Aerobic Endurance Training in Sport Climbing: Capacity (II). Training Load Elements: Objectives, Intensity and Volume

Tweet
Versión en español

1. Objectives for Developing Capacity (also known as ARC)

a) Basic objective: Accumulate during the training session many minutes staying on the wall, of actual climbing.

Recommended for the beginning of a cycle, lower and medium level climbers, or those who don't have much experience with training in general.

b) Advanced objective: Total depletion at the end of the sets or the session.

Best for: experienced or high level climbers, or those who have worked the previous objective long enough.

Dani Fuertes resting on La Rubia, 8c+, Villanueva del Rosario, Málaga. Picture: Javipec

 

2.Intensity

We will use a Low intensity. More exactly, up to 25% of maximum grip force (To learn why we choose a % of maximum strength over maximal oxygen consumption or maximum heart rate like they do in other sports, have a look at this entry).

2.1 Why topping at 25% of maximum grip strength?

We will lean on a number of related conclusions:

a) Some authors suggest that 25% of MVC is the highest intesity where the aerobic metabolism is still the main energy source (Fallentin et col., 1993; Byström, 1994; Kimura et col., 2006), and that is the one we want to optimize here (Usaj et col., 2007; Fryer et col., 2014).

b) One of the stimuli that lead to changes in the blood vessels surrounding certain muscle fibers (angiogenesis and arteriogenesis, see previous entry) is the repeated and sustained increase of blood flow in the area (Hudclicka et col., 1992; Prior et col., 1997, Egginton et col., 2001, Hounker et col., 2003) characteristic of aerobic exercise at the aforementioned intensities.

The growth of new blood vessels and the widening of existing ones aid in the development of aerobic endurance. Climber: Tommy Caldwell on Dawn Wall Project, El Capitan, Yosemite National Park, CA (USA). Photo by: Josh Lowell. Source: Climax magazine #20.

One could think that a higher demand on the muscles would increase even more their need for energy and hence blood flow. By the contrary, in isometric contractions maximal blood flow is registered at very low intensities: around 10-25% of MVC. Past this, at 25-40%, the flow does not actually go up, and it even decreases if we go further (Barnes, 1980; Byström and Kilbom, 1990). Let's explain why:

• On the one hand there has been found a direct association between the intensity of a contraction and blood flow (Sjøgaard, Fagard & Fuel, 1988; Byström & Kilbom, 1990); also between the duration of a contraction and blood flow during the interval between contractions, as well as during recovery after exertion (Byström & Kilbom, 1990; Laughlin et col., 1999).

• On the other hand, though, the harder the contraction, the more intramuscular pressure (Barnes et col., 1980; Sejersted et col., 1984; Thompson et col., 2007). When it comes to isometric contractions a problem arises: the blood vessels get occluded for several seconds, compromising nutrient exchange. This leads to a buildup of liquid as well. According to some authors, this explains isometric fatigue (Sjøgaard, Fagard & Fuel, 1988; Kalliokoski et col., 2003).

More specifically, tests performed with a dynamometer on the muscles of the forearm have found that the blood occlusion starts at 30% of MVC, and is complete at 50-70% (Barcroft & Miller, 1939; Barnes, 1980; Sjøgaard et col., 1998).

Mich Kemeter at Verdon (Francia). Photo by: Alex Buisse.

Source: Gripped Canada´s Climbing Magazine facebook page

2.2 The usual problem... How do we control the intensity during a training session?

From a practical point of view, what kind of holds and what climbing styles do I have to favor?

Looking at what we have already seen we should go for holds that, being on a particular wall, wouldn't represent more than 25% of our maximum grip strength.

a) One possible solution would be to perform a test of maximum climbing time on a certain kind of hold, and looking at the relationship found by Rohmert (1960) and confirmed by successive authors (Allison et col., 2004; Frey & Avin 2010; Looft, 2012) between percentage of MVC during an isometric contraction and maximum duration of such contraction. In short, the higher the intensity the quicker the exhaustion and vice versa. This can also be applied to the number of repetitions/sets in dynamic exercises:

• An isometric contraction at 10% of MVC can be held for about an hour,
• A 12% one about 40 minutes,
• Repeated intermittent contractions at 25% of MVC (10-second contraction / 2-second relaxation) can be sustained for 6-8 minutes.
• Around 30% the time drops to 2-4 minutes.

