This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Did I miss a meeting whilst I've been away?
Randomly checking some threads today and I've seen two climbers who's profiles say that they have been climbing 1 - 3 years and that their worked grade is f8a.
Two? Coincidence?
Discuss the likelihood of that or am I out of touch with reality?
In my 1 - 3 years of climbing I only ever met or saw about half a dozen people that I saw climbing that grade or above. In my 1 - 3 years (and I was climbing quite regularly) I didn't get anywhere near leading f7a (not that I am your average punter). I couldn't even top rope a f7a!
Randomly checking some threads today and I've seen two climbers who's profiles say that they have been climbing 1 - 3 years and that their worked grade is f8a.
Two? Coincidence?
Discuss the likelihood of that or am I out of touch with reality?
In my 1 - 3 years of climbing I only ever met or saw about half a dozen people that I saw climbing that grade or above. In my 1 - 3 years (and I was climbing quite regularly) I didn't get anywhere near leading f7a (not that I am your average punter). I couldn't even top rope a f7a!
In reply to tommyzero: you profile says your 35. a younger, more talented, stronger and fitter climber should have a propblem doing it i dont think
In reply to tommyzero:
Happens loads, specially with the wall bred climbers now. I don't suppose you get to Kilnsey and Malham much. Most weekends you will see 8a+ done.
Happens loads, specially with the wall bred climbers now. I don't suppose you get to Kilnsey and Malham much. Most weekends you will see 8a+ done.
In reply to Stash:
LOL. Yeah, give me 1 - 3 more years and maybe I will get f8a!
> (In reply to tommyzero)
>
> it happens, get over it
>
> it happens, get over it
LOL. Yeah, give me 1 - 3 more years and maybe I will get f8a!
In reply to tommyzero:
you might if you train hard and have the ability.
just cos you cant do it doesn't mean its impossible
you might if you train hard and have the ability.
just cos you cant do it doesn't mean its impossible
In reply to Adam Lincoln: Only ever been to Malham once. It was quite empty. I guess location has something to do with it!
In reply to Jamie Bankhead: No it doesn't matter. But as we humans like to measure our success with those around us it raises the bar higher if this is more like the standard!
In reply to tommyzero:
You probably went when it was sunny. No one goes there if its hot that is wanting to climb in the 8's.
> (In reply to Adam Lincoln) Only ever been to Malham once. It was quite empty. I guess location has something to do with it!
You probably went when it was sunny. No one goes there if its hot that is wanting to climb in the 8's.
In reply to tommyzero: Seems quite common place now i guess.
i did my first 8a in 3 years. I only really do sport so it helped that my time outside was 100% sport, in order to achieve this in the time period i did. For me it also required climbing lots indoors in the week and outside at the weekend and getting on lots of trips. And being prepared to do long redpoints.
Cheers
Tim
i did my first 8a in 3 years. I only really do sport so it helped that my time outside was 100% sport, in order to achieve this in the time period i did. For me it also required climbing lots indoors in the week and outside at the weekend and getting on lots of trips. And being prepared to do long redpoints.
Cheers
Tim
In reply to tommyzero:
Relax. I've been climbing 20 years and I can't lead 8a (YET!) - but on the flip side I've met people who can climb 7a within a couple of weeks, and 8a within a year or so. Some people are just naturally better/stronger at climbing than others. I'm afraid that's something you're going to have to accept.
Well, if you're only climbing 6a, you're not going to be climbing at crag which is full of 8s. And the 8a climber is not going to be climbing at a crag full of 5s.
Relax. I've been climbing 20 years and I can't lead 8a (YET!) - but on the flip side I've met people who can climb 7a within a couple of weeks, and 8a within a year or so. Some people are just naturally better/stronger at climbing than others. I'm afraid that's something you're going to have to accept.
> In my 1 - 3 years of climbing I only ever met or saw about half a dozen people that I saw climbing that grade or above
Well, if you're only climbing 6a, you're not going to be climbing at crag which is full of 8s. And the 8a climber is not going to be climbing at a crag full of 5s.
In reply to Alun:
Some people are just naturally better/stronger at climbing than others. I'm afraid that's something you're going to have to accept.
Yep, but is that really the main reason? I think most people who climb F8a within that period of time do it through hard, regular training of ones weaknesses. However I really don't know. I just like the idea that most people could do it if they put their mind and time towards it. Hopefully I better/ more clued up poster will come along and tell us what it's really like.
James
Some people are just naturally better/stronger at climbing than others. I'm afraid that's something you're going to have to accept.
Yep, but is that really the main reason? I think most people who climb F8a within that period of time do it through hard, regular training of ones weaknesses. However I really don't know. I just like the idea that most people could do it if they put their mind and time towards it. Hopefully I better/ more clued up poster will come along and tell us what it's really like.
James
In reply to Jamie Bankhead:
> (In reply to tommyzero)
>
> Two possibilities:
>
> 1. They're really good.
> 2. They're lying.
>
3. It was a Kalymnos/Spanish/Indoors/New Yorkshire 8a.>
> Two possibilities:
>
> 1. They're really good.
> 2. They're lying.
>
In reply to James Oswald:
Oh yes, I agree completely, and I know that some people who climb high grades get very shirty at accusation that they are 'naturally better', as they feel it demeans the effort they have put into to reaching those grades.
But it's a fact that there is genetic variation in the population - some people are just naturally stronger/fitter than others. That takes nothing away from those who dedicate a considerable portion of their lives to training.
