No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Strength Training in Climbing: A Systematic Review
Abstract
The aim of this review was to provide an overview of the state of research on strength training in climbing and to answer the
question how climbing performance, maximum grip strength, upper-limb strength endurance, maximum upper-limb strength, and
upper-limb power as dependent variables are affected by different types of training. Moreover, we addressed the question which
training methods and training parameters are most effective in increasing climbing and bouldering performance. Searches of
MEDLINE (PubMed), SPORTDiscus, ProQuest, and Google Scholar were conducted for studies that met the following criteria: (a)
examining effects of training on at least one of the dependent variables, (b) controlled longitudinal design with pretest and posttest,
and (c) detailed information on training parameters and subjects. Twelve studies were included into the review. The quality of the
studies was rated according to the PEDro scale, and the training interventions were classified according to training method
(maximum strength [MS], hypertrophy [HYP], and endurance [END]), specificity (specific, semispecific, and unspecific), and static or
dynamic exercises. For 9 of the 12 studies, effect sizes were calculated and the treatments compared. The results showed (a)
positive effects of strength training on all variables, (b) a trend toward a mixture of MS and HYP or END training, (c) a trend toward
semispecific exercise, and (d) similar effects for dynamic and static exercise with a trend toward a mixture of both. Coaches and
athletes are recommended to combine static and dynamic semispecific exercises in a HYP and MS or END training.
Key Words: performance, specificity, training methods, strength endurance, power, grip strength
... To improve CSHT, the results suggest reducing body weight, as well as improving HGS and pull-up performance. However, climbing is characterized by a wide spectrum of conditional and coordinative abilities that are relevant to performance [31]. Therefore, isolated training of the parameters found appears to be insufficient for an optimal training strategy. ...
... Therefore, isolated training of the parameters found appears to be insufficient for an optimal training strategy. According to [31], the best effect when undertaking conditioning training in climbing is obtained through a mixture of dynamic and static exercises in a semi-specific setting, combining hypertrophy, maximum strength, and endurance. In terms of more climbing-specific training, [32] states that interval bouldering works best as a form of sport-specific conditioning training, which may, in parallel, show positive effects on HGS and pull-up performance. ...
Handgrip strength (HGS) appears to be an indicator of climbing performance. The trans-ferability of HGS measurements obtained using a hand dynamometer and factors that influence the maximal climbing-specific holding time (CSHT) are largely unclear. Forty-eight healthy subjects (27 female, 21 male; age: 22.46 ± 3.17 years; height: 172.76 ± 8.91 cm; weight: 69.07 ± 12.41 kg; body fat: 20.05% ± 7.95%) underwent a maximal pull-up test prior to the experiment and completed a self-assessment using a Likert scale questionnaire. HGS was measured using a hand dynamometer, whereas CSHT was measured using a fingerboard. Multiple linear regressions showed that weight, maximal number of pull-ups, HGS normalized by subject weight, and length of the middle finger had a significant effect on the maximal CSHT (non-dominant hand: R 2 corr = 0.63; dominant hand: R 2 corr = 0.55). Deeper exploration using a machine learning model including all available data showed a predictive performance with R 2 = 0.51 and identified another relevant parameter for the regression model. These results call into question the use of hand dynamometers and highlight the performance-related importance of body weight in climbing practice. The results provide initial indications that finger length may be used as a sub-factor in talent scouting.
... Speed climbers require higher levels of strength, anaerobic power, and speed compared to climbers of other disciplines [3][4][5]. Traditionally, climbing training programs have primarily focused on developing upper limb capabilities [6]. However, recent studies have highlighted the significant influence of the lower body in speed climbing, as it demands different abilities compared to other climbing disciplines, founding strong correlations between running time and leg power output and hypertrophy [7][8][9]. ...
ABSTRACT: Speed climbing will be a new discipline in Paris 2024. The physical requirements of speed climbing
are different from the other climbing modalities due to the short event time requiring higher level of strength
and power. These parameters have been measured through the Force-Velocity (F-V) profile in different climbing
disciplines. However, there are no known results evaluating different speed climbing abilities to establish whether
F-V relationship is a determining factor between performance levels. The purpose of this study was to evaluate
the upper and lower limbs F-V profile in different speed climbing abilities considering sex. Twenty-six speed
climbers were divided into two groups based on their level of performance: international level (men n = 7 and
women n = 2) and national level (men n = 8 and women n = 7). Participants performed pull-ups and squat
incremental tests and F-V profile variables [Maximum theorical values of force (F0), velocity (V0) and power (Pmax)],
one-repetition maximum value (1RM) and %1RM where peak power was expressed were collected using a linear
encoder. There were significant differences in F0, relative force, %1RM where peak power was expressed, and
1RM in pull-ups (p < 0.05) between groups. However, there were not significant differences between groups
in squat variables. No significant sex differences were found in any variable. There were moderate-strong
correlations between running time and 1RM (pull-ups and squat), F0 and FV-slope (pull-ups) (p < 0.05) analyzed
in the whole group. In conclusion, F0 and 1RM in pull-ups were significantly higher in international climbers.
Therefore, national climbers should focus their training on improving force by training with heavy loads. Additionally,
squat F-V profile variables do not seem to be as important as in the pull-up for performance.
... KEYWORDS injury, hypertrophy, hypoxia, ischemia, intermittent exercise, isometric contraction, strength, oxidative capacity Introduction Sport climbers heavily rely on finger flexor contractions, making finger flexor strength and endurance crucial predictors of climbing performance (1,2). Previous research has extensively investigated the physiological adaptations induced by highintensity training (HIT) on finger strength and endurance (3,4). For example, specific maximal strength and hypertrophy training designed for climbers have demonstrated significant increases in finger flexor strength and endurance after 5-10 weeks of training (5)(6)(7)(8). ...
Introduction: It is acknowledged that training during recovery periods after injury
involves reducing both volume and intensity, often resulting in losses of sportspecific
fitness. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the effects of highintensity
training (HIT) and low-intensity training with blood flow restriction (LIT
+ BFR) of the finger flexors in order to preserve climbing-specific strength and
endurance.
Methods: In a crossover design, thirteen intermediate climbers completed two 5-
week periods of isometric finger flexors training on a hangboard. The trainings
consisted of ten LIT + BFR (30% of max) or HIT sessions (60% of max without
BFR) and were undertaken in a randomized order. The training session consisted
of 6 unilateral sets of 1 min intermittent hanging at a 7:3 work relief ratio for
both hands. Maximal voluntary contraction (MVC), force impulse from the 4 min
all out test (W), critical force (CF) and force impulse above the critical force (W’)
of the finger flexors were assessed before, after the first, and after the second
training period, using a climbing-specific dynamometer. Forearm muscle
oxidative capacity was estimated from an occlusion test using near-infrared
spectroscopy at the same time points.
Results: Both training methods led to maintaining strength and endurance
indicators, however, no interaction (P > 0.05) was found between the training
methods for any strength or endurance variable. A significant increase (P =
0.002) was found for W, primarily driven by the HIT group (pretest—25078 ±
7584 N.s, post-test—27327 ± 8051 N.s, P = 0.012, Cohen’s d = 0.29). There were
no significant (P > 0.05) pre- post-test changes for MVC (HIT: Cohen’s d = 0.13;
LIT + BFR: Cohen’s d = −0.10), CF (HIT: Cohen’s d = 0.36; LIT + BFR = 0.05), W`
(HIT: Cohen’s d = −0.03, LIT + BFR = 0.12), and forearm muscle oxidative
capacity (HIT: Cohen’s d = −0.23; LIT + BFR: Cohen’s d = −0.07).
Conclusions: Low volume of BFR and HIT led to similar results, maintaining
climbing-specific strength and endurance in lower grade and intermediate
climbers. It appears that using BFR training may be an alternative approach after
finger injury as low mechanical impact occurs during training.
... The heterogeneity of the tests and the lack of reports on test quality can lead to problems when comparing the effects of different training interventions (13). In addition, researchers, coaches, and athletes find it difficult to select appropriate tests for their diagnostic test batteries. ...
