|
milesenoell
Dec 4, 2008, 2:09 AM
Post #26 of 48
(6055 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 19, 2006
Posts: 1156
|
I thought that those figures were a little off, but when you try doing the pullups with turquoise/neon spandex on you can pull way more weight than normal. It's all about the spandex.
|
|
|
|
|
rock_fencer
Dec 4, 2008, 2:25 AM
Post #27 of 48
(6052 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 7, 2005
Posts: 752
|
is 5.13 the new 5.10 on sport or trad? I was happy meeting my goal of climbing 10's on gear but shit now your telling me the new 10 is a 13... damn just have to start training carrying all my friend's racks up at the gym
|
|
|
|
|
Physicist
Dec 4, 2008, 4:20 AM
Post #28 of 48
(6037 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 19, 2008
Posts: 13
|
I don't remember if the book those figures are in is the one I'm thinking of, but if it is, it listed what an average of 5.XX climber should be able to do in a broad range of things, i.e. pull-ups, deadhangs on very small holds, flexibility, etc. etc., with the intention of the reader looking at all of these things to find out what their weakness is and work on it.
Basically, all the people who are looking at this one statistic and going "THIS IS NOT A NECESSARY OR SUFFICIENT CONDITION AND IS THUS ENTIRELY USELESS" should shutup.
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Dec 4, 2008, 4:40 AM
Post #29 of 48
(6030 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
Physicist wrote: I don't remember if the book those figures are in is the one I'm thinking of, but if it is, it listed what an average of 5.XX climber should be able to do in a broad range of things, i.e. pull-ups, deadhangs on very small holds, flexibility, etc. etc., with the intention of the reader looking at all of these things to find out what their weakness is and work on it. Basically, all the people who are looking at this one statistic and going "THIS IS NOT A NECESSARY OR SUFFICIENT CONDITION AND IS THUS ENTIRELY USELESS" should shutup.
We don't have a poll here but I'd guess that VAST majority here are not able to do such powerful pulldowns.
I know probably 2 dozen people that can and do consistently climb 5.12. I can think of 2 that could do a 190% body weight pullup.
Just for grins, I'll go to the gym tomorrow and see how much I can pull down on a single rep. I'm guessing 180. I weigh 140.
|
|
|
|
|
aerili
Dec 4, 2008, 6:34 AM
Post #30 of 48
(6017 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 13, 2006
Posts: 1166
|
NEWSFLASH, PEOPLE.
Pull-DOWNS are not the same as pull-UPS. Furthermore, different brands of pull-DOWN machines often create each "pound" of weight differently. On one brand, you may lift far more total pounds than on another. This is mainly due to the system of pulleys/cams/cables/gears. So, I'm sorry to say, on a pull down machine a pound is not a pound is not a pound...exactly. Not in the way F=m(a) when just walking around normally on Earth, anyway.
alexoverhere wrote: She surveyed climbers, averaged several measurements such as pull-down strength, and published the results. No one ever said entries of that table were necessary or sufficient conditions.
If she used a pull-down machine, I am sure you all would need to use the same make and model in order to compare yourselves truly accurately against her percentages.
Just so it's understood: many people appear to lift more on an average pull-DOWN machine than they do on a pull-UP--again, mainly due to the skewed measure of pounds a machine gives. But to really know for sure, you would need to measure the precise amount of WORK you did for each exercise. Nevermind, I wasn't thinking. They still shouldn't be measurable against each other even if you did this, because the pounds aren't typically equal.
edited for clarity
edited again for being stupid
(This post was edited by aerili on Dec 4, 2008, 7:06 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
aerili
Dec 4, 2008, 6:40 AM
Post #31 of 48
(6013 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 13, 2006
Posts: 1166
|
Oh, yah, forgot to add: many machines that use cams (i.e. a lot of them) often do not mimic the normal human torque capability patterns.
Again, this would factor into creating differences in your pull-down vs pull-up total weight and make them hard to compare.
(This post was edited by aerili on Dec 4, 2008, 7:04 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
limeydave
Dec 4, 2008, 6:50 PM
Post #32 of 48
(5987 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 23, 2006
Posts: 2453
|
Physicist wrote: I don't remember if the book those figures are in is the one I'm thinking of, but if it is, it listed what an average of 5.XX climber should be able to do in a broad range of things, i.e. pull-ups, deadhangs on very small holds, flexibility, etc. etc., with the intention of the reader looking at all of these things to find out what their weakness is and work on it. Basically, all the people who are looking at this one statistic and going "THIS IS NOT A NECESSARY OR SUFFICIENT CONDITION AND IS THUS ENTIRELY USELESS" should shutup.
