One thing about Alex that flummoxes me is how quickly his body must turn over protein to keep his tendons and ligaments up to snuff. Not to mention skin. The lad climbed El Cap and then proceeded to hangboard…
1 Like
I’d be curious to know, do you think there is any applicable label commonly applied to athletes to which climbers belong?
I was listening to an episode of Just Fly Performance with Eric Cressey where he talks about overhead athletes, and while the episode centered heavily on pitchers I do to some extent see some utility in viewing climbers through that lens.
Ignoring finger problems, a lot of climbers that I’ve come in contact with have issues in their shoulders, or elbows and some even the wrists although it’d seem to be less common than having problems with the former two joints.
I’m still learning, but I imagine the causes of injury are significantly dissimilar between pitching sports and climbing as I believe maybe the primary reason for shoulder pain in climbers revolve around how the shoulder is used. A disengaged rest, which one sees very often in a climbing hall,
would — I assume — rely on non-contractile tissues while an engaged rest would use contractile tissues that presumably fatigue more quickly but are also easier for the body to rebuild
But, even if the how varies there may be a lot of overlap in what is worth doing.
Maybe unique to climbers, compared with other overhead athletes, is how developed their lats are encouraging an internal rotation of the shoulder. Evidently, I haven’t finished thinking about this, just tossing something out in medias res.
2 Likes
I haven’t thought about this much before, tbh, but I’d think the demands of climbing to similar to grappling, with some elements of gymnastics. Obviously, this depends on the type of climbing one does, but in general I’d believe the energetic demands to be quite close. As far as I can tell, both require:
- Access to a large range of motion
- Significant isometric strength at end-ranges of motion
- The ability to fluidly transition between isometrics at different end-ranges of motion
- Very highly developed grip strength
Now, speed climbers would have to train some more elements or power, and endurance climber less so, but as a whole I think the comparison is pretty good.
Yes and no. As far as I know, acute injuries associated with pitching are very rare, and pitching injuries are instead the product of overuse and/or misuse. I do believe that this is akin to climbing injuries.
Between overuse and misuse, overuse is the strongest predictor of pain and injury. This is why junior baseball clubs in the USA have implemented pitch counts to prevent young pitchers from throwing so much that they injure themselves. Similarly, climbing athletes who engages in extremely high volumes of training and increase their training volume aggressively would be at a significantly higher risk of pain and injury than athletes whose total training load is low and increases slowly over time
Biomechanically, there are similarities and differences. You mentioned that climbing injuries may be exacerbated by a depency on passive structures. Similarly, one of the most common injuries in baseball, the UCL tear, occurs when the body depends too heavily on the medial elbow ligaments for force transmission from hip to ribcage to shoulder to hand. The difference is the fact that the rate of loading in pitching is extremely high, whereas the rate of loading in climbing - with the exception of big dyno movements - is much slower. Because of the extreme rate of loading in pitching, eccentric strength of the shoulder complex is at a premium for preserving pitchers’ upper limb function. In contrast, I would suggest that isometric strength of the shoulder complex may be more important to climbers. However, I also think that at this point we are splitting hairs. As I pointed out earlier, load management is king when it comes to discussing over/misuse injuries
Are you suggesting lats are more or less developed in climbers that overhead athletes? What you’ll find is that throwing athletes - particularly pitchers and cricket fast bowlers - actually have very highly-developed lats and very very strong lats, to support the rapid shoulder internal rotation (pitching) or extension (bowling, hitting) that occurs in these movements
You may find that climbers have larger lats due to greater time under tension, but I would imagine maximal concentric/isometric force would be similar or higher in throwing athletes, and RFD to be much higher in throwers
Thoughts @aldebaran
1 Like
Appreciate the tag even though I’m still a mere student of the game, I really appreciate reading you.
Yes I’d totally agree with you. I’ve climbed only once, and was only going up to 15m (vertigo). Of course my technique was bad and I was going super fast because of myf ear of height ahah but I already noticed acute soreness in the shoulder girdle and even begining of stress/pain in like the rotator cuff or joints.
I can only imagine, that even with perfect technique, this activity puts a certain strain on the tissues, passively or actively. The shoulder and elbows are quite frail and already sollicitated a lot by daily activity. Plus you add resistance training to it…
It’s like you said, in these sports, or thing like golf, handball… the athletes have crazy lats strength. They have to, because not only to throw it but they need to deccelerate their arm a lot. It is a very violent action. Hence why for instance golfers don’t drive out of their shoes, they’ll hurt themselves if they give their everything. I’d agree throwers are stronger on all aspect. But it’s not the same sport, climbers would be much more endurant.
I agree that both sports would benefit from eccentric training, climbers more for passive structures reinforcement.
Indeed, their lats, arms, are always in tension unless they use a kneebar or something! Even if it’s not always much tension it is crazy freaking long effort!
1 Like
And also, your build. How I climb as a 185 cm with a 192 wingspan is vastly different from how a 160 cm individual with 160 cm wingspan climbs.