Due to the increasing popularity of climbing, the corresponding diagnostics are gaining in importance for both science and practice. This review aims to give an overview of the quality of different diagnostic testing-and measurement methods for performance, strength, endurance, and flexibility in climbing. A systematic literature search for studies including quantitative methods and tests for measuring different forms of strength, endurance, flexibility, or performance in climbing and bouldering was conducted on PubMed and SPORT Discus. Studies and abstracts were included if they a) worked with a representative sample of human boulderers and/or climbers, b) included detailed information on at least one test, and c) were randomized-controlled-, cohort-, cross-over-, intervention-, or case studies. 156 studies were included into the review. Data regarding subject characteristics, as well as the implementation and quality of all relevant tests were extracted from the studies. Tests with similar exercises were grouped and the information on a) measured value, b) unit, c) subject characteristics (sex and ability level), and d) quality criteria (objectivity, reliability, validity) were bundled and displayed in standardized tables. In total, 63 different tests were identified, of which some comprised different ways of implementation. This clearly shows that there are no uniform or standard procedures in climbing diagnostics, for tests on strength, endurance or flexibility. Furthermore, only few studies report data on test quality and detailed information on sample characteristics. This not only makes it difficult to compare test results, but at the same time makes it impossible to give precise test recommendations. Nevertheless, this overview of the current state of research contributes to the creation of more uniform test batteries in the future.
... Arm muscle endurance is the ability of a muscle or group of muscles to be able to contract dynamically or statically by holding a load for a relatively long time, to be able to maintain stability between the traction and thrust exerted by the arm muscles in order to create consistency of movement from the start. End of the game (Langer et al., 2022). The use of arm muscle endurance in archers is when pulling the bow, aiming (holding), and releasing arrows. ...
The purpose of this study was to determine the effect of the triceps press down, seated rowing and endurance exercise methods on increasing arm muscle strength. Factorial method 2 x 2. There were 24 research samples. The pull up test instrument was for endurance and the holding bow digitec test. ANOVA data analysis technique α = 0.05. Results (1) there is a significant difference between the triceps press-down exercise and seated rowing exercise in increasing arm muscle strength. (2) There is a significant difference in the effect of athletes who have high and low muscle endurance on increasing arm muscle strength. (3) There is a significant interaction between triceps press down and seated rowing exercises with muscle endurance (high and low) on arm muscle strength in archery athletes.
... Upper limb strength training is essential in sports performance [1,2] and in improving autonomy for the activities of daily living [3,4]. ...
Pullover and straight arm pulldown exercises are commonly used in resistance exercise programs to improve sports performance or in physical activity health programs. This study aimed to evaluate the individual electromyographic (EMG) activity of the pectoralis major (clavicular, sternal, and costal portions), latissimus dorsi, anterior deltoid, triceps brachii, and rectus abdominis muscles in a barbell pullover exercise at a 100% biacromial width and a straight arm pulldown exercise at a 100% and 150% biacromial width and to compare the EMG activity in these selected muscles and exercises. Twenty healthy and physically active adults performed a set of eight repetitions of each exercise against 30% of their body mass. The barbell pullover exercise presented a higher EMG activity (p ≤ 0.01) than the straight arm pulldown exercise in both biacromial widths in all evaluated muscles except for the latissimus dorsi and the triceps brachii. These muscles showed the highest EMG activity in the straight arm pulldown exercise at both biacromial widths. In all of the exercises and muscles evaluated, the concentric phase showed a greater EMG activity than the eccentric phase. In conclusion, the barbell pullover exercise can highlight muscle activity in the pectoralis major (mainly in the sternal and lower portions), triceps brachii, and rectus abdominis muscles. However, the straight arm pulldown exercise at 100% and 150% biacromial widths could be a better exercise to stimulate the latissimus dorsi and triceps brachii muscles. Moreover, all exercises showed significantly greater EMG activity (p < 0.001) in the concentric phase than in the eccentric phase for all the evaluated muscles.
Improving climbing performance strongly depends upon effective training methods. Hangboard training is one of the most popular approaches to increase finger and forearm strength. Training protocols are based on maximizing weight or minimizing edges. We aimed to evaluate which of these protocols was superior. We prospectively analyzed 30 intermediate to advanced climbing athletes [Union Internationale des Associations d'Alpinisme (UIAA) VI–VIII] and randomized them into three groups: control group C (Control, normal climbing training), hangboard group HE (Hang endurance, grips to hold for a determined time decreased every week), and hangboard group HW (Hang weight, + 1.25 kg weight were added each week to hold for a determined time). As endpoints, we measured the grip strength before and after an 8-week training protocol in seven different pinches. Over the 8-week training period, HW hangboard training significantly improved the climbers’ grip strength compared to C [p = 0.032, effect size (ES) 0.36]. Maximizing weight improved the strength in I/II + III, I/II + III + IV and fist significantly. HW was superior compared to C in terms of grip strength improvement in three out of seven pinches and overall grip strength. The overall changes in the HE group did not differ significantly from the C group. An 8-week training protocol with increasing weights (HW) significantly improved overall grip strength more than a regular climbing training without the use of a hangboard.
Loading recommendations for resistance training are typically prescribed along what has come to be known as the “repetition continuum”, which proposes that the number of repetitions performed at a given magnitude of load will result in specific adaptations. Specifically, the theory postulates that heavy load training optimizes increases maximal strength, moderate load training optimizes increases muscle hypertrophy, and low-load training optimizes increases local muscular endurance. However, despite the widespread acceptance of this theory, current research fails to support some of its underlying presumptions. Based on the emerging evidence, we propose a new paradigm whereby muscular adaptations can be obtained, and in some cases optimized, across a wide spectrum of loading zones. The nuances and implications of this paradigm are discussed herein.
Albeit differences in climbing-specific strength of the forearms have been demonstrated between lead and boulder climbers, little is known about the potential differences in force and power output of the upper body pulling-apparatus between disciplines. The aim of this study was to compare the climbing-specific upper-body strength and finger flexor endurance between lead and boulder climbers, as well as to examine the relative utilization of force when testing on a ledge hold compared to a jug hold. Sixteen boulder climbers (red-point climbing grade 17.9 ± 3.3) and fifteen lead climbers (red-point climbing grade 20.5 ± 3.5) performing on an advanced level volunteered for the study. Peak force, average force and rate of force development (RFD) were measured during an isometric pull-up, average velocity in dynamic pull-up, and finger flexor endurance in an intermittent test to fatigue. The iso-metric pull-up was performed on a ledge hold (high finger strength requirements) and on a jug hold (very low finger strength requirements). Boulder climbers demonstrated a higher maximal and explosive strength in all strength and power measurements (26.2-52.9%, ES = 0.90-1.12, p = 0.006-0.023), whereas the finger flexor endurance test showed no significant difference between the groups (p = 0.088). Both groups were able to utilize 57-69% of peak force, average force and RFD in the ledge condition compared to the jug condition, but the relative utilization was not different between the groups (p = 0.290-0.996). In conclusion, boulder climbers were stronger and more explosive compared to lead climbers, whereas no differences in finger flexor endurance were observed. Performing climbing-specific tests on a smaller hold appears to limit the force and power output equally between the two groups.
Background
The number of athletes engaged in climbing sports has risen. Specific physical and psychological skills are required. The objective of this review was to determine factors for high climbing performance. We evaluated physiological, biomechanical and psychological characteristics that simplify the ascent. We also assessed training and recovery strategies.
Methods
Medline (Pubmed), Cochrane Library and Google scholar up to September 2018.
Results
A low skinfold thickness, body fat and large forearm volume were anthropometric traits in successful climbers. Well-trained forearm flexors with high aerobic capacities lead to an efficient style. Hand grip strength and endurance, postural stability and optimized kinematic motions were favourable. Elite climbers had long finger and bent-arm hang times. Psychologically, an “iceberg profile” was typical. Constant training with fingerboard and dynamic eccentric-concentric training helped to push the “red-point grade”.