(Rohmert 1960, Byström, 1994; Allison et col., 2004; Frey & Avin 2010).

Maximum durations (minutes) for different intesity (%MVC) intermittent contractions (contraction time + relaxation time) and continuous contractions (Byström y Kilbom, 1990)

All these figures have to be taken with a grain of salt, though, because:

i) The participants were untrained people for whom the forearm muscles were not a key performance factor.

ii) There is great variability in low intensity endurance among individuals.

iii) The dyamometer is not considered a specific tool to measure maximum grip strength in climbing (Watss, 2004) neither to assess actual climbing performance. In this regard, we don't know about any climbing-oriented tests that measure maximum time for a wide variety of intensities during real climbing.

Recently López-Rivera, E. (2014) has put forward in her PhD thesis a formula for estimating maximum hang-off duration as a function of edge depth (6-14 mm) and sport level (6b+ to 8c+, n=36), but it is probably valid for higher intensities only (we will go over it in the entries about high intensity endurance) and it remains to be seen its application to actual climbing on holds of similar size to the test ones.

Eva López. Photo by Javipec

b) The common sense approach, a simpler way:

The goal is to find holds and walls of a certain angle that allow us to endure the programmed climbing time at a low intensity:

• For low-mid level or high volume sessions, we will probably choose the largest holds, those deep enough to fit the entire fingers, with a positive and rounded profile (jugs), on vertical or less than vertical walls. For higher levels the holds could be similar, but the wall more steep or overhanging. Trying holds not so deep is a possibility. Anyway, each climber will have to test it...because as you already know, individualization and control of the training load is key for an effective training.

We will learn to associate low intensity to a set of sensations that can be described as follows.

 

2.2.2 Sensations related to the Physiological Effects of Capacity Training

Several authors have assessed the validity of subjective scales of perception to control the intensity in different sports (Seyler, S. in Mujika, 2012 [editor]). To develop our Capacity we have to look for and maintain the following sensations:

Local signs at the forearms:

• Moderate swelling and activation, never stiffness and strong pumping. As we progress in time or sets we may need to shake off every 2-3 moves for 1-2 seconds.
• Some vasodilation that can translate into "heat", reddening, bulging veins...
• Progressive "depletion" (according to the objectives for the session).
• Mild pain. Using the subjective scale from 1 to 5 developed by Binney & MacClure (2006), we should rate at 1 or 2.

Global signs:

• Light increase in breath and heart rate, etc.
• Moderate perspiration.
• As the session progresses, especially at the end of every set, it is normal to notice our movements are "slower", perhaps due to some related factors: a) we start running out of glycogen and use slow-burning fatty acids, b) we need to save energy and the kind of holds we are using allows us to do that, and c) because this way we can relax the free hand a bit longer. When climbing easy parts our hand can stay free for about 0,5 seconds, but it can go up to 1-2 seconds if we climb slower, giving time to the forearm to recover and keep on functioning.

Note: In the future we will publish an entry discussing a proposal for a load control scale in climbing training.
 

3. Volume

From 10 to 40-60 minutes, attending to the use of continuous or interval methods, our level, our training experience, climbing projects and time of the season, etc.

The next post will expand on the continuous and interval methods, and will offer some guidelines to customize total volume, number of sets, rest pauses, etc.

