/ Academic research for trainingregimes
If I was, say, in my endurance volume training to include a route at my onsight grade, rather than lots of routes below that, would this really blow the the training ...really?
Blow the training is maybe a bit overwrought, it's probably more of a difference between some benefit and more benefit.
I doubt there's much research done into climbing specifically because the money isn't likely to be there.
I believe although I'm happy to be corrected that the ancap/anpower/aerocap/aeropower training lingo has its roots in the training for other more well researched sports - swimming perhaps? I can't remember for sure though.
I think it was cycling - but again i am not 100% on that.
'Probably not' is the most likely answer.
In exercise physiology you quickly come to realise that 'new' training practises that work for everyone, and which are significantly better than the nearest sensible alternative, are pretty rare - even in relatively 'controlled' sports such as running and cycling. Transferring findings from lab to real life is another issue still.
Nout wrong with being informed, but experience and common sense are generally your best guides. People just like to adopt an air of scientificyness to sell or lay claim to their own programme/technique/whatever. That's not to say they are wrong, it's just probably not the reason they are right.
Elsewhere on the site
PowerFingers is a simple, easy to use product which is incredibly effective for Climbers who require finger strength and... Read more
F ounded in 1993, Mountain Hardwear are a pretty young mountaineering clothing and equipment manufacturer but are also one of... Read more
With four photos in this week's top ten, and a UKC gallery of stunning images we thought it was time we had a chat with... Read more