Conclusion
Hand, forearm strength and endurance are highly important elements in elite climbers. An efficient climbing style with perpetual focus and accuracy, high speed and low exhaustion due to adaption to repeated isometric exercise is helpful in the ascent, while low body fat and a large bone-to-tip pulp make it easier. Constant training is essential, e.g. eccentric-concentric training of finger flexors, which should be followed by active recovery.
Intermittent isometric endurance of the forearm flexors is a determinant factor of sport climbing performance. However, little is known about the best method to improve grip endurance in sport climbing regarding maximal or intermittent dead-hang training methods. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of three 8-week finger training programs using dead-hangs (maximal, intermittent, and a combination) on grip endurance. Twenty-six advanced sport climbers (7c+/8a mean climbing ability) were randomly distributed among three groups: maximal deadhangs with maximal added weight on an 18 mm edge followed by MaxHangs on minimal edge depth; intermittent dead-hangs using the minimal edge depth, and a combination of both. The grip endurance gains and effect size were 34% and 0.6, respectively, for the group following maximal dead-hang training, 45% and 1, respectively, for the group following intermittent dead-hang training, and 7% and 0.1, respectively, for the group applying the combination of both training methods. Grip endurance increased significantly after 4 weeks in the group performing intermittent deadhangs (p = 0.004) and after 8 weeks in both groups performing intermittent dead-hangs (p = 0.002) and MaxHangs (p = 0.010). The results suggest that the intermittent dead-hangs training method seems to be more effective for grip endurance development after eight week application in advanced sport-climbers. However, both methods, maximal and intermittent dead-hangs, could be alternated for longer training periods.
Grip strength and endurance are determinant factors of climbing performance. The training response to strength training depends on initial strength levels. This study aims to investigate the effects on grip strength and endurance of a 4-week weighted dead-hang training program in experienced rock climbers with a higher (HS; n = 10) and lower strength level (LS; n = 12) according to the median value in the initial strength test. Grip strength and endurance changes were significant for the LS group, but not for HS (35.8%, p < 0.01; 35,6%, p < 0.01; against 3.7% and-4% respectively). These results suggest that finger strength levels must be taken into consideration when designing finger training programs. Résumé La force de préhension et l'endurance sont des facteurs déterminants pour la performance en escalade. La réponse à l'entrainement de la force dépend du niveau de force initiale. L'objectif de cette étude est d'investiguer les effets, sur la force de préhension et l'endurance, d'un programme d'entrainement de suspensions avec poids durant 4 semaines sur des grimpeurs expérimentés qui ont un niveau de force supérieur à (HS; n = 10) et inférieur à (LS; n = 12) selon la valeur moyenne du test de force initiale. Les changements sur la force d'agrippement et l'endurance sont significatifs pour le groupe LS, par contre ce n'est pas le cas pour le groupe HS (35.8%, p < 0.01; 35,6%, p < 0.01; contre 3.7% et-4% respectivement). Ces résultats suggèrent que le niveau de force des doigts doit être pris en compte pour la création de programmes d'entrainement des doigts.
Abstract.
Intermittent isometric endurance of the forearm flexors is a determinant factor of sport climbing performance. However, little is known about the best method to improve grip endurance in sport climbing regarding maximal or intermittent dead-hang training methods. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of three 8-week finger training programs using dead-hangs (maximal, intermittent, and a combination) on grip endurance. Twenty-six advanced sport climbers (7c+/8a mean climbing ability) were randomly distributed among three groups: maximal dead-hangs with maximal added weight on an 18 mm edge followed by MaxHangs on minimal edge depth; intermittent dead-hangs using the minimal edge depth, and a combination of both. The grip endurance gains and effect size were 34% and 0.6, respectively, for the group following maximal dead-hang training, 45% and 1, respectively, for the group following intermittent dead-hang training, and 7% and 0.1, respectively, for the group applying the combination of both training methods. Grip endurance increased significantly after 4 weeks in the group performing intermittent dead-hangs (p = 0.004) and after 8 weeks in both groups performing intermittent dead-hangs (p = 0.002) and MaxHangs (p = 0.010). The results suggest that the intermittent dead-hangs training method seems to be more effective for grip endurance development after eight week application in advanced sport-climbers. However, both methods, maximal and intermittent dead-hangs, could be alternated for longer training periods.
The goal of this study was to assess the impact of a specific four-week training program on finger grip in climbers; specifically, on the maximal force and the rate of force development (RFD) of finger muscles in isometric contraction. The participants were 14 French male rock climbers who took part in national and international bouldering competitions (at world-ranking and elite levels). They were divided into two samples. The experimental group performed a specific four-week training program that included such exercises as suspensions on small holds at the rate of three times a week. The control group performed climbing exercises only. The maximal force and the RFD were recorded using a specific dynamometer in three different holding conditions (slope crimp, half crimp and full crimp). Results reveal a significant gain of force for the slope crimp (+ 8 %) and a high increase of the RFD in the first 200ms of the force-time slope (between 27.5 % and 32 % for averaged conditions), suggesting a neural gain rather a change in muscle-tendon structure. These results reveals that a four-week training program is enough to improve the level of maximum force and rate of force development in elite climbers. Bearing in mind that climbing will make its appearance in a future Olympic Games in the form of a combined competition, i.e., bouldering, speed climbing and lead climbing, it will be crucial for each athlete to develop both a high level of force and RFD to be competitive.
The capacity for human exercise performance can be enhanced with prolonged exercise training, whether it is endurance- or strength-based. The ability to adapt through exercise training allows individuals to perform at the height of their sporting event and/or maintain peak physical condition throughout the life span. Our continued drive to understand how to prescribe exercise to maximize health and/or performance outcomes means that our knowledge of the adaptations that occur as a result of exercise continues to evolve. This review will focus on current and new insights into endurance and strength-training adaptations and will highlight important questions that remain as far as how we adapt to training.
The aim of the study was to compare the effects of different strength training intensities on climbing performance, climbing-specific tests and a general strength test. Thirty lower grade and intermediate-level climbers participated in a 10-week training programme. The participants were randomized into three groups: high resistance-few repetitions training groups (HR-FR), low resistance-high repetitions training groups (LR-HR) and a control group (CON) which continued climbing/training as usual. Post-testing results demonstrated statistical tendencies for climbing performance improvements in the HR-FR and LR-HR (p = 0.088-0.090, effect size = 0.55-0.73), but no differences were observed between the groups (p = 0.950). For the climbing-specific tests, no differences were observed between the groups (p = 0.507-1.000), but the HR-FR and LR-HR improved their time in both Dead-hang (p = 0.004-0.026) and Bent-arm hang (p < 0.001-0.002). The HR-FR and LR-HR improved their 12RM strength in pull-down (p ≤ 0.001), but not the CON group (p = 0.250). No differences were observed in the CON group in any of the tests (p = 0.190-0.596) with the exception of improvement in Bent-arm Hang (p = 0.018). The training groups reduced their climbing sessions during the intervention compared to the CON group (p = 0.057-0.074). In conclusion, HR-FR and LR-HR training programmes demonstrated an 11% and 12% non-significant improvement in climbing performance despite a 50% reduction in climbing sessions, but improved the results in strength and climbing-specific tests. None of the training intensities was superior compared to the others.
The present study was designed to determine which types of specific tests provide an effective evaluation of strength and endurance in highly trained competitive sport climbers. The research process consisted of three basic components: the measurement of selected somatic characteristics of the climbers, the assessment of their physical conditioning, and a search for correlations between the anthropometric and " conditioning " variables on the one hand, and climber's performance on the other. The sample of subjects consisted of 14 experienced volunteer climbers capable of handling 7a-8a+/b on-sight rock climbing grades. The strongest correlations (Spearman's rank) were found between climber's competence and the relative results of the finger strength test (r = 0.7); much lower, but still statistically significant coefficients were found between the level of competence and the results of the muscle endurance tests (r = 0.53 – 0.57). Climbers aspiring to attain an elite level must have strong finger and forearm muscles, but most of all, they must be capable of releasing their potential during specific motor capability tests engaging these parts of the body. The forearm muscles of elite climbers must also be very resistant to fatigue. Since highly trained athletes vary only slightly in body mass, this variable does not have a major effect on their performance during strength and endurance tests.
