There are now dozens of hangboards available, not to mention DIY
options. There are perhaps, even more suggested training methods.
Given the variety of methods, I wanted a succinct overview of the
different workouts, how they are used, and their overall philosophy.
The following are my thoughts on the subject, but ultimately, you should
make your own decisions based on your knowledge, experience, goals, and
interests.
Starting with it's humble roots in walking to the top of hills, modern climbing is a marvel of human accomplishment and technology. Despite climbing's widespread public exposure, relatively little science has gone into training methods as compared to more well established Olympic sports like running or weight lifting. Perhaps the complex range of movements and span of physical systems required for any given climb, much less climbing style, challenge the training science that has been successfully applied to other sports. With all that in mind, there are certain common factors that we climbers can take from other sports, like specificity and periodization. After a certain level of overall fitness and technique, climbing, and modern sport climbing in particular, becomes almost entirely dependent on finger strength. It has famously been quoted that for climbers, the limiting factor is usually "from the elbows out."
In running, success can be measured by the combination of speed and distance the athlete runs. In weight lifting, the mass lifted in a particular style is the metric of success. In climbing, the metric of success is the grade of climb achieved. But grades are not absolute, rather ordinal and highly subjective. A climb that "feels like 5.12" to one climber may feel much easier or harder to another climber. This is a fundamental problem to training science. No matter how hard I train, if I am too tall/short, if my fingers are too large/small, (not to mention environmental conditions like humidity) the route is different and I may not be able to send. Therefore, climbing training must start with well defined proxy metrics for success.
Hangboards have long been a unique tool in the climbers training repertoire to isolate muscles and improve finger strength. However, the best means to use them are a subject for debate. A variety of techniques have been suggested, with each top athlete having their own recommendation. Before selecting a technique, one must consider the metric by which to measure success, is it weight held on a specific grip, time on a specific grip, number of cycles on a set of grips? Given the inherently limited number of grips and movements one can do on a hangboard, I will argue that for endurance based activities, a bouldering wall or climbing routes offer a better training facility. The strength of a hangboard lies in it's offering of consistent grips. This allows the user to measure their capability to hold more weight on, or hold longer on, a specific hold.
So how does one best use a hangboard then? My recommendation is the "rockprodigy" method. It combines measurable results with sport specific grip positions. I also see a high degree of value in Eva Lopez's "progression" workouts. In contrast, the "Chris Web Parsons" workout lacks any metric of success or even reproducibility of a given workout. Workouts like those suggested by Nicros, Metolious, or Ben Moon's School Room seem best suited as substitutes for a workout at the gym.
The "rockprodigy" method, briefly, consists of using weights (with a pulley) to increase (or decrease) the difficulty of a hang. It is recommended that hangboard workouts be followed by two full days of rest, so 2x per week at most. In a given workout, 5-7 grips may be worked. For a given grip, three sets of hangs are performed with each set being 5-7 10 second hangs with 5 seconds rest and each set increasing in load and decreasing in time.
The Lopez method is an 8 week cycle with the first 4 weeks focusing on maximizing the weight added and the second 4 weeks focusing on using the smallest grip possible. Unlike the rockprodigy method, it is meant to be done in addition to regular climbing. Workouts consist of a set of 3 hangs on a defined edge size and load such that one hangs for 10 seconds out of a total capability of 13 seconds. That is, you would fall/fail at 13 seconds, so you stop at 10. Counter to common training philosophy, one does not train to failure.
I appreciate the science behind the Lopez method (see her blog and papers showing percent improvments for various groups of climbers). I also appreciate the fact that the Lopez method can be incorporated into regular climbing as setting aside 4-8 weeks for nothing but hangboard workouts is mind numbing. However, I appreciate the specificity in grip positions utilized by the rockprodigy method (as opposed to Lopez's specialized progression/transgression boards). Both methods utilize repeatable loads and grips with the focus of hangboard workouts as increasing finger strength as opposed to an overall climbing workout. As for which is best, rockprodigy or Lopez, I think the answer depends on your personal style. And who's to say that you couldn't adapt the Lopez method to any hangboard and grip position.
I hope you find this comparison useful. My goal is to be able to track my training and see quantifiable gains.
References:Starting with it's humble roots in walking to the top of hills, modern climbing is a marvel of human accomplishment and technology. Despite climbing's widespread public exposure, relatively little science has gone into training methods as compared to more well established Olympic sports like running or weight lifting. Perhaps the complex range of movements and span of physical systems required for any given climb, much less climbing style, challenge the training science that has been successfully applied to other sports. With all that in mind, there are certain common factors that we climbers can take from other sports, like specificity and periodization. After a certain level of overall fitness and technique, climbing, and modern sport climbing in particular, becomes almost entirely dependent on finger strength. It has famously been quoted that for climbers, the limiting factor is usually "from the elbows out."