RELATED LINKS

Why we need to train Local Aerobic Endurance: Let the Numbers Talk

Objectives and Bases for Designing an Endurance Training Program in Sport Climbing

Aerobic Endurance Training in Sport Climbing: Capacity (I). Physiological Adaptations

 

RECOMMENDED READINGS

• Bechtel, S. Unlearning Endurance Training, website: "Climb Strong"[on-line], Entry from January 21th, 2013. Available at: http://www.climbstrong.com/articles/20130121_12
• Guyton, A., and Hall, J. (2006). Textbook of medical physiology, 11th.
• MacLeod, D (2010). 9 out of 10 climbers make the same mistakes: navigation through the maze of advice for the self-coached climber. Rare Breed Productions. (pp 85-89).
• Randall, T Tricks of the endurance training trade, website: "Tom Randall Climbing"[online], Entry from July 9th, 2012. Available at: https://tomrandallclimbing.wordpress.com/2012/07/09/tricks-of-the-endurance-training-trade/
• Wilmore, JH and Costill, DL (2004). Physiology of Sport and Exercise. Human Kinetics.

REFERENCES

• Allison, B., Desai, A., Murphy, R., & Sarwary, R. M. (2004). Human potential of applying static force as measured by grip strength: Validation of Rohmert’s formula (Doctoral dissertation, Thesis. San Jose State University).
• Barcroft H, and Millen JLE (1939) The blood flow through muscle during sustained contraction. J Physiol (Lond) 97:17--3
• Barnes WS. (1980). The relationship between maximum isometric strength and intramuscular circulatory occlusion. Ergonomics 23: 351–357.
• Binney, D, and McClure, S (2006). Aerobic and anaerobic power: Power endurance. Climb, 26, 64 66.
• Byström, SEG, and Kilbom, Å (1990). Physiological response in the forearm during and after isometric intermittent handgrip. European journal of applied physiology and occupational physiology, 60(6), 457-466. 
• Byström, S (1994). Estimation of aerobic and anaerobic metabolism in isometric forearm exercise. Upsala journal of medical sciences, 99(1), 51-62.
• Fallentin, N, Jørgensen, K, and Simonsen, EB (1993). Motor unit recruitment during prolonged isometric contractions. European journal of applied physiology and occupational physiology, 67(4), 335-341.
• Frey Law, L. A., & Avin, K. G. (2010). Endurance time is joint-specific: a modelling and meta-analysis investigation. Ergonomics, 53(1), 109-129. 
• Fryer, S., Stoner, L., Scarrott, C., Lucero, A., Witter, T., Love, R., ...and Draper, N. (2014). Forearm oxygenation and blood flow kinetics during a sustained contraction in multiple ability groups of rock climbers. Journal of sports sciences, (ahead-of-print), 1-9.
• Hounker M, Schmid A, Schmidt-Trucksass A, Grathwohl D, and Keul J (2003). Size and blood flow of central and peripheral arteries in highly trained able-bodied and disabled athletes. J Appl Physiol 95: 685–691.
• Kimura, N, Hamaoka, T, Kurosawa, Y, and Katsumura, T (2006). Contribution of intramuscular oxidative metabolism to total ATP production during forearm isometric exercise at varying intensities. TheTohoku journal of experimental medicine, 208(4), 307-320.  
• Looft, JM (2012). Modeling and validating joint based muscle fatigue due to isometric static and intermittent tasks.
• López-Rivera, E (2014): Efectos de Diferentes Métodos de Entrenamiento de Fuerza y Resistencia de Agarre en Escaladores Deportivos de distintos Niveles (Tesis Doctoral). Programa de Doctorado en Rendimiento Deportivo, Universidad de Castilla-La Mancha, Toledo, España.
• Rohmert, W, 1960. Determination of the recovery pause for static work of man. Internationale Zeitschrift Fur Angewandte Physiologie, Einschliesslich Arbeitsphysiologie 18, 123-164.
• Seiler, S  (2012). Training Intensity Distribution, Chapter 4. En Mujika, I. (editor), Endurance Training (pág. 31-39). Bizkaia. I. Mujika.
• Sjøgaard, G, Savard, G, and Juel, C (1988). Muscle blood flow during isometric activity and its relation to muscle fatigue. European journal of applied physiology and occupational physiology, 57(3), 327-335.
• Sejersted OM, Hargens AR, Kardel KR, Blom P, Jensen O, and Hermansen L. (1984). Intramuscular fluid pressure during isometric contraction of human skeletal muscle. J Appl Physiol 56: 287–295
• Thompson, B. C., Fadia, T., Pincivero, D. M., and Scheuermann, B. W. (2007). Forearm blood flow responses to fatiguing isometric contractions in women and men. American Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology, 293(1), H805-H812.
• Kalliokoski, K. K., Laaksonen, M. S., Takala, T. O., Knuuti, J., and Nuutila, P. (2003). Muscle oxygen extraction and perfusion heterogeneity during continuous and intermittent static exercise. Journal of Applied Physiology, 94(3), 953-958.
• Ušaj, A., Jereb, B., Robi, P., and von Duvillard, S. P. (2007). The influence of strength-endurance training on the oxygenation of isometrically contracted forearm muscles. European journal of applied physiology, 100(6), 685-692.
• Watts, P. B. (2004). Physiology of difficult rock climbing. European journal of applied physiology, 91(4), 361-372.