Indoor bouldering consists of low height climbing sequences completed without ropes on artificial walls with landing mats for protection. Although bouldering is increasingly popular and competitive, scientific research remains sparse and information on ideal training regimens is limited. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of interval bouldering on hanging and climbing time to subjective exhaustion. Twenty-four men, highly advanced boulderers (25.2 ± 4.8 years; 1.77 ± 0.07 m; 69.1 ± 5.3 kg; 6.8 ± 3.1 years climbing; 7b Fontainebleau bouldering ability), were randomly allocated to a 4-week interval bouldering (IB with n = 12) and conventional bouldering (CB with n = 12) training regimen. Pre- and posttests consisted of intermittent finger hangs (IFH) and climbing time to exhaustion (CTE). Results indicate significant higher IFH times after 4-week regimen for IB (+27.3 ± 18.4 s, t11 = − 5.16, P < .001), but not for CB (+4.9 ± 11.5 s, t11 = − 1.47, P = .168). Moreover, a significant higher CTE was displayed for IB (+36.2 ± 14.1 s, t11 = − 8.85, P < .001), but not for CB (6.1 ± 19.3 s, t11 = − 1.09, P = .298). These findings suggest that IB is a highly effective method to increase hanging and climbing time to exhaustion in competitive bouldering.
In order to outline the performance limiting factors and to conduct an effective training process in rock climbing a characteristic of the physical activity is needed. On this basis proper training exercises and methods could be designed. Rock climbing has a variable character of the workload, includes many sub disciplines and demands complex development of the motor abilities. Different types of climbing vary in intensity, duration, methods used for protection and terrain. This may set different physical, mental and technical demands and may induce different physiological responses. Nevertheless, the performance limiting factors and training methods may be considered identical. Only the levels and proportions of development of the decisive abilities would be different. A very important characteristic of the workload in climbing is that more than one third of the ascent time is spend in immobilized positions. Climbing involves also sustained intermittent isometric contractions. These characteristics largely explain the nonstandard physiological responses. One unique physiological response is that heart rate disproportionally rises in comparison to oxygen consumption and heart rate could not be used for training guidance. Among the main training goals in rock climbing are: sport-specific strength and strength endurance of the forearm flexors, explosive strength of the arm flexors, strength endurance of the shoulder girdle and core maximal strength. Sport-specific strength is commonly developed through bouldering, hanging on fingerboards, exercising on campus boards and system training. Bouldering as a sport-specific exercise is highly effective for developing strength in unity with sports technique. However, the necessary training load cannot always be achieved due to difficulties of coordinative nature. Thus, special-preparatory strength exercises are widely used. Fingerboard hanging can enhance maximal strength and intramuscular coordination. Campus board training is a proven in the practice extraordinary tool for developing explosive strength, improving rate of force development, as well as intramuscular and intermuscular coordination. System training is a special form of strength training used mainly to improve intermuscular coordination. For endurance training mostly interval methods for developing aerobic and anaerobic capabilities are used in the form of long bouldering or traversing, top rope and lead climbing. As rock climbing has a variable character and many climbing conditions are possible (i.e. route length and inclination, holds' sizes, shapes and situation) it is difficult to standardize training and testing, to evaluate the performance limiting factors and to uncover workload control indicators. Nevertheless, the profound knowledge on different aspects of rock climbing is a precondition for enhancing performance through designing effective training methods which should highly reflect specificity to climbing. Key words: sport climbing, physiological responses to climbing, anthropometric characteristics of climbers, motor abilities in climbing Introduction Rock climbing may be described as a " natural " physical activity, inherent in man as walking, running, or swimming. As modern lifestyle requires much less physical activity than it was necessary several decades ago, many people prefer rock climbing to meet the necessity of workload as an encoded factor for maintaining health status. However, rock climbing outdoors or at indoor artificial structures is practiced not only as a recreational but also as a competitive sport, as well as for non-competitive high performance climbing achievements, which is not typical for other sports. The theory and methodology of sports training is an important issue for elite climbers, competitors and their trainers. A common feature of sport climbing is to climb at the limits of one's own capabilities. This is valid also for recreational climbers. Besides it is in the human nature to seek improvement. Therefore, the interest how to build the training process and which methods to use is great even among less skilled climb
The goal of this study was to: i) assess the physical and anthropometric differences between three levels of climbers and ii) predict climbing ability by using a multiple regression model. The participants were divided into novice (n=15), skilled (n=16) and elite (n=10) climbers. Anthropometric characteristics such as height, weight, percentage of body fat and muscle, bi-acromial breath, arm span and ape index were measured. General and specific strength were assessed through an arm jump test, a bench press test, and a hand and finger grip strength test in maximal and endurance conditions. All variables were combined into components via a principal component analysis (PCA) and the components used in a multiple regression analysis. The major finding of this study is that climbing ability is more related to specific rather than general strength. Only finger grip strength shows a higher level of initial strength between all samples while the arm jump test discriminates between climbers and non-climbers. The PCA reveals three components, labeled as training, muscle and anthropometry, which together explain 64.22% of the variance. The regression model indicates that trainable variables explained 46% of the total variance in climbing ability, whereas anthropometry and muscle characteristics explain fewer than 4%.
Bouldering (BL) is an independent discipline of sport climbing, with grip strength and endurance as key factors. Although the sport has grown increasingly popular and competitive, limited research has been conducted on commonly used training methods to maximize BL performance. The purpose of this study was to investigate the training effects of 4 weeks of fingerboarding (FB) on grip strength and endurance in competitive BL. Twenty-three highly advanced male boulderers (25.6 +/- 4.4 y; 1.78 +/- 0.05 m; 70.1 +/-5.4 kg; 6.2 +/- 2.8 y climbing; 7b+ Fb mean ability) were randomly allocated to a 4-week FB (n = 11) or BL (n = 12) training regimen. Pre- and posttests (50 min duration) involved (a) handheld dynamometry (GS) to assess grip strength, as well as (b) dead hangs (DH) and (c) intermittent finger hangs (IFH) to assess grip endurance. After the four-week regimen, GS increased significantly in the FB group (2.5 +/- 1.4 kg, P < 0.001), but not in the BL group (1.4 +/- 2.8 kg, P = 0.109). The mean increase in DH ranged from 5.4 to 6.7 s in the FB group and was significantly (P < 0.05) higher than that in the BL group (3.0 - 3.9 s). Finally, significantly higher IFH gains were observed in the FB group (P = 0.004), with a mean gain of 26 s, but not in the BL group (P = 0.168). These results suggest that FB is highly effective in increasing grip strength and endurance in competitive BL.
The aim of the study was to evaluate the validity and reliability of different arm positions for finger flexor strength measurement in sport climbers. Forty six climbers completed finger flexor strength measurement on a climbing specific device with four different arm positions: 1 - handgrip, shoulder flexed at 0°, elbow fully extended; 2 - shoulder flexed at 90° and externally rotated, elbow flexed at 90° (position 90/90); 3 - shoulder abducted at 130°, elbow flexed at 50° (position 130/50), 4 - shoulder flexed at 180°, elbow fully extended (position 180/0). Intra-session reliability from 3 trials was assessed by an intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC). To assess the criterion related validity repeated analysis of covariance was used (4 x 2 x 2) with the arm position as a within subject factor, sex and climbing ability as between subject factors, and body mass as a covariate. The criterion was represented by self-reported climbing ability. A high ICC was found for all arm positions ranging from 0.95 to 0.98. The highest variability explained by climbing ability in finger strength was found in the 180/0 position (ηp2 = 0.25) and 130/50 position (ηp2 = 0.25). The handgrip test had the lowest validity to the reported climbing ability (ηp2 = 0.05). It was concluded that the positions 180/0 and 130/50 are most suitable to assess finger flexor strength in climbers.
