activity found in pilates is a good example of this, go back down to the floow very slowly. since its the eccentric contraction of going back to the floor that more closely resembles a frequent pattern in climbing movement.
I also like the idea of training the obliques and the hip adductors together with laterial side raises, but with a difference: bend the knee of the leg closer to the floor so that all your weight is only supported by the upper leg, this makes the activity a lot more demanding and I think a little closer to climbing.
off topic:
The debate about movement has crept into the thread, but I would like to gently squash the idea that movement somehow is less important to making gains when a climber gets to a "certain level."
Its not that hard to quanitfy the fact that the difficulty of a move is determind by the type and quality of the available balance. In essence this is the very definition of a climbing move.
Because of the way balance, force, time and space are interrelated in movement it means that climbers need not only to be able to generate more force but they also need to have significantly better control over the direction of applied force, better ability to deal with off-set balance and better timing of their movements. Its a package deal, impoving one element such as strength is helpful, but improving all of them is mandatory. The harder the move the more more extreme the demands in ALL aspects. And some of these demands are in the cognitive aspects of movement that greater strength simply will not effect.
We do not master movement skills at one level and then simply apply them at higher levels, our movement skills are constantly developing as we improve and try more difficult climbs. The V10 climber does have a tremendous advantage over the V2 climber in this learning but since the motor demands are so much greater at that level they need it!
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Dec 2, 2006, 8:46 AM
Post #32 of 81
(5173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
fluxus wrote: We do not master movement skills at one level and then simply apply them at higher levels, our movement skills are constantly developing as we improve and try more difficult climbs. The V10 climber does have a tremendous advantage over the V2 climber in this learning but since the motor demands are so much greater at that level they need it!
ditto that. i have a friend who onsights .13 while i climb .12. well, hes not only 'stronger', he also moves better than me. and its in all the little details; while i do not have 'poor technique' (in fact, i believe i improoved a lot in the past year or so), hes is more 'polished', for the lack of a batter word. we always have something new to learn, its just that we need to work on smaller and smaller details when the going gets tough, you need to learn how to drop your knee at .10 and you need to drop your knee while trying hard to stay on two widely seperated micro imperfections on the rock at .12. exegerating a bit offcourse.
|
|
|
|
|
collegekid
Dec 4, 2006, 5:49 AM
Post #33 of 81
(5124 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 7, 2002
Posts: 1852
|
jt512 wrote: collegekid wrote: jt512 wrote: Harder routes tend to by more dynamic, not less, and so timing and coordination tend to gain importance relative to lock-off strength. A problem of training lock-off strength in isolation is that, you won't be accurately replicating the body positions and movements used in climbing. A lock-off done on a bar with your feet hanging is different than a lock-off done with the assistance of the feet on the rock, with momentum generated from the pelvis, and ending with latching a hand hold; that is, a lock-off done while climbing. I suspect that you are falling into the classic error of believing that the reason you fail on moves is that you aren't strong enough, when, in reality, you lack the complex combination of movement skills needed to complete the move. Rather than doing lock-offs to failure, boulder to failure. Jay Jay, I think you oversimplify the problem. Perhaps the reason you think that harder routes require more dynamic movement is because you lack the strength to perform the moves statically? As my strength improves through physical conditioning (campus board, weights) I note a definite improvement in static holding power, such that previously dynamic movements become static. Why would you strive to climb more statically!? This isn't 1970. Dynamic moves are usually (always?) more efficient than static ones. Even if you can do a move statically, you save energy by doing it dynamically; and thus, if you can do it dynamically, you should. I'm way more interested in working on my dynamic movement skills than on improving my "static holding power." Every climber I know who does non-climbing-specific strength training climbs too statically ("too" in the sense that they could be climbing higher grades if they learned to climb more dynamically). I suspect that the training reinforces their tendency to climb too statically. In reply to: Also, bouldering to failure is a great way to get injured (and not train effectively). I don't know how you interpreted my "boulder to failure" statement (which, I admit, was a bit glib). You can certainly pick a level to work at, and do problems at that level until you fail at that level. That is not a recipe for improvement, not injury. Jay
Jay, I agree with most of what you say...and in fact, my climbing would probably benefit most by replacing my strength training with focused climbing training. But, my time and resources are limited, like most people's;
From my past experiences, the best gains are made with a solid mix of pure outdoors climbing (for fun), gym climbing, strength exercises (campus board/hang board), and consistent cross training (antagonist muscles) to avoid injury.
I am unaware if you've posted your typical workout schedule, would you care to enlighten me?
|
|
|
|
|
collegekid
Dec 4, 2006, 5:53 AM
Post #34 of 81
(5123 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 7, 2002
Posts: 1852
|
lena_chita wrote: collegekid wrote: Example: T-Pushups. Holding two light dumbells, do a standard pushup. At the top of the pushup, lift one hand until you make a T with both of your arms (at the same time, turn your hips to the side). The combination of pressing, twisting, and holding your body as flat as possible creates a great abs workout. These are incredibly taxing due to the number of muscles worked. Hey, that's yoga! Side-plank pose :) Want to make it harder? Then lift the top leg perpendicular to the floor once you get into the pose. Or better yet, drop the dumbell and grap your toe with the top hand while streightening the leg. Overlords mention of Pilates made me feel like Duh, I should have been thinking about that, it is all core work, I should know since I used to teach it... But all this talk about strength training to failure made me not think about Pilates. Still, it is a DIFFERENT kind of core work...