> I think most people who climb F8a within that period of time do it through hard, regular training of ones weaknesses.
Oh yes, I agree completely, and I know that some people who climb high grades get very shirty at accusation that they are 'naturally better', as they feel it demeans the effort they have put into to reaching those grades.
But it's a fact that there is genetic variation in the population - some people are just naturally stronger/fitter than others. That takes nothing away from those who dedicate a considerable portion of their lives to training.
In reply to tommyzero:
Out of touch with reality. Commonly known as living in London (speaking as a fellow Londoner).
The two facts you present are intimately connected. If you hardly ever saw anyone climb 8a, it is not surprising you see this as a distant, unachievable feat. If you lived in Lleida, where even lardy rugby types climb 8a - I've seen them, you'd find it harder to get away with the subtle excuses we all make to justify our under-performance. The old 'natural ability' lie (sorry Alun) for example.
As 65 year-olds and 8 year-olds climb 8a, it is clearly not hard in the greater athletic scheme of things. Which is not to say that climbing 8a doesn't involve a lot of hard work. It is just that most climbers don't know what hard (training) work is or are not prepared to put the hours in and suffer in way that club runners or cyclists do.
> Discuss the likelihood of that or am I out of touch with reality?
Out of touch with reality. Commonly known as living in London (speaking as a fellow Londoner).
> In my 1 - 3 years of climbing I only ever met or saw about half a dozen people that I saw climbing that grade or above. In my 1 - 3 years (and I was climbing quite regularly) I didn't get anywhere near leading f7a (not that I am your average punter). I couldn't even top rope a f7a!
The two facts you present are intimately connected. If you hardly ever saw anyone climb 8a, it is not surprising you see this as a distant, unachievable feat. If you lived in Lleida, where even lardy rugby types climb 8a - I've seen them, you'd find it harder to get away with the subtle excuses we all make to justify our under-performance. The old 'natural ability' lie (sorry Alun) for example.
As 65 year-olds and 8 year-olds climb 8a, it is clearly not hard in the greater athletic scheme of things. Which is not to say that climbing 8a doesn't involve a lot of hard work. It is just that most climbers don't know what hard (training) work is or are not prepared to put the hours in and suffer in way that club runners or cyclists do.
In reply to Serpico:
Shouldn't you be at Hyde Park Corner?
Andy F
> (In reply to Jamie Bankhead)
> [...]
> 3. It was a Kalymnos/Spanish/Indoors/New Yorkshire 8a.
> [...]
> 3. It was a Kalymnos/Spanish/Indoors/New Yorkshire 8a.
Shouldn't you be at Hyde Park Corner?
Andy F
In reply to flaneur:
In my part of London there are some tennis courts and a running track. Both are used quite regularly by people who, I imagine, class themselves as keen amateurs. The tennis players amble up, knock the ball around for a few minutes then play a game, usually doubles, for an hour or so. Then they go to the cafe or the pub. The athletes have a coach who shouts a lot, they warm-up systematically, then they do stuff like 150m sprint interval training. After this they collapse in a heap and sometimes throw up.
The UK has an athletics team with several world-class performers. The tennis team has one anomaly (who trained in Spain) and a bunch of no-hopers.
When I go to my local climbing wall, which might well be tommyzero's local wall, it reminds me of the tennis courts.
In my part of London there are some tennis courts and a running track. Both are used quite regularly by people who, I imagine, class themselves as keen amateurs. The tennis players amble up, knock the ball around for a few minutes then play a game, usually doubles, for an hour or so. Then they go to the cafe or the pub. The athletes have a coach who shouts a lot, they warm-up systematically, then they do stuff like 150m sprint interval training. After this they collapse in a heap and sometimes throw up.
The UK has an athletics team with several world-class performers. The tennis team has one anomaly (who trained in Spain) and a bunch of no-hopers.
When I go to my local climbing wall, which might well be tommyzero's local wall, it reminds me of the tennis courts.
In reply to tommyzero:
Apparently Dave Graham did F8b+ in two years...
Personally it took me nearly two years to lead F6a outdoors, but I still made it to F7c (about 5 years later) before cutting back a bit on the climbing to do other stuff as well.
Apparently Dave Graham did F8b+ in two years...
Personally it took me nearly two years to lead F6a outdoors, but I still made it to F7c (about 5 years later) before cutting back a bit on the climbing to do other stuff as well.
In reply to flaneur:
>When I go to my local climbing wall, which might well be tommyzero's local wall, it reminds me of the tennis courts.
Good analogy.
Most people at climbing walls are just going climbing as if they were outside for a day at the crag. Very few are treating it as a training facility in the same way as your runners. If they were, there would be a lot more people climbing 8a.
>When I go to my local climbing wall, which might well be tommyzero's local wall, it reminds me of the tennis courts.
Good analogy.
Most people at climbing walls are just going climbing as if they were outside for a day at the crag. Very few are treating it as a training facility in the same way as your runners. If they were, there would be a lot more people climbing 8a.
In reply to James Oswald:
This comes up fairly regularl and usually somebody will say how hard 8a is (someone tried to compare it to a four minute mile a few years ago!) and then Serpico will say that the only qualification is having four working limbs (and he probably thinks that is more than necessary if you're willing to put the effort in!).