Utterly worthless.
That one original table which is shown infers a relationship between climbing grade and one specific feat of strength. (and it's crap)
You want to add scope to this, cool - don't forget to add all the intangibles like mental strength.
And I will not 'shutup'.
This kind of false information gets people killed.
It's what is wrong with climbing.
That and the OP's 8a.nu spray.
|
|
|
|
|
limeydave
Dec 4, 2008, 6:56 PM
Post #33 of 48
(5982 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 23, 2006
Posts: 2453
|
Now if someone would like to take my sarcasm about getting people killed seriously and get outraged and somebody else could quote the dictionary at someone, we'll be about done with this ridiculous thread.
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Dec 4, 2008, 6:58 PM
Post #34 of 48
(5982 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
limeydave wrote: This kind of false information gets people killed. It's what is wrong with climbing. That and the OP's 8a.nu spray.
It's hard to call it spray when the OP isn't really doing anything special.
Cheers,
Sprangry
|
|
|
|
|
limeydave
Dec 4, 2008, 8:17 PM
Post #35 of 48
(5964 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 23, 2006
Posts: 2453
|
angry wrote: limeydave wrote: This kind of false information gets people killed. It's what is wrong with climbing. That and the OP's 8a.nu spray. It's hard to call it spray when the OP isn't really doing anything special. Cheers, Sprangry
Is there no honor amongst spraylords?
Seems you'd eat your way out of a pile of dead babies if you thought it'd feed your ego.
|
|
|
|
|
bababooey1
Dec 4, 2008, 10:56 PM
Post #36 of 48
(5932 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 13, 2008
Posts: 16
|
im not an expert, but i would expect hand/finger strength and endurance to correlate with climbing skill MUCH more closely than pullup/pulldown strength.
i weigh ~155 and at my peak could do a chinup with about 105lbs on my belt(never tested my absolute max, but this is an estimate based on the fact that i was doing multiple sets of 3-4 reps with 95lbs). beyond a certain level of base strength, which can be achieved long before pulling such heavy weight, i dont think there is really any benefit to climbing. and there is no way in hell i could climb a 5.12 or even the great majority of 5.11's. similarly, there isnt a day at the gym where i dont see a bunch of people climb WAY harder routes then me despite being significantly weaker than me in pure pulling strength. if i could start my training over again knowing that i would be getting into climbing, i would have spent a LOT less time building pullup strength, and a lot more time just climbing. aside from the extremely elite climber on the extremely elite route where he may actually need to do the equivalent of a one arm pullup, i cant imagine any scenario where you would be in a position where you would be able to climb if you could pull 190% of your bodyweight, but not if you were able to pull only 120%. like i said before, it seems much much much more likely that such a situation would arise with regard to hand/finger strength. anyways, there are women who climb 5.14-5.15...i SERIOUSLY doubt that they can do one arm chinups.
|
|
|
|
|
dudemanbu
Dec 4, 2008, 11:40 PM
Post #37 of 48
(5916 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2005
Posts: 941
|
Now THAT would be something to spray about.
In reply to: "limeydave" Seems you'd eat your way out of a pile of dead babies if you thought it'd feed your ego.
(This post was edited by dudemanbu on Dec 4, 2008, 11:41 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
Senate156
Dec 4, 2008, 11:56 PM
Post #38 of 48
(5904 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 11, 2008
Posts: 73
|
actually they are the same, essentially.
Lat Pull-Downs and Pull-Ups (assuming, hands are placed in the same position) are in all practical dimensions the same thing. Now, that being said, I think it would be MUCH easier to do pull-ups with a weight belt and plates around my waist than to do lat pull-downs with 375ish pounds...there'd have to be a hell of a restraining device to prevent me from cheating.
The differences you make note of are because of:
1. inaccurate representation of how much force is actually being moved by the pulley action of the machines.
2. People tend to cheat much more frequently when it comes to Lat Pull-downs. (arching their backs, using their abs, misc. other 'hybrid' lifts)
3. And yeah, the weight you work with on lat pull-downs does vary from machine to machine do to all the factors you mentioned.