Actually, I too noticed the similarity to side-plank. But it's a much different exercise, since it is dynamic in nature, requires a pushup between planks, and has the added difficulty of raising a weight with your free hand. I am pretty much spent after about 16 reps with 15 lb weights.
btw, I found the exercise in an issue of men's health.
|
|
|
|
|
phang_nga
Dec 4, 2006, 12:38 PM
Post #35 of 81
(5120 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 2, 2006
Posts: 326
|
Swiss Ball training can certainly help your core strength by strengthening your stabilizing muscles around your spine.
Check out http://www.spine-health.com/...hab/ball/ball04.html
You can do a lot of the exercises you do with dumbells while sitting on a ball. You can do sit-ups, leg-raises, push-ups or whatever.
|
|
|
|
|
irateplatypus8
Dec 12, 2006, 6:45 AM
Post #36 of 81
(5014 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 18, 2006
Posts: 1
|
I was a competitive gymnast for 15 years before switching to rock climbing to gve my body a break. I found that the best exercises for abs and climbing in general were related to the skills and drills that I learned during gymnastics. Moves like kips provide some of the best ab work available. Also leg lifts no swinging allowed, v-ups, hollow holds of all varieties, and reverse leg lifts done on the floor along with dynamic moves such as holding tight in handstands, flips, and swinging. All these things proved amazingly effective in rock climbing.
|
|
|
|
|
granite_puller
Dec 12, 2006, 4:49 PM
Post #37 of 81
(4983 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 6, 2006
Posts: 28
|
Couple of questions: what is a kip, a reverse leg lift and a v-pullup? I have been using some gymnastics type core workouts like hollows, and I have been very impressed by the reuslts. I didnt have a very weak core before, but after only a couple weeks of doing exercises that really stress the stabilizer muscles like these do i feel 100 times more comfortable holding tension in my body on overhangs and such and my climbing has improved a ton.
|
|
|
|
|
pjdf
Dec 12, 2006, 7:48 PM
Post #38 of 81
(4963 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 23, 2006
Posts: 307
|
In a related question, what's a hollow? Anyone know sites with good descriptions and pictures of all of these exercises?
|
|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
Dec 12, 2006, 9:20 PM
Post #39 of 81
(4941 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 6087
|
Well, I know what the kip is -- I watch the kids doing it every Saturday in my daughters gymnastics class...
Here is is with pictures:
http://www.gymnasticsrevolution.com/Parents15.htm
The other things I'm guessing...
(This post was edited by lena_chita on Dec 12, 2006, 9:22 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
minn8325
Dec 18, 2006, 8:42 AM
Post #40 of 81
(4853 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 20, 2006
Posts: 33
|
easiest answer there is lift wieghts replace all bench exercises with a swiss ball and use bumbells. This will train all the stabilization you need.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Dec 18, 2006, 8:45 AM
Post #41 of 81
(4851 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
minn8325 wrote: easiest answer there is lift wieghts replace all bench exercises with a swiss ball and use bumbells. This will train all the stabilization you need.
Is that supposed to be English?
|
|
|
|
|
whoa
Dec 19, 2006, 5:13 AM
Post #42 of 81
(4784 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 19, 2005
Posts: 193
|
jt512 wrote: minn8325 wrote: easiest answer there is lift wieghts replace all bench exercises with a swiss ball and use bumbells. This will train all the stabilization you need. Is that supposed to be English?
Well, yeah! If you can butterfly-press two homeless people on a ball of cheese, you are all set.
|
|
|
|
|
zeke_sf
Dec 21, 2006, 8:43 PM
Post #43 of 81
(4740 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2006
Posts: 18730
|
^^^^^hahaha. living in S.F., this will definitely boost my workout potential through the freaking roof. for a bit of pocket change, there's a vast array of willing bumbells to choose from.
I don't know if anybody answered the question of what "the core" is, but an Eric Horst article defined it (paraphrasing here) as everything between your arms down to your waist. pretty simple.
|
|
|
|
|
danutter
Dec 21, 2006, 9:47 PM
Post #44 of 81
(4725 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 15, 2006
Posts: 17
|
From About.com, written by one Elizabeth Quinn, M.S., an exercise physiologist and health information content producer and editor.
"Core stability training is essential to sports performance and injury prevention. The body's core muscles are the foundation for all other movement. The muscles of the torso stabilize the spine and provide a solid foundation for movement in the extremities.
These core muscles lie deep within the torso. They generally attach to the spine, pelvis and muscles that support the scapula. When these muscles contract, we stabilize the the spine, pelvis and shoulders and create a solid base of support. We are then able to generate powerful movements of the extremities."