Boringly the truth is probably somewhere in the middle, yes 8a is a reasonable target for a relatively fit climber who is willing to put a fair amount of effort in but it's a way from a trivial achievement. The views can be skewed by the fact that climbers doing the same sort of thing tend to group together so, as said above, if you go to Malham / Kilnsey and haven't climbed 8a you're a punter, go to Stanage and climb E3 and you'll be one the strongest route climbers there.
At the higher end the likes of Serpico tend to downplay the amount of effort and commitment they put into there climbing, as a once a weekend punter on Yorkshire one of the things I notice is that for most people the only question for the other day of the weekend is whether they go the the same crag, the same is often true about holidays where its which climbing area are they visiting.
> (In reply to Alun)
> Yep, but is that really the main reason? I think most people who climb F8a within that period of time do it through hard, regular training of ones weaknesses. However I really don't know. I just like the idea that most people could do it if they put their mind and time towards it. Hopefully I better/ more clued up poster will come along and tell us what it's really like.
>
>
This comes up fairly regularl and usually somebody will say how hard 8a is (someone tried to compare it to a four minute mile a few years ago!) and then Serpico will say that the only qualification is having four working limbs (and he probably thinks that is more than necessary if you're willing to put the effort in!).
Boringly the truth is probably somewhere in the middle, yes 8a is a reasonable target for a relatively fit climber who is willing to put a fair amount of effort in but it's a way from a trivial achievement. The views can be skewed by the fact that climbers doing the same sort of thing tend to group together so, as said above, if you go to Malham / Kilnsey and haven't climbed 8a you're a punter, go to Stanage and climb E3 and you'll be one the strongest route climbers there.
At the higher end the likes of Serpico tend to downplay the amount of effort and commitment they put into there climbing, as a once a weekend punter on Yorkshire one of the things I notice is that for most people the only question for the other day of the weekend is whether they go the the same crag, the same is often true about holidays where its which climbing area are they visiting.
In reply to Tyler:
You should be safe, not sure I want to know
> (In reply to Serpico)
>
> [...]
>
> Name names!
>
> [...]
>
> Name names!
You should be safe, not sure I want to know
In reply to tommyzero: You fail to grasp the strange dynamic negative co-efficient that Porn, beer, women and soap operas play in climbing achievements. Stangely hard climbers display the same chronicaly defined forearms that also denote a dedicated porn addict...
In reply to flaneur:
No need to apologise, though I politely suggest you study a bit more about developmental biology, evolution, and genetic variation. It's quite interesting.
Me too, unfortunately on a depressingly regular basis. I've also seen the enormous numbers of punters who climb nothing harder than 6a. I'm not saying there isn't a proportionally higher number of harder climbers in Lleida than London (of course there is), but i'm saying that the reasons behind the stat are more complicated than you seem to suggest.
However, I agree with many of the sentiments in your post - especially the bit about climbers not being prepared to put in the hours like club runners or cyclists. I think it's difficult to compare motivations directly though. One could argue that the principal goal for the club runner is reduce his/her time over a certain distance. Although the grade/difficulty is of course very important in climbing (especially sport climbing), it is not the be all and end all, unless you're competing.
> The old 'natural ability' lie (sorry Alun) for example
No need to apologise, though I politely suggest you study a bit more about developmental biology, evolution, and genetic variation. It's quite interesting.
> If you lived in Lleida, where even lardy rugby types climb 8a - I've seen them,
Me too, unfortunately on a depressingly regular basis. I've also seen the enormous numbers of punters who climb nothing harder than 6a. I'm not saying there isn't a proportionally higher number of harder climbers in Lleida than London (of course there is), but i'm saying that the reasons behind the stat are more complicated than you seem to suggest.
However, I agree with many of the sentiments in your post - especially the bit about climbers not being prepared to put in the hours like club runners or cyclists. I think it's difficult to compare motivations directly though. One could argue that the principal goal for the club runner is reduce his/her time over a certain distance. Although the grade/difficulty is of course very important in climbing (especially sport climbing), it is not the be all and end all, unless you're competing.
In reply to tommyzero: Quite likely I recon..... consider Mark McGowan and his 8a in 6 months (successful) quest after 15 years off climbing. A fine effort.
In reply to Ian Patterson:
Absolutely! Remember Marvin Bore from OTE?
Surely this contradicts your previous assertion? Personally I don't think I've ever tried to underplay the effort and commitment I put in - I'm a product of my training.
> (In reply to James Oswald)
> [...]
>
> [...]
>
> and then Serpico will say that the only qualification is having four working limbs (and he probably thinks that is more than necessary if you're willing to put the effort in!).
>> [...]
>
> [...]
>
> and then Serpico will say that the only qualification is having four working limbs (and he probably thinks that is more than necessary if you're willing to put the effort in!).
Absolutely! Remember Marvin Bore from OTE?
> At the higher end the likes of Serpico tend to downplay the amount of effort and commitment they put into their climbing,
Surely this contradicts your previous assertion? Personally I don't think I've ever tried to underplay the effort and commitment I put in - I'm a product of my training.
In reply to Ian Patterson:
I suspect that a 4 minute mile is a significantly bigger deal than 8a (in that if the entire able bodied population tried equally hard to achieve both, fewer would achieve the 4 minute mile) but, at least for climbers of my sort of age, they both had the same almost mythical landmark status. Maybe the younger generation now see 9a in the same way. Incidentally, E5 for me always had a similar status, but now, maybe, it is juat another grade somewhere between E1 and E9.