Nine experienced rock climbers (mean climbing ability of 8a+/b) were randomly assigned to Group A (n = 5) and Group B (n = 4). Both groups trained dead hanging using two different methods. One method consisted of using the minimum edge depth (MED) they could hold the weight of their body; the other consisted of using a bigger edge (18 mm) with maximum added weight (MAW). Group A performed MED from Weeks 1 to 4, and then performed MAW the following 4 weeks (termed as MED–MAW group); Group B performed MAW from Weeks 1 to 4 and then performed MED the following 4 weeks (termed as MAW–MED group). Maximum grip strength and endurance tests were conducted initially (ST1; ET1), following 4 weeks (ST2; ET2), 8 weeks (ST3; ET3), 2 weeks (ST4; ET4) and 4 weeks (ST5; ET5) completion of training to determine the effects of detraining. The 9.6% improvement in grip strength (p>0.05) in MAW–MED group in ST2 and 6.9% in ST4 was greater than in MED–MAW group. In terms of grip endurance, MAW–MED group in ET2 (16.69%) and in ET3 (19.95%) improved more than MED–MAW group (p>0.05). Significant positive correlation was found between ST and ET, and between changes in strength and changes in endurance at all stages, controlling for body weight in all cases. The present data suggest that the most effective sequence of finger strength training methods is MAW–MED.
The aims of this study were to examine training characteristics, body composition, muscular strength, and endurance in sport climbers, and to demonstrate the relationship among these components by means of structural equation modelling. Altogether, 205 sport climbers (136 males, 69 females), with a performance RP (red point) of grade 4 to 11 on the Union Internationale des Association d'Alpinisme (UIAA) scale, took part in the study. The proposed structural model, with latent variable hand–arm strength and endurance (developed from reference values for simple tests), indicated by three manifest variables (grip strength, bent-arm hang, and finger hang) and three exogenous variables (body fat, volume of climbing, and climbing experience), explained 97% of the variance in climbing performance. The relationship between body fat and climbing experience/volume with climbing performance was not direct, but was better explained using the mediator hand–arm strength and endurance. We conclude that these simple tests, together with percent body fat, volume of climbing, and climbing experience, can satisfactorily predict climbing performance.
In this article, the authors outline methods for using fixed and random effects power analysis in the context of meta-analysis. Like statistical power analysis for primary studies, power analysis for meta-analysis can be done either prospectively or retrospectively and requires assumptions about parameters that are unknown. The authors provide some suggestions for thinking about these parameters, in particular for the random effects variance component. The authors also show how the typically uninformative retrospective power analysis can be made more informative. The authors then discuss the value of confidence intervals, show how they could be used in addition to or instead of retrospective power analysis, and also demonstrate that confidence intervals can convey information more effectively in some situations than power analyses alone. Finally, the authors take up the question ‘‘How many studies do you need to do a meta-analysis?’’ and show that, given the need for a conclusion, the answer is ‘‘two studies,’’ because all other synthesis techniques are less transparent and/or are less likely to be valid. For systematic reviewers who choose not to conduct a quantitative synthesis, the authors provide suggestions for both highlighting the current limitations in the research base and for displaying the characteristics and results of studies that were found to meet inclusion criteria.
The purpose of this study was to compare maximal muscle strength and rapid force capacity of finger flexors between boulder and lead climbers of national-international level. Ten boulder (mean ± SD, age 27 ± 8 yrs) and 10 lead climbers (age 27 ± 6 yrs) volunteered for the study. Ten non-climbers (age 25 ± 4 yrs) were also tested. Isometric maximal voluntary contraction (MVC) force and rate of force development (RFD) produced in "crimp" and "open-crimp" hand positions were evaluated on an instrumented hold. Climbers were stronger than non-climbers. More interestingly, MVC force and RFD were significantly greater in boulder compared to lead climbers (p < 0.05), in both crimp and open-crimp positions. RFD was the most discriminatory outcome, as the largest difference between boulder and lead climbers (34-38%) was observed for this variable. RFD may reflect the specific requirements of bouldering and seems to be more appropriate than pure maximal strength for investigating muscle function in rock climbers.
The Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association (American Psychological Association, 2001, American Psychological Association, 2010) calls for the reporting of effect sizes and their confidence intervals. Estimates of effect size are useful for determining the practical or theoretical importance of an effect, the relative contributions of factors, and the power of an analysis. We surveyed articles published in 2009 and 2010 in the Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, noting the statistical analyses reported and the associated reporting of effect size estimates. Effect sizes were reported for fewer than half of the analyses; no article reported a confidence interval for an effect size. The most often reported analysis was analysis of variance, and almost half of these reports were not accompanied by effect sizes. Partial η2 was the most commonly reported effect size estimate for analysis of variance. For t tests, 2/3 of the articles did not report an associated effect size estimate; Cohen's d was the most often reported. We provide a straightforward guide to understanding, selecting, calculating, and interpreting effect sizes for many types of data and to methods for calculating effect size confidence intervals and power analysis.
Bouldering is a discipline of rock climbing completed at low height. Despite its popularity, scientific description of this sport remains sparse. This study aims to characterize the athletic profile of highly accomplished boulderers.
Twelve male highly accomplished boulderers (age 25.3 ± 4.9) were matched for age (± 5 yr), height (± 5 cm), and body mass (± 5 kg) to 12 nonclimbing aerobically trained controls. Body composition was determined by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry. Handgrip and climbing specific finger strength were assessed by dynamometry. Shoulder girdle and abdominal muscle endurance were assessed by isometric tests. Data were mostly analyzed by t-tests with an adjusted alpha level for multiple comparisons. Ethical approval was received from the School of Sport, Health and Exercise Sciences, Bangor University, Bangor, UK.
Body composition was similar between the groups, apart from increased bone mineral density in climbers' forearms (1.1 ± 0.1 vs. 1.0 ± 0.1 g·cm(2), t((22))=2.798, p=0.010). Hand grip strength and climbing specific finger strength were greater in climbers (eg, finger strength: 494 ± 64 vs. 383 ± 79 N, t((22))=3.740, p=0.001), but handgrip and abdominal endurance were similar between the groups. In contrast, endurance of the shoulder girdle was substantially greater in boulderers (58 ± 13 vs. 39 ± 9 s, t((22))=4.044, p=0.001).
Highly accomplished boulderers were characterized by handgrip and finger strength better than that of nonclimbing controls and superior to that of previously investigated elite climbers. In contrast, boulderers' body composition and core endurance were similar to that of controls (who were aerobically trained). These characteristics provide an athletic profile of highly accomplished boulderers, and hence identify possible targets that with further investigation may aid athlete selection and training program design.
Grip force, as measured via handgrip dynamometry, is often given importance in the study of rock climbing performance. Whether handgrip dynamometry produces a degree of muscle activation comparable to actual climbing has not been reported. Furthermore, the degree and variability of muscle activation for various configurations during climbing are unknown. The purpose of this study was to record forearm EMG responses for six hand configurations during climbing and to compare these responses to a maximum handgrip test. Five experienced climbers signed informed consent to participate in the study. Subjects performed four moves up (UP) and down (DN) on an overhanging 45-deg. climbing wall with each of six hand configurations: crimp (C), pinch (P), three 2-finger combinations (2F1, 2F2, 2F3) and an open-hand grip (O). Forearm EMG was recorded via surface electrodes. Data were recorded for the second UP and second DN moves. Prior to climbing, maximum handgrip force (HG) and simultaneous EMG were obtained. Mean HG force was 526.6±33.3 N. Times to complete the climbing movements with each hand configuration varied between 3.1±0.5 and 4.8±0.9 sec, however no significant differences were found. All peak EMG’s during climbing were higher than HG EMG (p<.05). Mean EMG amplitudes for UP, expressed as percentages of HG EMG, were 198±55, 169±22, 222±72, 181±39, 126±32, and 143±47% for C, P, 2F1, 2F2, 2F3, and O respectively. Significant differences were found for O versus 2F1 and for 2F3 versus 2F1 and C (p<.05). All EMG amplitudes were lower for DN than UP (p<.05). Since all climbing EMGs exceeded HG EMG, it was concluded that handgrip dynamometry lacks specificity to actual rock climbing.