Which is why yoga and Pilates are good for core training, and why former gymnasts often make good climbers...the motions and muscles needed to do those motions are similar.
On roof problems, you might not think you're working your core, but there's actually NO WAY to keep a body horizontal, or even close to it, without some level of core strength.
This isn't really that difficult a concept, folks.
|
|
|
|
|
joswald
May 5, 2008, 2:37 PM
Post #45 of 81
(4447 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 19, 2008
Posts: 64
|
Go on if you can never train technique or strength seperately in a climbing specific manner then how about one handed slab climbing?
|
|
|
|
|
Tornapart
May 8, 2008, 6:52 PM
Post #46 of 81
(4331 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 23, 2008
Posts: 1
|
Everyone keeps saying the same things over and over again. Let me ask everyone a question. In most pro athletes what came first skill or muscle? Skill! Skill always comes before muscle. But my second thing is sometimes it does take muscle to make improvements because if you can't hold onto that little crimp before making that dynamic move to the jug while you won't be going anywhere. Also everyone is different no one is going to do the same training as everyone else does. The pros don't the average joes don't. Use what is best for you. Me personally I climb 3 times a week doing different things. I have my climbing goals. I do circuits 4 times, than I do a mix of circuits and treverse. Not only does this improve my techinque but my stregth as well. But I also hit the gym. I work my pecs , my abs, my shoulders, my biceps, my cafes, my forearms. I try and get as much variety as possible because having muscles not worked makes everything else just as weak. But about specific exec I know none but I am going to talk to a personal trainer because who would know more than them in my humble opinion no one.
|
|
|
|
|
borntorocku
May 8, 2008, 8:23 PM
Post #47 of 81
(4306 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 12, 2003
Posts: 88
|
Another perspective on it: http://www.gymjones.com/schedule.php?date=20080423
|
|
|
|
|
caliclimbergrl
May 9, 2008, 4:36 PM
Post #48 of 81
(4261 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 19, 2008
Posts: 354
|
Normally I avoid replying directly to your posts, because I think you're kind of an asshole and I'm not really interested in getting into a pissing contest with you. But I have to say something about this comment of yours:
"Why would you strive to climb more statically!? This isn't 1970. Dynamic moves are usually (always?) more efficient than static ones. Even if you can do a move statically, you save energy by doing it dynamically; and thus, if you can do it dynamically, you should. I'm way more interested in working on my dynamic movement skills than on improving my "static holding power." Every climber I know who does non-climbing-specific strength training climbs too statically ("too" in the sense that they could be climbing higher grades if they learned to climb more dynamically). I suspect that the training reinforces their tendency to climb too statically."
I COMPLETELY disagree with that. Certainly, there is a time and a place for dynamic moves and sometimes they are the best move to do. And I do agree with you that if you're climbing repertoire is limited exclusively to static movement, you're not going to advance as far in difficulty of grades. But most of the time, moving statically is better or at least just as good of an option. And moving dynamically is hardly ever more efficient.
(This post was edited by caliclimbergrl on May 10, 2008, 1:57 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
pyrosis
May 9, 2008, 4:56 PM
Post #49 of 81
(4238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 1, 2004
Posts: 150
|
In a hollow a gymnasts hips are turned under, legs are tight chest rounded inward. Lie on your back on the floor with your arms by your ears. Lift your legs slightly off the ground. Lift your head slightly off the floor. Your lower back should maintain contact with the floor.
From
http://www.drillsandskills.com
They have great descriptions of enough exercises and skills to learn to keep you busy for years. Literally.
My favorites for core are:
Knees to elbows (or feet to hands with legs straight) while hanging from a bar/jug
L-hangs from a bar
L-supports on rings or parallettes
Tuck sit and tuck planche on parallettes
Front lever variations (both knees bent, one knee bent, etc)
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
May 9, 2008, 5:33 PM
Post #50 of 81
(4216 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
caliclimbergrl wrote: Normally I avoid replying directly to your posts, because I think you're kind of an asshole and I'm not really interested in getting into a pissing contest with you. But I have to say something about this comment of yours: "Why would you strive to climb more statically!? This isn't 1970. Dynamic moves are usually (always?) more efficient than static ones. Even if you can do a move statically, you save energy by doing it dynamically; and thus, if you can do it dynamically, you should. I'm way more interested in working on my dynamic movement skills than on improving my "static holding power." Every climber I know who does non-climbing-specific strength training climbs too statically ("too" in the sense that they could be climbing higher grades if they learned to climb more dynamically). I suspect that the training reinforces their tendency to climb too statically." I COMPLETELY disagree with that. Certainly, there is a time and a place of dynamic holds and sometimes they are the best move to do. And I do agree with you that if you're climbing repertoire is limited exclusively to static movement, you're not going to advance as far in difficulty of grades. But most of the time, moving statically is better or at least just as good of an option.
Would you care to back that up with some evidence, or logic perhaps?
In reply to: And moving dynamically is hardly ever more efficient.
I think that statement violates physics, but whatever.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
