UKC

I read some mention of ape index on another thread.

How is it calculated?

Number of back hairs per square inch?

Seriously though, I'd like to know.

In reply to Ed Boyter: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ape_index

In reply to Ed Boyter:

ape index = height of climber x number of bananas they eat / number of pints they drink

Some one will be along with a serious reply soonest

In reply to Ed Boyter: Stand back against a wall and measure to top of head. Make a mark then stand with your arms stretched out with fingers touching floor with one hand and the other stretching up to mark. The difference is your ape index. Most people's are above the mark giving a positive index although a few are below giving a negative index. I think that a large positive index is more useful than body height for climbing.

Al

In reply to Gaston Rubberpants:

Yes, much more useful.

In reply to Gaston Rubberpants:

Thank you.

In reply to Gaston Rubberpants:

"Make a mark then stand with your arms stretched out with fingers touching floor with one hand and the other stretching up to mark. The difference is your ape index"

This is almost correct but not quite, it is not the difference between the two measurements but the ratio, so a person with a height of 183cm (6 feet) and a span of 183cm has an index of 1 but if the span is greater say 190cm then the ape index is 1.038

In reply to Gaston Rubberpants: Is it not easier to measure by lying on the floor with your feet touching the wall (at 90 degree angle), making a mark where your head is and then, still lying on the floor, finger tip to wall and other finger tip to mark? I was very drunk when Tony W and Nigel made me try it.

In reply to hexcentric: but most people just say even,plus 1/2/3/4 etc or minus 1/2/3/4 never heard anyone say 1.038 or anything like that

In reply to hexcentric:

Maybe, but hardly anyone uses it like that. Most people quote the difference in inches, I know I'm +2 for instance.

I'd definitely agree that a positive ape trumps height.

In reply to jonny2vests:

Jealous. I'm -2. Bah.

In reply to Ava Adore:

Ditto!

Not only am I a midget but I've little stubby arms too!

In reply to Jaffacake:

being tall isn't that much of a benefit I don't think. Well hard to keep in balance. My plus 6 helps a little though...

In reply to Franco Cookson:

I think it is when you start, certainly when we've had tall freshers they can just run up things by reaching past the moves, but probably less so once you've reached a certain level. I'm still rubbish though :P and my lack of height does little to improve my balance.

A couple of extra inches reach would probably be a lot more useful than extra height.

In reply to Ed Boyter:
My teacher always told me I had the thickened brow and flappy ears of a chimpanzee. But only the intelligence of a beetle.

In reply to birdie num num:

Haha! Brilliant!

I was once told by a teacher that the only way I'd get into university was in a specimen jar.

In reply to Ed Boyter:
Probably the simplest analogy is to say that "Ape Index" is a fairly crude way of estimating how much of a persons overall reach is due to the length of their arms and not the length of their legs.
Another way to put it (in terms of relevance to climbers) is to say that if two persons have exactly the same overall reach but the first person achieves this by having longer arms but shorter legs than the second person, then the first person will tend to be at an advantage in climbing terms (although not always and in all situations eg; long legs are often an advantage when bridging but a disadvantage when moving around overhangs or doing rockovers).
Also note that it's impossible to use this as an exact measure either since other factors affect a persons height as well, (particularly spine length) and normal anatomical variances such as whether a person has 4, 5 (normal) or 6 lumbar vertebrae can make significant differences to the height of two persons with exactly the same leg length!!
"Biggest difference in personal terms between two climbers and their relative abilities; usually technique!!" Anon.

In reply to Franco Cookson:

I believe you, I've seen that photo.

In reply to Jaffacake:

Definitely. I'm a perfectly respectable 5 feet 5 inches but my shitty negative ape index means I might as well be a midget

In reply to Ed Boyter: goddam sucks having a -2 ape index....