To establish the isokinetic strength profiles and work ratios of the shoulder internal and external rotators in sport climbers and to compare them with these profiles and ratios in nonclimbers. We hypothesized that the strength profiles of the shoulder rotators were different between sport climbers and nonclimbers.
Cross-sectional study.
Exercise science laboratory.
Thirty-one experienced sport climbers and 27 nonclimbers.
We tested all participants by measuring the isokinetic concentric and eccentric work output of their shoulder rotators in the middle 110 degrees of shoulder rotation. We measured mean conventional work ratios of concentric external rotation (ER) to internal rotation (IR) (con ER:IR) and eccentric ER to IR (ecc ER:IR), and we measured mean functional work ratios of eccentric ER to concentric IR (ecc ER:con IR) and eccentric IR to concentric ER (ecc IR:con ER).
All work ratios were different between the 2 groups (P < .001). In the climbers, the conventional work ratios were smaller than 1 for con ER:IR (0.79) and ecc ER:IR (0.88), whereas for the nonclimbers, the ratios were 1.03 and 1.13, respectively. The functional work ratio of ecc ER:con IR was smaller for the climbers (1.05) than for the nonclimbers (1.30), but the functional work ratio of ecc IR:con ER was larger for the climbers (1.58) than for the nonclimbers (1.17).
The difference in work ratios of the shoulder rotators between participant groups might be due to training-induced changes in the shoulder rotation muscles of sport climbers. The clinical implication of this strength difference in shoulder IR and ER in climbers has yet to be examined.
To identify the physiological and anthropometric determinants of sport climbing performance.
Forty four climbers (24 men, 20 women) of various skill levels (self reported rating 5.6-5.13c on the Yosemite decimal scale) and years of experience (0.10-44 years) served as subjects. They climbed two routes on separate days to assess climbing performance. The routes (11 and 30 m in distance) were set on two artificial climbing walls and were designed to become progressively more difficult from start to finish. Performance was scored according to the system used in sport climbing competitions where each successive handhold increases by one in point value. Results from each route were combined for a total climbing performance score. Measured variables for each subject included anthropometric (height, weight, leg length, arm span, % body fat), demographic (self reported climbing rating, years of climbing experience, weekly hours of training), and physiological (knee and shoulder extension, knee flexion, grip, and finger pincer strength, bent arm hang, grip endurance, hip and shoulder flexibility, and upper and lower body anaerobic power). These variables were combined into components using a principal components analysis procedure. These components were then used in a simultaneous multiple regression procedure to determine which components best explain the variance in sport rock climbing performance.
The principal components analysis procedure extracted three components. These were labelled training, anthropometric, and flexibility on the basis of the measured variables that were the most influential in forming each component. The results of the multiple regression procedure indicated that the training component uniquely explained 58.9% of the total variance in climbing performance. The anthropometric and flexibility components explained 0.3% and 1.8% of the total variance in climbing performance respectively.
The variance in climbing performance can be explained by a component consisting of trainable variables. More importantly, the findings do not support the belief that a climber must necessarily possess specific anthropometric characteristics to excel in sport rock climbing.
The purpose of this review is to explore existing research on the physiological aspects of difficult rock climbing. Findings will be categorized into the areas of an athlete profile and an activity model. An objective here is to describe high-level climbing performance; thus the focus will primarily be on studies that involve performances at the 5.11/6c (YDS/French) level of difficulty or higher. Studies have found climbers to be small in stature with low body mass and low body fat. Although absolute strength values are not unusual, strength to body mass ratio is high in accomplished climbers. There is evidence that muscular endurance and high upper body power are important. Climbers do not typically possess extremely high aerobic power, typically averaging between 52-55 ml.kg(-1).min(-1) for maximum oxygen uptake. Performance time for a typical ascent ranges from 2 to 7 min and oxygen uptake (VO2) averages around 20-25 ml.kg(-1).min(-1) over this period. Peaks of over 30 ml.kg(-1).min(-1) for VO2 have been reported. VO2 tends to plateau during sustained climbing yet remains elevated into the post-climb recovery period. Blood lactate accumulates during ascent and remains elevated for over 20 min post-climbing. Handgrip endurance decreases to a greater degree than handgrip strength with severe climbing. On the basis of this review, it appears that a specific training program for high-level climbing would include components for developing high, though not elite-level, aerobic power; specific muscular strength and endurance; ATP-PC and anaerobic glycolysis system power and capacity; and some minimum range of motion for leg and arm movements.
This study examined the effects of two or four weekly campus board training sessions among highly accomplished lead climbers. Sixteen advanced-to-elite climbers were randomly allocated to two (TG2), or four weekly campus board training sessions (TG4), or a control group (CG). All groups continued their normal climbing routines. Pre- and post-intervention measures included bouldering performance, maximal isometric pull-up strength using a shallow rung and a large hold (jug), and maximal reach and moves to failure. Rate of force development (RFD; absolute and 100ms) was calculated in the rung condition. TG4 improved maximal force in the jug condition (effect size (ES) = 0.40, p = 0.043), and absolute RFD more than CG (ES = 2.92, p = 0.025), whereas TG2 improved bouldering performance (ES = 2.59, p = 0.016) and maximal moves to failure on the campus board more than CG (ES = 1.65, p = 0.008). No differences between the training groups were found (p = 0.107–1.000). When merging the training groups, the training improved strength in the rung condition (ES = 0.87, p = 0.002), bouldering performance (ES = 2.37, p = 0.006), maximal reach (ES = 1.66, p = 0.006) and moves to failure (ES = 1.43, p = 0.040) more than CG. In conclusion, a five-week campus board training-block is sufficient for improving climbing-specific attributes among advanced-to-elite climbers. Sessions should be divided over four days to improve RFD or divided over two days to improve bouldering performance, compared to regular climbing training.
This review used a narrative summary of findings from studies that focused on isometric strength training (IST), covering the training considerations that affect strength adaptations and its effects on sports related dynamic performances. IST has been shown to induce less fatigue and resulted in superior joint angle specific strength than dynamic strength training, and benefited sports related dynamic performances such as running, jumping and cycling. IST may be included into athletes’ training regime to avoid getting overly fatigue while still acquiring positive neuromuscular adaptations; to improve the strength at a biomechanically disadvantaged joint position of a specific movement; to improve sports specific movements that require mainly isometric contraction; and when athletes have limited mobility due to injuries. To increase muscle hypertrophy, IST should be performed at 70–75% of maximum voluntary contraction (MVC) with sustained contraction of 3–30 s per repetition, and total contraction duration of>80–150 s per session for>36 sessions. To increase maximum strength, IST should be performed at 80–100% MVC with sustained contraction of 1–5 s, and total contraction time of 30–90 s per session, while adopting multiple joint angles or targeted joint angle. Performing IST in a ballistic manner can maximize the improvement of rate of force development.
A spectrum of approaches exist amongst strength coaches as to the degree of specificity required to optimise training transfer to targeted athletic performance. The ‘problem’ with specificity is that it is in conflict with overload. Some giving precedence to specificity find a solution in applying overload via variation, while others seek to traditionally overload one or two elements of the sporting movement. Advocates of general training more readily sacrifice specificity for the development of capacities. In applying these contrasting approaches to the hypothetical target task of accelerative sprinting, this review combines evidence- and logic-led arguments to evaluate the efficacy of each. As such, a summary of literature is presented. In most contexts, a mixed methods approach remains recommended as degree of transfer to targeted athletic performance appears as dependent on athlete status as it is on the specificity of the training task.
Background:
Despite climbing being an increasingly popular sporting pursuit, there have been very few scientific evaluations of appropriate training methods for competitive climbers. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of an 8-week climbing-specific muscular hypertrophy (MH) or muscular endurance (ME) resistance training program on the on-sight lead climbing performance in a similar setting to a world cup.