Dead Hang training on Small Edges: Transgression's 6 mm edge

Tweet

Versión en español

 

The day we installed our Transgression, we couldn't help trying the most challenging edge, the 6 mm one.

Dafnis held for 10 seconds with ease, but this wasn't unexpected, given his strengths and the years he has been using the methods I started to develop in 2004, and others that now are included with this hangboard.

I dindn't walk it, but the goods news is that there's still room for improvement and a variety of methods to achieve it.

Speaking of training on small edges

In a study of my own (López-Rivera, E. & González-Badillo, J. J., manuscript in preparation), we found association between the maximum added weight that could be held for 5 seconds while hanging from a 15 mm edge (finger strength test), and the smallest edge upon which the same person could hang for 10 seconds during first training session. These results are in line with Bourne et al. (2011), who found positive significant relation between the maximum force applied on a 12.8 mm edge and the one applied on 7.3 and 5.8 mm.

The above results add up to the fact that in our study (López-Rivera E. & González-Badillo J.J.; 2012), the group that trained 4 weeks using added weight and an 18 mm edge, and then other 4 weeks without added weight on smallest edge possible (a more specific exercise), showed positive significant relation between the relative increment in maximum strength and the maximum time on an 11 mm edge without added weight; and also with the smallest edge held for 10 seconds. All of this has the following implications:

Training with added weight on a medium-sized edge like the 18 mm one, and then using a more specific exercise like is the deadhang on smallest edge possible, we will obtain an improvement in our ability to hold small edges (11 mm) for longer and also to hold smaller edges than before. As we all know, these improvements sometimes can determine the success of a climb.

Practical Aspects of training and climbing on very small or shallow edges

According to Bourne et al. (2011), the force applied on tiny holds, like 4.3 and 2.8 mm, didn't show association with the maximum force applied on 12.5 mm, but did with anthropometric factors like having a bigger volume of flesh between the distal end of the bone (phalanx) and the fingertip. The authors say that this would increase deformation of the fingertip, increasing the skin to rock contact area on very shallow edges, and thus increase the limit of force production. (This paragraph has been corrected on 23 July 2012)

Deformation of my fingertip when hanging from an 8 mm edge.
Yes...I prefer to use open grip instead half crimp on small holds

From my own experience and observations:

- Temperatures below 15º C, make it easier to grab small holds, because the skin is a bit stiffer, and doesn't stretch so much, helping to maintain the angle of the distal phalanx relative to the hold.

- If the skin is not adapted to climbing in general, and to dead hangs on small edges, the deformation will be greater, and, again, it will more difficult to maintain the angle.

Marks left on my skin after a hard deadhang session

- And, conversely, high temperature, air moisture and perspiration, decrease friction and make the skin softer, leading to tearing and ultimately to slip and fall.