> (In reply to James Oswald)
> ...... somebody will say how hard 8a is (someone tried to compare it to a four minute mile a few years ago!)
I suspect that a 4 minute mile is a significantly bigger deal than 8a (in that if the entire able bodied population tried equally hard to achieve both, fewer would achieve the 4 minute mile) but, at least for climbers of my sort of age, they both had the same almost mythical landmark status. Maybe the younger generation now see 9a in the same way. Incidentally, E5 for me always had a similar status, but now, maybe, it is juat another grade somewhere between E1 and E9.
In reply to Serpico:
Maybe unfair to aim at you personally but we have comments on this thread about how climbers don't train like cyclist or runners. I think by the time you get to the 8a'ish level most climbers are putting some serious effort in - there training may not look as organised as runners / cyclists but its a more complex sport and and has higher time requirements than relatively simple aerobic based sports.
> Surely this contradicts your previous assertion? Personally I don't think I've ever tried to underplay the effort and commitment I put in - I'm a product of my training.
Maybe unfair to aim at you personally but we have comments on this thread about how climbers don't train like cyclist or runners. I think by the time you get to the 8a'ish level most climbers are putting some serious effort in - there training may not look as organised as runners / cyclists but its a more complex sport and and has higher time requirements than relatively simple aerobic based sports.
In reply to Robert Durran:
Aha, a nice twist - but you can 'cheat' your way to higher E-grades by being bold and/or have excellent technique (note: this is my preferred method!!). You can't cheat a 4 minute mile, and I suspect you can't really cheat your common-or-garden 8a.
> Incidentally, E5 for me always had a similar status, but now, maybe, it is juat another grade somewhere between E1 and E9.
Aha, a nice twist - but you can 'cheat' your way to higher E-grades by being bold and/or have excellent technique (note: this is my preferred method!!). You can't cheat a 4 minute mile, and I suspect you can't really cheat your common-or-garden 8a.
In reply to Alun:
This is not cheating. Boldness and technicality all add to the E grade, because they add to the difficulty of doing the route. You might as well say that I have cheated my way to E5 by training to be fit and moderately strong; you certainly wouldn't catch me on a bold, technical E5 slab!
> (In reply to Robert Durran)
> [...]
>
> Aha, a nice twist - but you can 'cheat' your way to higher E-grades by being bold and/or have excellent technique.
> [...]
>
> Aha, a nice twist - but you can 'cheat' your way to higher E-grades by being bold and/or have excellent technique.
This is not cheating. Boldness and technicality all add to the E grade, because they add to the difficulty of doing the route. You might as well say that I have cheated my way to E5 by training to be fit and moderately strong; you certainly wouldn't catch me on a bold, technical E5 slab!
In reply to Robert Durran:
You can find an 8a that suits your strengths. 4 minutes is however invariable.
Trad E5s I suspect are probably not climbed in as blase a manner as you suspect. French 7a is a warm up grade if you climb 8a, but doing it onsight carrying 2 ropes, a rack, and uncertain gear and a runout still challenges many.
> (In reply to Ian Patterson)
> [...]
Incidentally, E5 for me always had a similar status, but now, maybe, it is juat another grade somewhere between E1 and E9.> [...]
You can find an 8a that suits your strengths. 4 minutes is however invariable.
Trad E5s I suspect are probably not climbed in as blase a manner as you suspect. French 7a is a warm up grade if you climb 8a, but doing it onsight carrying 2 ropes, a rack, and uncertain gear and a runout still challenges many.
In reply to Alun:
I'm sure these limit people's theoretical ultimate potential but I'm equally sure that they are not the actual limiting factor for 99% of climbers. I'm pretty confident that they are still not that important even at the 8a level (Spanish prop-forwards, 8 year-olds, grand-dads, rock climbing is a very young sport in training terms). Perhaps they are starting to become more important at 8b+? Getting to 8b+ in 2 years suggests you have been dealt a strong genetic hand: you're probably a scrawny youth with steely fingers...like Dave Graham! However, I'm told 8b+ is a lot harder than 8a and plenty of genetically non-ideal specimens still climb 8b+ although it takes them a lot longer and more (cumulative) effort than Dave Graham.
I've not climbed 8a.
> (In reply to flaneur)
> [...natural ability lie...]
>
> No need to apologise, though I politely suggest you study a bit more about developmental biology, evolution, and genetic variation. It's quite interesting.
> [...natural ability lie...]
>
> No need to apologise, though I politely suggest you study a bit more about developmental biology, evolution, and genetic variation. It's quite interesting.
I'm sure these limit people's theoretical ultimate potential but I'm equally sure that they are not the actual limiting factor for 99% of climbers. I'm pretty confident that they are still not that important even at the 8a level (Spanish prop-forwards, 8 year-olds, grand-dads, rock climbing is a very young sport in training terms). Perhaps they are starting to become more important at 8b+? Getting to 8b+ in 2 years suggests you have been dealt a strong genetic hand: you're probably a scrawny youth with steely fingers...like Dave Graham! However, I'm told 8b+ is a lot harder than 8a and plenty of genetically non-ideal specimens still climb 8b+ although it takes them a lot longer and more (cumulative) effort than Dave Graham.
I've not climbed 8a.
In reply to mrjonathanr:
Up to a point, but unless you do something pretty esoteric, 8a is going to require a (considerable) base level of strength and endurance.