Methods:
Twenty-three elite male and female climbers (age: 25.5±6.7 years; height: 1.72±0.08 m; body mass: 63.4±7.7 kg; measured on-sight level: 20.8±2.0 IRCRA (International Rock Climbing Research Association)) participated in 8 weeks' worth of MH (N=11) or ME (N=12) training. Before the training (FT1), after 8 weeks of training (FT2), and after a 2-week tapering period (FT3), the participants climbed an on-sight lead route in a similar setting to a world cup.
Results:
Climbers were able to perform significantly more moves (p=0.019; p<0.001) and climb significantly harder (p=0.014; p<0.001) with FT2 and FT3 versus FT1. Climbing moves per unit time increased significantly when comparing FT2 to FT1 (p=0.007) and showed a tendency to increase when comparing FT3 to FT1 (p=0.061). However, there was no interaction effect between the groups.
Conclusions:
Our findings demonstrated that climbing-specific ME, as well as MH resistance training, improved on-sight lead climbing performance in a similar setting to a world cup. For competing climbers and climbing coaches, we recommend inclusion of the same proportions of climbing-specific ME and MH resistance training in their training programs to enhance on-sight lead climbing performance.
This study examined differences in the oxygenation kinetics and strength and endurance characteristics of boulderers and lead sport climbers. Using near infrared spectroscopy, 13-boulderers, 10-lead climbers, and 10-controls completed assessments of oxidative capacity index and muscle oxygen consumption (mV˙O2) in the flexor digitorum profundus (FDP), and extensor digitorum communis (EDC). Additionally, forearm strength (maximal volitional contraction MVC), endurance (force-time integral FTI at 40% MVC), and forearm volume (FAV and ΔFAV) was assessed. MVC was significantly greater in boulderers compared to lead climbers (mean difference = 9.6, 95% CI 5.2-14 kg). FDP and EDC oxidative capacity indexes were significantly greater (p = .041 and .013, respectively) in lead climbers and boulderers compared to controls (mean difference = -1.166, 95% CI (-3.264 to 0.931 s) and mean difference = -1.120, 95% CI (-3.316 to 1.075 s), respectively) with no differences between climbing disciplines. Climbers had a significantly greater FTI compared to controls (mean difference = 2205, 95% CI= 1114-3296 and mean difference = 1716, 95% CI = 553-2880, respectively) but not between disciplines. There were no significant group differences in ΔFAV or mV˙O2. The greater MVC in boulderers may be due to neural adaptation and not hypertrophy. A greater oxidative capacity index in both climbing groups suggests that irrespective of climbing discipline, trainers, coaches, and practitioners should consider forearm specific aerobic training to aid performance.
Background and purpose:
Assessment of the quality of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) is common practice in systematic reviews. However, the reliability of data obtained with most quality assessment scales has not been established. This report describes 2 studies designed to investigate the reliability of data obtained with the Physiotherapy Evidence Database (PEDro) scale developed to rate the quality of RCTs evaluating physical therapist interventions.
Method:
In the first study, 11 raters independently rated 25 RCTs randomly selected from the PEDro database. In the second study, 2 raters rated 120 RCTs randomly selected from the PEDro database, and disagreements were resolved by a third rater; this generated a set of individual rater and consensus ratings. The process was repeated by independent raters to create a second set of individual and consensus ratings. Reliability of ratings of PEDro scale items was calculated using multirater kappas, and reliability of the total (summed) score was calculated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC [1,1]).
Results:
The kappa value for each of the 11 items ranged from.36 to.80 for individual assessors and from.50 to.79 for consensus ratings generated by groups of 2 or 3 raters. The ICC for the total score was.56 (95% confidence interval=.47-.65) for ratings by individuals, and the ICC for consensus ratings was.68 (95% confidence interval=.57-.76).
Discussion and conclusion:
The reliability of ratings of PEDro scale items varied from "fair" to "substantial," and the reliability of the total PEDro score was "fair" to "good."
The research base for rock climbing has expanded substantially in the past three decades as worldwide interest in the sport has grown. An important trigger for the increasing research attention has been the transition of the sport to a competitive as well as recreational activity and the potential inclusion of sport climbing in the Olympic schedule. The International Rock Climbing Research Association (IRCRA) was formed in 2011 to bring together climbers, coaches and researchers to share knowledge and promote collaboration. This position statement was developed during and after the 2nd IRCRA Congress which was held in Pontresina, in September 2014. The aim of the position statement is to bring greater uniformity to the descriptive and statistical methods used in reporting rock climbing research findings. To date there is a wide variation in the information provided by researchers regarding the climbers’ characteristics and also in the approaches employed to convert from climbing grading scales to a numeric scale suitable for statistical analysis. Our paper presents details of recommended standards of reporting that should be used for reporting climber characteristics and provides a universal scale for the conversion of climbing grades to a number system for statistical analysis.
This paper investigates the impact of the number of studies on meta-analysis and meta-regression within the random-effects model framework. It is frequently neglected that inference in random-effects models requires a substantial number of studies included in meta-analysis to guarantee reliable conclusions. Several authors warn about the risk of inaccurate results of the traditional DerSimonian and Laird approach especially in the common case of meta-analysis involving a limited number of studies. This paper presents a selection of likelihood and non-likelihood methods for inference in meta-analysis proposed to overcome the limitations of the DerSimonian and Laird procedure, with a focus on the effect of the number of studies. The applicability and the performance of the methods are investigated in terms of Type I error rates and empirical power to detect effects, according to scenarios of practical interest. Simulation studies and applications to real meta-analyses highlight that it is not possible to identify an approach uniformly superior to alternatives. The overall recommendation is to avoid the DerSimonian and Laird method when the number of meta-analysis studies is modest and prefer a more comprehensive procedure that compares alternative inferential approaches. R code for meta-analysis according to all of the inferential methods examined in the paper is provided.
© The Author(s) 2015 Reprints and permissions: sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav.
THE MOST KNOWN METHODS FOR STRENGTH TRAINING REVOLVE AROUND MUSCLE HYPERTROPHY, WHICH CAN EFFECTIVELY INCREASE MUSCLE MASS. IN THEORY, A METHOD FOCUSING ON ANATOMICAL ADAPTATION MAY BUILD A STRONG MUSCULOSKELETAL STRUCTURE BY STRENGTHENING CONNECTIVE TISSUES AND MUSCLES REQUIRED FOR SUPPORTING, BALANCING, AND STABILIZING THE BODY. STRENGTH TRAINING THROUGH THE USE OF HEAVY LOADS INCREASES THE NUMBER OF MOTOR UNITS RECRUITED. EXPLOSIVE MOVEMENTS MAY FAMILIARIZE THE NEUROMUSCULAR SYSTEM AND ENHANCE THE EFFICIENCY OF THE ACTIVATION FREQUENCY. THIS ARTICLE WILL EXPLORE VARIOUS TRAINING METHODS IN THEORY TO MAXIMIZE ATHLETIC PERFORMANCE.