(This post was edited by Senate156 on Dec 4, 2008, 11:57 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
aerili
Dec 5, 2008, 5:04 AM
Post #39 of 48
(5876 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 13, 2006
Posts: 1166
|
Senate156 wrote: actually they are the same, essentially.
Senate,
These exercises work the same major muscle group and most of the same secondary movers in the same relative plane of motion, but regardless they are hardly the same exercise.
Now IF you are ALSO taking data points and measuring them against climbing ability (the topic at hand), you can hardly substitute one in for the other at will because you believe "they are essentially the same."
Lastly, there is a fundamental difference between pull-ups and pull-downs: in pull-ups, the closed chain end of the system is your hands. In pull-DOWNS, the closed chain end of the system is your entire lower body. This means you have some differing secondary muscle groups firing in each that don't do much in the other.
Pull-downs tend to engage erector spinae more and hip flexors far more.
Pull-ups tend to fire abdominals more as a stabilizer (vs hip flexors in pull-downs) as the body wants to swing forward, and I personally believe the sternal pec major tends to be recruited more heavily in pull-ups.
|
|
|
|
|
greatgarbanzo
Dec 5, 2008, 5:20 AM
Post #40 of 48
(5871 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2001
Posts: 360
|
Well, my hardest onsigth is 11a. I weight 160lb. I can lift 110lb + bodyweigth.
I can also do 3 one arm pull ups. Is not right to say that you need to "double" your strength to do a one armer.
|
|
|
|
|
greatgarbanzo
Dec 5, 2008, 5:22 AM
Post #41 of 48
(5869 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2001
Posts: 360
|
Well, my hardest onsigth is 11a. I weight 160lb. I can lift 110lb + bodyweigth.
I can also do 3 one arm pull ups. Is not right to say that you need to "double" your strength to do a one armer.
|
|
|
|
|
boadman
Dec 5, 2008, 5:52 AM
Post #42 of 48
(5865 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 7, 2003
Posts: 726
|
bothomsen wrote: Hi just moving on, from the prvius subject.... :-) how much can you lift when doing just one full movement Pull-up???? me: 138llbs - can pull extra 121lbs. =187% app. Onsigt F6b+ ~5.10c http://www.8a.nu/user/Profile.aspx?UserId=19230
I would have to be able to do a pullup with over 200 lbs according to the chart. The most I've ever been able to do is about 100.
|
|
|
|
|
getout87
Dec 5, 2008, 2:51 PM
Post #43 of 48
(5843 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 30, 2007
Posts: 597
|
My hardest onsight is 11a. I weight 155-160, so I should be able to pull like 290? Yeah freaking right. I can do 10 or 15 (i can't remember) with the weight of my rack on, and that's it.
That is a ridiculous chart.
|
|
|
|
|
dudemanbu
Dec 5, 2008, 4:12 PM
Post #45 of 48
(5823 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2005
Posts: 941
|
greatgarbanzo wrote: Well, my hardest onsigth is 11a. I weight 160lb. I can lift 110lb + bodyweigth. I can also do 3 one arm pull ups. Is not right to say that you need to "double" your strength to do a one armer.
This is the kind of thing i wonder about. I can't even do a single arm lock off, and despite my body weight being similar to yours, my onsight is similar.
The OP would argue that if I were as strong as you, I would probably be onsighting 5.12-5.13. It's a shame I'll probably never get that strong to find out, and I'll have to just continue to refine my technique, endurance, and finger strength.
|
|
|
|
|
greatgarbanzo
Dec 5, 2008, 5:09 PM
Post #46 of 48
(5796 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2001
Posts: 360
|
"....I'll have to just continue to refine my technique, endurance, and finger strength...."
Tell me about it! jajajaja
Actually I can onsight 11a on trad. My guest is that I would do better on sport if I wasn`t so scare of bolts! Yep, there it is, I said it! I only trust bolts placed by me.
To understand that you will have to live in Venezuela!
(This post was edited by greatgarbanzo on Dec 5, 2008, 5:24 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
jgill
Dec 6, 2008, 3:29 AM
Post #47 of 48
(5750 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 18, 2002
Posts: 653
|
one-arm pull-up + 20 pounds (40 years ago). I.e., 175 lbs to 195 lbs. This stuff is fun, but has little bearing on climbing skills.
|
|
|
|
|
|