I don't think that E5 is climbed in a blase away at all! In fact I suspect far fewer people regularly onsight E5 than many people imagine.
During my formative climbing years of the early 80's there were certainly more people onsighting E5 than there were redpointing 8a (arguably more than there are now!) because people went out climbing more, developing the skills to climb trad, but very few were putting in the hours of specific physical training to climb 8a. I am not sure that one is "easier" than the other; it just depends what you put your time into. Obviously the inhabitants of Lleida put alot of time into climbing 8a and above!
>
> You can find an 8a that suits your strengths. 4 minutes is however invariable.
> You can find an 8a that suits your strengths. 4 minutes is however invariable.
Up to a point, but unless you do something pretty esoteric, 8a is going to require a (considerable) base level of strength and endurance.
> Trad E5s I suspect are probably not climbed in as blase a manner as you suspect.
I don't think that E5 is climbed in a blase away at all! In fact I suspect far fewer people regularly onsight E5 than many people imagine.
During my formative climbing years of the early 80's there were certainly more people onsighting E5 than there were redpointing 8a (arguably more than there are now!) because people went out climbing more, developing the skills to climb trad, but very few were putting in the hours of specific physical training to climb 8a. I am not sure that one is "easier" than the other; it just depends what you put your time into. Obviously the inhabitants of Lleida put alot of time into climbing 8a and above!
In reply to Robert Durran:
Agreed.
Agreed.
In reply to tommyzero:
I think achieving f8a in your first 1-3 years climbing does involve a considerable measure of natural talent.
I think you have to have quickly picked up good technique/habits and have developed pretty steely fingers. While 8a is not so amazing in the scheme of things, just looking at the UKC stats shows that out of the logged climbs, very few appear in the 8s.
It probably helps to start climbing in an environment where there are other climbers at that level to use as examples. You see how much they climb, how hard they try, and how they overcome technical problems.
Where you don't have any high standard climbers to copy in terms of technique/training, I think you're a lot less likely to progress. Hence the OP not knowing many people climbing at that level, and not climbing near that level.
I like to think that these days, most people could achieve 8a. How hard they have to work for it depends on talent and favourable or unfavourable conditions (availability of rock, good climbing partners, climbing/training/eating/sleeping habits).
I'd love to know how the people who achieve it quickly do it! For me I foresee it taking several years of hard work.
I think achieving f8a in your first 1-3 years climbing does involve a considerable measure of natural talent.
I think you have to have quickly picked up good technique/habits and have developed pretty steely fingers. While 8a is not so amazing in the scheme of things, just looking at the UKC stats shows that out of the logged climbs, very few appear in the 8s.
It probably helps to start climbing in an environment where there are other climbers at that level to use as examples. You see how much they climb, how hard they try, and how they overcome technical problems.
Where you don't have any high standard climbers to copy in terms of technique/training, I think you're a lot less likely to progress. Hence the OP not knowing many people climbing at that level, and not climbing near that level.
I like to think that these days, most people could achieve 8a. How hard they have to work for it depends on talent and favourable or unfavourable conditions (availability of rock, good climbing partners, climbing/training/eating/sleeping habits).
I'd love to know how the people who achieve it quickly do it! For me I foresee it taking several years of hard work.
In reply to Ian Patterson:
I think most people are having to put a fair amount of work in to climb 8a, even if it is just by climbing a lot. My response was aimed at tommyzero and his fellow 6-something dilettantes.
Hugh Herr has climbed 8a+ (on trad. gear!).
> Maybe unfair to aim at you personally but we have comments on this thread about how climbers don't train like cyclist or runners. I think by the time you get to the 8a'ish level most climbers are putting some serious effort in - there training may not look as organised as runners / cyclists but its a more complex sport and and has higher time requirements than relatively simple aerobic based sports.
I think most people are having to put a fair amount of work in to climb 8a, even if it is just by climbing a lot. My response was aimed at tommyzero and his fellow 6-something dilettantes.
> and then Serpico will say that the only qualification is having four working limbs (and he probably thinks that is more than necessary if you're willing to put the effort in!).
Hugh Herr has climbed 8a+ (on trad. gear!).
I know a rather handy climber who has not only climbed 8a in 3 years but onsighted 8a in 5 years. He doesn't talk massively about what his training involves which gives the impression that it's mostly down to natural talent (which he clearly has a lot of too).
However, I was priveleged enough to set eyes on his most recent training plan and suddenly my eyes were opened. The guy works his butt off like you wouldn't believe morning, noon and night to achieve his goals and I realised then how much I was not doing by comparison.
8a is hard, even if it isn't anywhere near the cutting edge. However, most people who complain they aren't physically capable of climbing at that level simply don't know how much hard work they have to put in to get there.
I myself missed the boat by miles (to get there in 3 years I mean), but now I have a little bit of insight I can at least up my game and do it a bit quicker than I would have otherwise!!
However, I was priveleged enough to set eyes on his most recent training plan and suddenly my eyes were opened. The guy works his butt off like you wouldn't believe morning, noon and night to achieve his goals and I realised then how much I was not doing by comparison.
8a is hard, even if it isn't anywhere near the cutting edge. However, most people who complain they aren't physically capable of climbing at that level simply don't know how much hard work they have to put in to get there.
I myself missed the boat by miles (to get there in 3 years I mean), but now I have a little bit of insight I can at least up my game and do it a bit quicker than I would have otherwise!!