In running, success can be measured by the combination of speed and distance the athlete runs. In weight lifting, the mass lifted in a particular style is the metric of success. In climbing, the metric of success is the grade of climb achieved. But grades are not absolute, rather ordinal and highly subjective. A climb that "feels like 5.12" to one climber may feel much easier or harder to another climber. This is a fundamental problem to training science. No matter how hard I train, if I am too tall/short, if my fingers are too large/small, (not to mention environmental conditions like humidity) the route is different and I may not be able to send. Therefore, climbing training must start with well defined proxy metrics for success.
Hangboards have long been a unique tool in the climbers training repertoire to isolate muscles and improve finger strength. However, the best means to use them are a subject for debate. A variety of techniques have been suggested, with each top athlete having their own recommendation. Before selecting a technique, one must consider the metric by which to measure success, is it weight held on a specific grip, time on a specific grip, number of cycles on a set of grips? Given the inherently limited number of grips and movements one can do on a hangboard, I will argue that for endurance based activities, a bouldering wall or climbing routes offer a better training facility. The strength of a hangboard lies in it's offering of consistent grips. This allows the user to measure their capability to hold more weight on, or hold longer on, a specific hold.
So how does one best use a hangboard then? My recommendation is the "rockprodigy" method. It combines measurable results with sport specific grip positions. I also see a high degree of value in Eva Lopez's "progression" workouts. In contrast, the "Chris Web Parsons" workout lacks any metric of success or even reproducibility of a given workout. Workouts like those suggested by Nicros, Metolious, or Ben Moon's School Room seem best suited as substitutes for a workout at the gym.
The "rockprodigy" method, briefly, consists of using weights (with a pulley) to increase (or decrease) the difficulty of a hang. It is recommended that hangboard workouts be followed by two full days of rest, so 2x per week at most. In a given workout, 5-7 grips may be worked. For a given grip, three sets of hangs are performed with each set being 5-7 10 second hangs with 5 seconds rest and each set increasing in load and decreasing in time.
The Lopez method is an 8 week cycle with the first 4 weeks focusing on maximizing the weight added and the second 4 weeks focusing on using the smallest grip possible. Unlike the rockprodigy method, it is meant to be done in addition to regular climbing. Workouts consist of a set of 3 hangs on a defined edge size and load such that one hangs for 10 seconds out of a total capability of 13 seconds. That is, you would fall/fail at 13 seconds, so you stop at 10. Counter to common training philosophy, one does not train to failure.
I appreciate the science behind the Lopez method (see her blog and papers showing percent improvments for various groups of climbers). I also appreciate the fact that the Lopez method can be incorporated into regular climbing as setting aside 4-8 weeks for nothing but hangboard workouts is mind numbing. However, I appreciate the specificity in grip positions utilized by the rockprodigy method (as opposed to Lopez's specialized progression/transgression boards). Both methods utilize repeatable loads and grips with the focus of hangboard workouts as increasing finger strength as opposed to an overall climbing workout. As for which is best, rockprodigy or Lopez, I think the answer depends on your personal style. And who's to say that you couldn't adapt the Lopez method to any hangboard and grip position.
I hope you find this comparison useful. My goal is to be able to track my training and see quantifiable gains.
- rockprodigy:
- http://rockclimberstrainingmanual.com/
- http://www.rockclimbing.com/Articles/Training_and_Technique/The_Making_of_a_Rockprodigy__258.html
- http://blog.trango.com/category/hangboard-beta/
- https://www.trango.com/p-232-rock-prodigy-training-center-by-trango.aspx
- Eva Lopez:
- http://en-eva-lopez.blogspot.com/search/label/Finger%20training
- Chris Web Parsons:
- http://vimeo.com/61430224
- http://www.climbingstrong.com/2013/03/10/my-thoughts-on-chris-webb-parsons-high-intensity-hangboard-program/
- Moon Board: http://www.moonclimbing.com/blog/school/fingerboard-training-plan/
- Nicros: http://www.nicros.com/training/articles/effective-hangboard-training-part-1/
- Metolious: http://www.metoliusclimbing.com/training_giude_10_min.html
1 comment:
For me, even workouts requiring a ton of time in the gym are kinda numbing.. So it's hard to think of only doing hangboard for weeks at a time! We are switching to the strength phase of the Building a Better Climber routine this month and I am looking forward to seeing what comes of it. Good review!
Post a Comment