:-(

-If we perform a maximum repetition on an edge too small for us upon which we can't hold for the stated time with the previously determined effort level (EL), we risk spoiling the training session, because we can end with a cut fingertip or exhausted due to the "record setting" try.

As you have probably noticed if you already tried it, training in small edges causes a deep and localized fatigue. So manage cautiously the shifts from one size to the next, and honor the proposed rest periods between repetitions, sets and sessions.

You've been warned... if you want to make a try until muscular failure, do it in a separate session or as the last repetition of your dead hang training segment.

More articles about finger strength training and JM Climbing & Eva Lopez hangboards here 

REFERENCES
Bourne, R., Halaki, M., Vanwanseele, B., Clarke, J. (2011): Measuring Lifting Forces in Rock Climbing: Effect of Hold Size and Fingertip Structure. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 27, 40-46.

López-Rivera, E. & González-Badillo, J.J. (2012): The effects of two maximum grip strength training methods using the same effort duration and different edge depth on grip endurance in elite climbers, Sports Technology, 5:3-4, 100-110

Frequently Asked Questions about Progression and Finger Strength Training (III)

Tweet
version en español

source: www. fitnessmegastore.co.uk

Question about How to Adjust the Load when doing Dead Hangs with Added Weight 
December the 2nd, 2011
By Jorge:

Hi Eva, I have read some of your entries about finger training and I'm not sure of how to apply some of the criteria. I have been a climber for 3 years now, my time on a 20 mm edge is 38'' and this is what I am currently doing:

Twice a week, dead hangs on an edge upon which I can hang for 10''. Gradually, on a weekly basis, if I can hang for more than 10'' off the edge, then I use added weight so my time is 10 seconds again. This goes for 4 weeks, 3 to 5 sets each session. Then I rest for a week and start training without added weight, but this time I use progressively smaller edges to stay within the desired 10 seconds.

As I said, I'm not sure this is the right way to do it.
Thank you for helping self-taught people like me, who sometimes feel a bit lost in the field of training.

Answer
I'm afraid you haven't fully understood how to use the added weight yo adjust the load. Don't worry, this is normal, this method is very different from the usual ones. The same concept of adjusting the load is not very common and hard to grasp at first, but once you get it and practice it during a few sessions, you will surely become an expert.

Practice makes perfect. Source: www.blog.naver.com

In your case, when using added weight you don't have to start with an edge where you can hold for 10 seconds and add weight as you gain strength; the edge depth is fixed: 20 mm (a size suitable for people who are just starting to train with added weight). Then you add weight so your maximum time is of 13'' but you hang for just 10'' (remember, this is 10''(3) from the previous entry). More experience climbers will eventually progress to 18 or even 14 mm, but they will use the same procedure to choose the extra weight.

This methodology implies a minute and constant control of the training load, such that every day -and even for every set- the added weight (or the edge size in other phases) must be adjusted.
I will end with the following example:

If some day you feel stronger and it seems like you could do 15''(3) instead of 10''(3) with the added 10 kg you used the last session, then you will have to add more kilos so your effort duration is 10''(3) again. Likewise, you would remove some kilos if that day you didn't feel as strong as the last ones.

Question about the most suitable method to Start Training Finger Strength on a Fingerboard
November th 18th, 2011
By Ángel

Hi Eva,

Congratulations on your blog. I read it a lot and I find it very interesting because you are always investigating and your answers are up to date, so here is my question.

I have been climbing assiduously for 2 years (not stopping for more than a week), and usually climb 2 days in the gym and 1 or two on rock.
My maximum boulder grade is 7a+/b, my weight 73-75 kg and I'm 182 cm tall.

Now I've decided to train a bit more, and for the past two months my training is more organized. I have started with the fingerboard and I wanted to know what the best way is to start working on it. Up until now I've been performing the "contratos method"  which consists of sets of pull-ups and dead hangs utilizing different grips, with varying degrees of flexion of the arms, in groups of 10-20 exercises with incomplete, or no rest period between them (similar to what they call "repeaters" in another countries:example 1, example 2...). What do you think?