In reply to tommyzero:
>Discuss the likelihood of that or am I out of touch with reality?
You're out of touch with reality.
jcm
>Discuss the likelihood of that or am I out of touch with reality?
You're out of touch with reality.
jcm
In reply to tommyzero:
On how many f7a's have you had 3 go's per night, 3 nights per week, for 6 weeks?
Try and you might surprise yourself.
On how many f7a's have you had 3 go's per night, 3 nights per week, for 6 weeks?
Try and you might surprise yourself.
In reply to Tyler:
Think he means, Le Lapin, Dead Calm, etc etc.
> (In reply to Serpico)
>
> [...]
>
> Name names!
>
> [...]
>
> Name names!
Think he means, Le Lapin, Dead Calm, etc etc.
In reply to Serpico:
i'll take whatever's going... Specially this year!
> (In reply to Adam Lincoln)
>
> stern
>
> stern
i'll take whatever's going... Specially this year!
In reply to tommyzero:
Slightly off topic, but where do people think F8a fits in compared to other sports?
Is it the same as a 4minute mile or a 3hour marathon? Obv not a 10 second 100m but where do people think it stands?
Slightly off topic, but where do people think F8a fits in compared to other sports?
Is it the same as a 4minute mile or a 3hour marathon? Obv not a 10 second 100m but where do people think it stands?
In reply to Serpico:
There speaks Mr Downgrader himself!
Andy F
> (In reply to Adam Lincoln)
>
> Maybe not Le Lapin... then again I'm not as stern a grader as you.
>
> Maybe not Le Lapin... then again I'm not as stern a grader as you.
There speaks Mr Downgrader himself!
Andy F
In reply to andy farnell:
Standing up to your torrent of upgrades does not make me a downgrader - I'm for keeping routes at the grades that they've been settled at for decades unless there's been loss of holds etc.
All of which is wildly off-topic.
> (In reply to Serpico)
> [...]
>
> There speaks Mr Downgrader himself!
>
> [...]
>
> There speaks Mr Downgrader himself!
>
Standing up to your torrent of upgrades does not make me a downgrader - I'm for keeping routes at the grades that they've been settled at for decades unless there's been loss of holds etc.
All of which is wildly off-topic.
In reply to Serpico: So, which routes have I upgraded? I've agreed with the given grade of every route I've done, apart from the routes I think need downgrading.
Sorry for going even further off topic than before.
Andy F
Sorry for going even further off topic than before.
Andy F
I had a goal of doing it in three years. Earlier this year I redpointed my first 7b in two tries, but that was on Kalymnos. As I've only done 7a in multiple countries (France, Morocco and Kalymnos), I have yet to even try one in my home country. I don't think I'll be even near 8a. Was a fun goal though.. It's definitely doable for someone who's very keen on climbing and have a good sense of climbing intuitively.
In reply to eivindf: forgot to mention I've been climbing for exactly two years now and 7b after one and a half approx
In reply to tommyzero:
My 15 year old son started at Leeds wall in November, he just about climbed a 7a at malham in June, tried an 8a but it was beyond him at that time. Then unfortunately he went and broke his collar bone snowboarding a couple of months ago. Now he's starting again but he's not up to that yet.
So, yeah, I reacon 8a is definately possible within 3 years, or a lot less...but not for me unfortunately, it will take me a while to reach 7a, if I ever do
My 15 year old son started at Leeds wall in November, he just about climbed a 7a at malham in June, tried an 8a but it was beyond him at that time. Then unfortunately he went and broke his collar bone snowboarding a couple of months ago. Now he's starting again but he's not up to that yet.
So, yeah, I reacon 8a is definately possible within 3 years, or a lot less...but not for me unfortunately, it will take me a while to reach 7a, if I ever do
In reply to tommyzero: So are any of the 8a guys on here willing to share how much they do of an average week?
In reply to edinburgerboulderer53:
There are a few who alreqady do on Fit Club: http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=426031
Ally Smith and Andy Farnell have done so - PlexiglassNick may be more relevant to keep an eye on as he is doing the work to get there
There are a few who alreqady do on Fit Club: http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=426031
Ally Smith and Andy Farnell have done so - PlexiglassNick may be more relevant to keep an eye on as he is doing the work to get there
In reply to shark: Ah cheers, I don't think I've ever actually read that thread in all the time I've been on here.
In reply to Alun:
>the bit about climbers not being prepared to put in the hours like club runners or cyclists.
there's one more thing about it, it's a bit subtle...
most of our training schedules/routines start from 2 assumptions
a)we want to be in reasonable shape all the time.
b)we train a relatively limited amount of time per week and need to make the most out of that.
So, if one is willing to go further and train "like a runner/cyclist/swimmer/etc", he/she has no clue about what to do, at what intensity, and what kind of result to expect.
I bet 90% of enthusiast newcomers who try to go that way either end up in an overtrained/burned out state for which they are not psychologically prepared, or get injuried (or both)
>the bit about climbers not being prepared to put in the hours like club runners or cyclists.
there's one more thing about it, it's a bit subtle...
most of our training schedules/routines start from 2 assumptions
a)we want to be in reasonable shape all the time.
b)we train a relatively limited amount of time per week and need to make the most out of that.
So, if one is willing to go further and train "like a runner/cyclist/swimmer/etc", he/she has no clue about what to do, at what intensity, and what kind of result to expect.