Your analysis is fairly sound I’d argue, or at least there is no downside to possessing all of the items that you mention. Isometric strength at end-ranges of motion might not be as important as one would think. There are some tremendous technical climbers that climb better than me, but wouldn’t be able to even do weighted pull-ups. Decent technique can offset the need for physical qualities to a point.
Speed climbing is very different, it’s super power dominant. And much more like a sport wherein the form remains the same. I can see a parallel to a golf swing here. There’s a perfect way the athlete could move, and they can practice to get closer to perfect as the speed climbing route never changes. Rather than a single cohesive movement it becomes stringing together a sequence of movements. Meanwhile, climbing sport/bouldering/trad on a new route/problem benefits more from having practiced 1000 other problems, moreso than repeating one problem 1000 times.
That’s a fair assessment, I didn’t think of it through that lens.
That’s cool! Nothing in the (my) climbing world is as disciplined yet but some rules of thumb I’ve heard is, no more than three/seven tries on the same route.
Can’t this be said for any sport? I’m asking if this isn’t a fundamental principle around injury resulting from human locomotion.
I was, but I realise I must have been mistaken. I honestly wrote this without knowing what really qualifies as overhead athletes. Do swimmers count? Volleyball players? I haven’t a clue.
Maybe. Pound for pound, climbers that pursue strength as their dominant superpower do end up with pretty impressive vertical pulls and even gymnastics abilities. The front lever is a coveted skill, preferably performed off of a hangboard using a single finger 
.
That’s more than me! Happy to have you chiming in. Maybe let’s tag @Koestrizer too?
I think that climbers have to be vary about how their lats develop and affect the position their shoulders have within the joint. This should maybe also influence other programming concerns, like with the bench press. Any horizontal pressing should perhaps ideally let the scapula rotate more freely around the ribcage?
But eccentric training would surely be beneficial. And isometric. As the sport already exposes the muscles to plenty of concentric work, albeit not always through-out a full ROM the need for normal tempo vertical pulls feel reduced.
I appreciate the tag, guys. That said, I have no idea about climbing or different variations within the sport, nor do I have any experience doing it. Same goes for baseball. I am familiar with Eric Cressey, who has devoted his entire career to S&C for pitchers/ baseball players. So I’d say he is a good resource.
Furthermore I am pretty tired and upon finishing have realized that my rambling mainly consists of agreeing with and repeating with less eloquence, what @j4gga2 has already written out.
Agreed.
Universally true for every sport.
I’d say the factor that makes pitching more prone to injury over time is the rapid movement and sheer force of the movement. In the end every sport/ movement done in repetition is going to provoke wear and tear. The more one dimensional a sport (pitching horizontally vs. using various ranges of motion and directions to move in), the sooner and more prone the wear and tear. Then you have acute traumas, which can occur as a product of wear and tear or independently. Soccer for example is a sport that features an extreme amount of acute trauma to the knee joint (acl and menisci tears). I agree that those are unlikely in pitching and climbing. Also absolutely present (UCL tears in baseball and finger injuries in climbing).
I am not sure I agree that this is the case. I can’t stress enough that I don’t know much of anything about climbing. But unless you strap yourself in somehow, you won’t rely on passive structures much by hanging down from something. Much less at the shoulder joint, since that is almost entirely held by musculature (not a lot of passive stuff to rely on). So in such a case, I would argue that you rely on isometric muscle activity. As I said, not entirely sure on the concept.
Also this:
Ah yeah that was the point I was trying to make earlier. Should maybe read the entirety first.
Throwing depends a lot more on maximal acceleration and therefore intramuscular coordination (similar to weightlifting or powerlifting). The movement itself is quite complex, but if all you do is practice a horizontal throw, the movement battery required for your task is minimal. Compared to, lets say tennis: endless combinations of foot and arm positions and as I assume climbing as well. Those sports that rely on total body movement for a longer period of time are much more dependent on intermuscular coordination.
To work on your intramuscular coordination, you need to train very fast and most importantly: Very heavy. A synonym for ic-training is simply maximal strength training (wow these things sound better in German for a change. Please don’t hold me to any terms here, I am just translating freely and from memory). As we know from our’s and everyone’s experience, training close to your max (weight and/ or speed in this case) places a higher demand on the structures in question.
You will only get better at throwing if you train to throw with maximal velocity. That places a high demand and that will make the structures more prone to injury. Climbing is a serious of different movements over a longer period of time, done at a lower percentage of your maximal strength (I assume).
Well a pull up per se is much more dependent on concentric muscle activity (way up) and depending on how you plan to go down, eccentric as well. Isometric = muscle holds tension while points of insertion and origin neither approach, nor move apart.
1 Like
Using a concentric as an example was poor communication on my part. My point was, some can’t even pull themself into an end range of motion haha.
Ah gotcha. No condescension intended obv.