SUMMARY In order to stimulate further adaptation toward specific training goals, progressive resistance training (RT) protocols are necessary. The optimal characteristics of strength-specific programs include the use of concentric (CON), eccentric (ECC), and isometric muscle actions and the performance of bilateral and unilateral single- and multiple-joint exercises. In addition, it is recommended that strength programs sequence exercises to optimize the preservation of exercise intensity (large before small muscle group exercises, multiple-joint exercises before single-joint exercises, and higher-intensity before lower-intensity exercises). For novice (untrained individuals with no RT experience or who have not trained for several years) training, it is recommended that loads correspond to a repetition range of an 8-12 repetition maximum (RM). For intermediate (individuals with approximately 6 months of consistent RT experience) to advanced (individuals with years of RT experience) training, it is recommended that individuals use a wider loading range from 1 to 12 RM in a periodized fashion with eventual emphasis on heavy loading (1-6 RM) using 3- to 5-min rest periods between sets performed at a moderate contraction velocity (1-2 s CON; 1-2 s ECC). When training at a specific RM load, it is recommended that 2-10% increase in load be applied when the individual can perform the current workload for one to two repetitions over the desired number. The recommendation for training frequency is 2-3 dIwkj1 for novice training, 3-4 dIwkj1 for intermediate training, and 4-5 dIwkj1 for advanced training. Similar program designs are recom- mended for hypertrophy training with respect to exercise selection and frequency. For loading, it is recommended that loads corresponding to 1-12 RM be used in periodized fashion with emphasis on the 6-12 RM zone using 1- to 2-min rest periods between sets at a moderate velocity. Higher volume, multiple-set programs are recommended for maximizing hypertrophy. Progression in power training entails two general loading strategies: 1) strength training and 2) use of light loads (0-60% of 1 RM for lower body exercises; 30-60% of 1 RM for upper body exercises) performed at a fast contraction velocity with 3-5 min of rest between sets for multiple sets per exercise (three to five sets). It is also recommended that emphasis be placed on multiple-joint exercises especially those involving the total body. For local muscular endurance training, it is recommended that light to moderate loads (40-60% of 1 RM) be performed for high repetitions (915) using short rest periods (G90 s). In the interpretation of this position stand as with prior ones, recommendations should be applied in context and should be contingent upon an individual's target goals, physical capacity, and training
Progression in resistance training is a dynamic process that requires an exercise prescription process, evaluation of training progress, and careful development of target goals. The process starts with the determination of individual needs and training goals. This involves decisions regarding questions as to what muscles must be trained, injury prevention sites, metabolic demands of target training goals, etc. The single workout must then be designed reflecting these targeted program goals including the choice of exercises, order of exercise, amount of rest used between sets and exercises, number of repetitions and sets used for each exercise, and the intensity of each exercise. For progression, these variables must then be varied over time and the exercise prescription altered to maintain or advance specific training goals and to avoid overtraining. A careful system of goal targeting, exercise testing, proper exercise technique, supervision, and optimal exercise prescription all contribute to the successful implementation of a resistance training program.
Throwing velocity in overarm throwing is of major importance in sports like baseball, team handball, javelin, and water polo. The purpose of this literature review was to give an overview of the effect of different training programs on the throwing velocity in overarm throwing, provide a theoretical framework that explains findings, and give some practical applications based on these findings. The training studies were divided into 4 categories: (a) specific resistance training with an overload of velocity, (b) specific resistance training with an overload of force, (c) specific resistance training with a combination of overload of force and velocity, and (d) general resistance training according to the overload of force. Each category is presented and discussed.
The anaerobic strength endurance of the forearm flexor muscles represents the main limiting factor in modern sports climbing. Only isometric testing has been performed so far in order to evaluate this factor. Since climbing involves intermittent isometric contraction as well as dynamic movements, a pure isometric testing is too unspecific. The present paper demonstrates a specific performance diagnosis using a rotating climbing wall as a climbing ergometer. Twenty-eight male climbers performed a step test. According to their climbing level they were divided into three groups with different inclinations of the wall. Maximum blood lactate was 5.0 +/- 1.3 mmol/l (mean +/- sd), climbing length 39.1 +/- 15.7 m, and heart rate 185 +/- 10.7 bpm. The mean number of steps performed was 5.8 +/- 2.5 and the mean slope of the blood lactate graph (regression equation) was 0.57 +/- 0.4. The specific climbing recovering ability is documented with the so called heart rate difference and additionally the positive effects of a non specific, aerobic, basic endurance training are demonstrated. A mathematical analysis of the most important performance limiting test results enabled us to determine a strength-endurance factor that can be applied for cross- and longitudinal-section comparisons.
In general, elite climbers have been characterised as small in stature, with low percentage body fat and body mass. Currently, there are mixed conclusions surrounding body mass and composition, potentially because of variable subject ability, method of assessment and calculation. Muscular strength and endurance in rock climbers have been primarily measured on the forearm, hand and fingers via dynamometry. When absolute hand strength was assessed, there was little difference between climbers and the general population. When expressed in relation to body mass, elite-level climbers scored significantly higher, highlighting the potential importance of low body mass.
Rock climbing is characterised by repeated bouts of isometric contractions. Hand grip endurance has been measured by both repeated isometric contractions and sustained contractions, at a percentage of maximum voluntary contraction. Exercise times to fatigue during repeated isometric contractions have been found to be significantly better in climbers when compared with sedentary individuals. However, during sustained contractions until exhaustion, climbers did not differ from the normal population, emphasising the importance of the ability to perform repeated isometric forearm contractions without fatigue becoming detrimental to performance.
A decrease in handgrip strength and endurance has been related to an increase in blood lactate, with lactate levels increasing with the angle of climbing. Active recovery has been shown to provide a better rate of recovery and allows the body to return to its pre-exercised state quicker. It could be suggested that an increased ability to tolerate and remove lactic acid during climbing may be beneficial.
Because of increased demand placed upon the upper body during climbing of increased difficulty, possessing greater strength and endurance in the arms and shoulders could be advantageous.
Flexibility has not been identified as a necessary determinant of climbing success, although climbing-specific flexibility could be valuable to climbing performance.
As the difficulty of climbing increases, so does oxygen uptake (V̇O2), energy expenditure and heart rate per metre of climb, with a disproportionate rise in heart rate compared with V̇O2. It was suggested that these may be due to a metaboreflex causing a sympathetically mediated pressor response. In addition, climbers had an attenuated blood pressure response to isometric handgrip exercises when compared with non-climbers, potentially because of reduced metabolite build-up causing less stimulation of the muscle metaboreflex.
Training has been emphasised as an important component in climbing success, although there is little literature reviewing the influence of specific training components upon climbing performance.
In summary, it appears that success in climbing is not related to individual physiological variables but is the result of a complex interaction of physiological and psychological factors.
Effect of maximal-and local muscular endurance strength training on climbing performance and climbingspecific strength in recreational climbers: A randomized controlled trial
- E Hermans
- A H Saeterbakken
- V Andersen
Hermans E, Saeterbakken AH, Andersen V. Effect of maximal-and local
muscular endurance strength training on climbing performance and climbingspecific strength in recreational climbers: A randomized controlled trial. In:
Proceedings of the 3rd Rock Climbing Research Congress. Telluride, Colorado, School of Health & Human Performance. Draper N, Drum S, Joubert L,
and Watts P, eds. Northern Michigan University, 2016. pp. 38-39.
Training for Climbing: The Definitive Guide to Improving Your Performance
- E J Hörst
Hörst EJ. Training for Climbing: The Definitive Guide to Improving Your
Performance. Guilford, CT, Helena, MT: Falcon, 2008.
The Effects of Hangboard Exercise on Climbing Performance and Grip Strength in College Female Indoor Rock Climbers
- A M Kingsley
Kingsley AM. The Effects of Hangboard Exercise on Climbing Performance and Grip Strength in College Female Indoor Rock Climbers
[Master's thesis]. La Crosse: University of Wisconsin, 1997. pp. 21-37.
Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults
- N A Ratamess
- B A Alvar
- T K Evetovich
Ratamess NA, Alvar BA, Evetovich TK, et al. Progression models in resistance training for healthy adults. Med Sci Sports Exerc 41: 687-708,
2009.
Correlation between relative peak-, isometric force and RFD and climbing performance
- V Vereide
- J Kalland
- A K Solbraa
- V Andersen
- A H Saeterbakken
Vereide V, Kalland J, Solbraa AK, Andersen V, Saeterbakken AH. Correlation between relative peak-, isometric force and RFD and climbing
performance. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Rock Climbing Research Congress. Telluride, Colorado, School of Health & Human Performance.
Draper N, Drum S, Joubert L, and Watts P, eds. Northern Michigan
University, 2016. pp. 12-13.
Forearm EMG during rock climbing differs from EMG during handgrip dynamometry
- P B Watts
- R L Jensen
- E Gannon
- R Kobeinia
- J Marnard
- J Sansom
Watts PB, Jensen RL, Gannon E, Kobeinia R, Marnard J, Sansom J.
Forearm EMG during rock climbing differs from EMG during handgrip
dynamometry. Int J Exerc Sci 1: 4-13, 2008.