I bet 90% of enthusiast newcomers who try to go that way either end up in an overtrained/burned out state for which they are not psychologically prepared, or get injuried (or both)
In reply to James Oswald: as is often said, most people simply dont try hard enough regularly enough (i mean really give it their absolute all every time, really reflect on and be honest about their performance)
In reply to Ian Patterson:
Higher time requirements? How do you mean? When I was training seriously for triathlon (i.e. GB squad level) our typical training week would be 25hrs per week of swimming, biking and running.
Long bike days would be 5hrs, long runs 2hrs and big swim days would be 2hrs in the morning and another 2 in the evening.
> (In reply to Serpico)
>
> [...]
>
> there training may not look as organised as runners / cyclists but its a more complex sport and and has higher time requirements than relatively simple aerobic based sports.
>
> [...]
>
> there training may not look as organised as runners / cyclists but its a more complex sport and and has higher time requirements than relatively simple aerobic based sports.
Higher time requirements? How do you mean? When I was training seriously for triathlon (i.e. GB squad level) our typical training week would be 25hrs per week of swimming, biking and running.
Long bike days would be 5hrs, long runs 2hrs and big swim days would be 2hrs in the morning and another 2 in the evening.
In reply to tom290483:
That pretty much proves the point 25 hours+ would be relatively typical for many climbers, nowhere near british squad level, particularly if you include time getting to anf from the crag, Saturday and Sunday could easily be 20 hours, 3 sessions during the week another 6 to 10 hours.
My brother is a decent cyclist / triathlete (was sub 1 hour time trialist, won cheshire sprint triathlon, now mountain bikes and when he competes has a good chance of wining vetren events) though not at your level, and when he's at his fittest he was training up to 15 - 20 hours a week.
> (In reply to Ian Patterson)
> [...]
>
> Higher time requirements? How do you mean? When I was training seriously for triathlon (i.e. GB squad level) our typical training week would be 25hrs per week of swimming, biking and running.
>
> [...]
>
> Higher time requirements? How do you mean? When I was training seriously for triathlon (i.e. GB squad level) our typical training week would be 25hrs per week of swimming, biking and running.
>
That pretty much proves the point 25 hours+ would be relatively typical for many climbers, nowhere near british squad level, particularly if you include time getting to anf from the crag, Saturday and Sunday could easily be 20 hours, 3 sessions during the week another 6 to 10 hours.
My brother is a decent cyclist / triathlete (was sub 1 hour time trialist, won cheshire sprint triathlon, now mountain bikes and when he competes has a good chance of wining vetren events) though not at your level, and when he's at his fittest he was training up to 15 - 20 hours a week.
In reply to Ian Patterson: If you work part-time, as some good but not top climbers do, then 3 sessions at the crag can easily be 25+ hrs in a week. On top of that there's training on the fingerboards/campus boards/walls.
We both know people who work full time and easily manage 30+ hrs climbing time per week (including travelling to the crag).
Andy F
We both know people who work full time and easily manage 30+ hrs climbing time per week (including travelling to the crag).
Andy F
In reply to andy farnell:
30+hrs climbing time isn't 30+hrs training time in the same way that a runner would describe their training. If a runner claims 30hrs training time then the vast majority of that time will actually be spent running/training, compare that to 30hrs of 'climbing time' where the majority of time will be spent belaying/standing around chatting/hanging on the rope...
I reckon for a typical 6hr day at the crag less than an hour is actually spent climbing on average.
> (In reply to Ian Patterson)
> We both know people who work full time and easily manage 30+ hrs climbing time per week (including travelling to the crag).
>
> We both know people who work full time and easily manage 30+ hrs climbing time per week (including travelling to the crag).
>
30+hrs climbing time isn't 30+hrs training time in the same way that a runner would describe their training. If a runner claims 30hrs training time then the vast majority of that time will actually be spent running/training, compare that to 30hrs of 'climbing time' where the majority of time will be spent belaying/standing around chatting/hanging on the rope...
I reckon for a typical 6hr day at the crag less than an hour is actually spent climbing on average.
In reply to Serpico:
Just what I was going to say Serpico. The vast majority of climbers don't train very hard, even those who do "training" don't generally do it to anything like the extent of a keen runner/cyclist.
Just what I was going to say Serpico. The vast majority of climbers don't train very hard, even those who do "training" don't generally do it to anything like the extent of a keen runner/cyclist.
In reply to Serpico:
Obviously true from the actual climbing time but your is still spending that much of their free time. And the running analogy doesn't really work - this mythical runner spending 30 hours a week, the 'vast amount' (lets say 25 hours) of which is running would be running over 200 miles a week based on a conservative 7 minute mile!
> (In reply to andy farnell)
> [...]
>
> 30+hrs climbing time isn't 30+hrs training time in the same way that a runner would describe their training. If a runner claims 30hrs training time then the vast majority of that time will actually be spent running/training, compare that to 30hrs of 'climbing time' where the majority of time will be spent belaying/standing around chatting/hanging on the rope...
> I reckon for a typical 6hr day at the crag less than an hour is actually spent climbing on average.
> [...]
>
> 30+hrs climbing time isn't 30+hrs training time in the same way that a runner would describe their training. If a runner claims 30hrs training time then the vast majority of that time will actually be spent running/training, compare that to 30hrs of 'climbing time' where the majority of time will be spent belaying/standing around chatting/hanging on the rope...