1 Like
Definitely true. As will always be the case in any sport, specificity is king. Where people fall into a trap is when, as @Koestrizer alluded to, “specificity” for you mean doing the exact same thing over and over and over, rather than similar things. I’ve been very into sprinting and change of direction development lately, and the one thing I’ve learnt is that slight variation (aka fluctuators), whilst maximising speed and good positions (aka attractors), is essential for performance (shout out Frans Bosch).
@aldebaran I think you’ve read more Bosch than I, any thoughts on this as it pertains to lifting?
Ahh yes I forgot speed climbing is a set route. For these athletes, I would focus on maximising RFD without restricting ROM. We would still do isometric and explosive training, but I would consider utilising explosive isometrics (1-2s) more than grinding isometrics (5-7s) that I might use with grapplers and longer-duration climbers
I do agree, the ability to fluidly transition between movements is far more important than the force an athlete can produce in any single movement. Lately I’ve been seeing this crop up a lot lately in sports performance, to the point now that I’d consider it a universal principle in athletic development
As @Koestrizer mentioned, it is indeed a universal principle of any injury
I just define as athletes who compete in sports in which the outcome is determined by activities that occur overhead (I hope that makes sense). For example, the outcome in volleyball is usually determined by the effectiveness of the block or the velocity of the spike/serve. The outcome is swimming is heavily dependent on an efficient stroke. The outcome is baseball is heavily dependent on the velocity and placement of the pitch.
Thursday 11th of Feb
10min EDT:
- Push Press: 40 x 8 x 3
- Coiled Landmine Punch: 30 x 8 x 3
Machine Hip Thrust / SA DB Row
- +20 x 12 w 3s hold / 22.5 x 12
1 Like
Saturday 13th of February
Warm-Up:
- Lateral Shuffle
- Carioca
- Gallop
- Carioca Skip
- Captain Morgan Hops
Crossover to Sprint:
- 3 x 10+10m each
Sprint to Decel to Sprint
- 4 x 10+2+10m
1 Like
Training for speed currently?
No I haven’t much like I said I’m just a student. Very good with general pop for body recomp, strength and size but I have zero experience with athletes, haven’t beginned S&C and have been myself out of competition for a while.
Though I think Bosch might be one the best S&C coaches there is right now. His approach to specifity is amazing. I’ve seen his influence with some coaches like my mentor who built an apparatus for a driver he coaches, super-speficic stuff and training, but it really worked!
I think that at some point there has to be transfer, but not just specificity for the sake of it, or you end up an idiotic jest like Joel Seedman.
Many books I want to buy and read, and I’ll come back to you then… Anyway lowing the shoutout and reading you and lookign forward to interesting exchanges with you guys
Yeah I agree. I’m the strongest around my peers, yet for instance my terrible balance/proprioception was preventing me from using it during our latest athletic drills.
2 Likes
I too have seen his influence on too many elite coaches to name.
Mate at this point I’m certain Seedman’s work lacks transfer and lacks specificity. That bloke is an absolute joker
1 Like
Actually current focus is aerobic capacity and repeat sprint ability. I’m just sprinting to maintain my speed and agility.
Currently do two lifting days, two speed days and two conditioning days
Lifting days feature either an upper or lower body contrast pairing, performed as an EDT set. This will maximise power development (or prevent loss of power) whilst giving me a mild aerobic stimulus. The pairing is then followed up by a small volume of hypertrophy work.
Speed days are either change-of-direction focussed or linear speed focused. All sprint sessions feature some kind of “asymmetrical” locomotion in warm-up for coordination, variability and again an aerobic stimulus. They also feature some kind of extensive plyometric to train foot-ankle stiffness. After warm-up, each session features a drill with predominantly lateral movement and a drill with predominantly forward movement. On the COD day this means beginning with some kind of lateral shuffle, and finishing with some kind of shuttle run. On the speed day this means beginning with crossover running and finishing with some kind of linear acceleration work. Rest intervals between reps are relatively short. This is to improve motor learning and maximise aerobic development
Conditioning days are just straight up LISS for ~20 minutes
1 Like
That enough to have an effect for you?
We’ll see, most of the literature I’ve seen would suggest it’s enough, but I’ve never committed to it long enough to be able to test if it works for me
Monday 15th of February
Lower Focus A
10min EDT:
- Front Squat: 75 x 9 x 3 PR
- Band-Assist Jump: 9 x 3
Giant Set:
- Hook-Lying Alt. DB Bench: 10s x 12, 15s x 8, 20s x 12 PR
- Pull-Ups: 3 x 8
- Contra SLRDL: 10 x 10, 15 x 10, 20 x 10
5 Likes
Just been lurking here but solid shit man you’ve been killing it, and from the last physique pics I’ve seen you look fuckin B E E F Y.
1 Like
Just checking in.
Nice work. I have been listening to the Just Fly podcast for sometime now. Have also been trying to add in some track work with limited success. Might pop in here later to ask you for some help with my programming if you don’t mind.
tweet
1 Like