Thanks a lot!

Answer
Thank you, Ángel

Your profile allows you to start training with the methods for finger maximum strength that I propose, because you have 2 years of systematic and continuous practice. The methods are described in the poster for the Progression hangboard and in this previous entry.

The most effective for you is to choose a maximum strength method that according to my studies also improves finger strength-endurance on small and medium edges. This could be explained by the fact that by increasing maximum strength, body mass represents a lower load, so there are more motor units that don't need to be recruited and can be used later. Among other things, this delays the intervention of type II fibers and the buildup of lactate, thus extending the time until fatigue.

When our maximum strength goes up, our body weight is less of a burden to our fingers, and so whe can hold for longer. Is like "Hardy transforming into Laurel".

So, in my opinion you should first develop your maximum strength, and once you reached certain level, start specifically working your strength-endurance, because it's been already tested as the most effective way to do it.
On the contrary, performing methods for strength-endurance without a well-developed maximum strength base does not have as much effect over the former, and even less over the latter.
The method you are currently following, the famous "contratos" training (similar to what they call "repeaters" in other countries) has as a main effect the increase of strength-endurance of fingers and arms, etc. This is due to the long duration of each dead hang, the high number of exercise for every group or set and the incomplete pause between them.

I must add that I don't have a very positive view of this method, because this hodgepodge of exercises, types of contraction, articular angles, types of grip, rest periods... can result in some of the effects counteracting the others. Moreover, the complexity and the high number of variables that are at play at the same time make for a really problematic control of the load, and even worse, of your own training process over time.

There are, though, some good things about it; it's really engaging and enjoyable, precisely because of that variety, and may have a general effect on pulling and grabbing strength endurance, albeit lower than if the load could be adjusted for each person and exercise. 

More detailed criticism:

Regarding one parameter that defines the load: the pause between exercises is arbitrary, because it depends on the amount of time that it takes you to complete them, with no appreciation of your capacity to perform each exercise. (In this method, you perform 1-minute sets, where you hang for some seconds, and then, rest for what is left of the minute)

Each athlete in their charge is unique. Athletes have different physiological characteristics, tolerances to environmental and training loads, rates of recovery from training stimuli, lifestyles and social pressures, psychological traits and training and competition goals  (Cross and Ellis, 2005).

The individualization of load training, one fundamental principle of a good training plan, is really impaired by the fact that you only get to choose the level in which you can complete all the exercises, no matter if some of them are harder or easier for you.

During each session you mix traction strength with finger strength, different types of grip and types of contraction... with disregard for your level on each aspect, so that if you can't finish a pull-up you won't be able yo discern if it was due to a lack of pulling strength or endurance, or because your fingers are just too tired to grab the holds. It can be the case that one of the first exercises (types of handhold/grip types) is too easy for you and then you are not really getting much work out of it, but one of the last is too hard (because hold depth or grip type), and you end up with an undesirable muscular failure that will impair strength development).

Also, the process for incrementing the load is based on doing longer dead hangs of more pull-ups while shortening the rest periods... which is a way of altering two parameters at the same time (duration of effort and rest), which in turn changes something called "workout density". This is inadvisable for those with a lower or medium level, or at least for people who don't have experience changing only one parameter at a time.

The list could go on and on... it could be mentioned that making someone perform slowly part of an exercise like pull-ups is against our interest, because it's not specific of our sport and can lead to injuries; same goes for maintaining a fixed angle of the elbow until exhaustion no matter the experience or the physical condition of the athlete... but let's drop the subject here.
In short, my main objection is that in it's current form, it is impossible to control the load and the effects of training. 

Now it's my turn to ask you: If you can't measure the effects of your training, if you don't manage it, then what's the use of it? Perhaps as an entertainment? If this is what you seek, then everything' fine.

But if your goal is to improve, and organize and optimize the time you devote to your trainig... now it's time to look for other ways of achieving it.