> I reckon for a typical 6hr day at the crag less than an hour is actually spent climbing on average.
Obviously true from the actual climbing time but your is still spending that much of their free time. And the running analogy doesn't really work - this mythical runner spending 30 hours a week, the 'vast amount' (lets say 25 hours) of which is running would be running over 200 miles a week based on a conservative 7 minute mile!
In reply to Keeg:
Again I'm not so sure - following injury I've spent a lot of time on the mountain bike with guys who are very keen and at the upper levels of fitness and got myself to a level where I could ride pretty well with them. What I see is good climbers putting in significant effort very comparable to other sports. Of course it may be that I'm just not a very good climber so biking just feels easier to me.
> (In reply to Serpico)
> Just what I was going to say Serpico. The vast majority of climbers don't train very hard, even those who do "training" don't generally do it to anything like the extent of a keen runner/cyclist.
> Just what I was going to say Serpico. The vast majority of climbers don't train very hard, even those who do "training" don't generally do it to anything like the extent of a keen runner/cyclist.
Again I'm not so sure - following injury I've spent a lot of time on the mountain bike with guys who are very keen and at the upper levels of fitness and got myself to a level where I could ride pretty well with them. What I see is good climbers putting in significant effort very comparable to other sports. Of course it may be that I'm just not a very good climber so biking just feels easier to me.
In reply to Ian Patterson:
Depends what distance they're training for, a quick Google got me this:
In reality, the ability to be a world-class marathon runner does in part depend on being able to absorb the training over two or three years. I don't know of any elite marathon runner who doesn't average around 100 miles a week, mostly around 120 miles a week. The most efficient ones can take it and become elite runners; those who can't drop out of marathon running. That's the nature of elite sport.
The work:rest ratio will depend on what's being trained - but you could use 1:1 as a conservative rule of thumb, which is still a lot more than a typical climber.
> (In reply to Serpico)
> [...]
>
>
> Obviously true from the actual climbing time but your is still spending that much of their free time. And the running analogy doesn't really work - this mythical runner spending 30 hours a week, the 'vast amount' (lets say 25 hours) of which is running would be running over 200 miles a week based on a conservative 7 minute mile!
> [...]
>
>
> Obviously true from the actual climbing time but your is still spending that much of their free time. And the running analogy doesn't really work - this mythical runner spending 30 hours a week, the 'vast amount' (lets say 25 hours) of which is running would be running over 200 miles a week based on a conservative 7 minute mile!
Depends what distance they're training for, a quick Google got me this:
In reality, the ability to be a world-class marathon runner does in part depend on being able to absorb the training over two or three years. I don't know of any elite marathon runner who doesn't average around 100 miles a week, mostly around 120 miles a week. The most efficient ones can take it and become elite runners; those who can't drop out of marathon running. That's the nature of elite sport.
The work:rest ratio will depend on what's being trained - but you could use 1:1 as a conservative rule of thumb, which is still a lot more than a typical climber.
In reply to Ian Patterson:
You're a bit too tall for a sport climber, but it could be interesting to see what the optimum limb length is for cycling.
> (In reply to Keeg)
> [...]
>
> Again I'm not so sure - following injury I've spent a lot of time on the mountain bike with guys who are very keen and at the upper levels of fitness and got myself to a level where I could ride pretty well with them. What I see is good climbers putting in significant effort very comparable to other sports. Of course it may be that I'm just not a very good climber so biking just feels easier to me.
> [...]
>
> Again I'm not so sure - following injury I've spent a lot of time on the mountain bike with guys who are very keen and at the upper levels of fitness and got myself to a level where I could ride pretty well with them. What I see is good climbers putting in significant effort very comparable to other sports. Of course it may be that I'm just not a very good climber so biking just feels easier to me.
You're a bit too tall for a sport climber, but it could be interesting to see what the optimum limb length is for cycling.
In reply to Ian Patterson:
Aye i think comparing and quantifying training in terms of hours is a bit disengenuous.
Intense things like campussing/fingerboarding are less time consuming than a session of routes on plastic for example.
In the bodybuilding world i remember the most successfull athelete for a time only used to train every other day and for short intense 1.5 hour sessions. Whereas many others found they made the best progress training 5-6 days a week and mornign and evening workouts.
Cheers
Tim
>
>
>
Aye i think comparing and quantifying training in terms of hours is a bit disengenuous.
Intense things like campussing/fingerboarding are less time consuming than a session of routes on plastic for example.
In the bodybuilding world i remember the most successfull athelete for a time only used to train every other day and for short intense 1.5 hour sessions. Whereas many others found they made the best progress training 5-6 days a week and mornign and evening workouts.
Cheers
Tim
In reply to Serpico:
At elite level you'd be more like 5 - 6 min miles (plus sonm faster speed work I guess) so you've only got to around 10 - 12 hours of actual running giving you less than 25 hours of training based on your 1:1 ratio. And 8a ish isn't the equivalent of elite marathon running.
> (In reply to Ian Patterson)
> [...]
>
> In reality, the ability to be a world-class marathon runner does in part depend on being able to absorb the training over two or three years. I don't know of any elite marathon runner who doesn't average around 100 miles a week, mostly around 120 miles a week. The most efficient ones can take it and become elite runners; those who can't drop out of marathon running. That's the nature of elite sport.
> [...]
>
> In reality, the ability to be a world-class marathon runner does in part depend on being able to absorb the training over two or three years. I don't know of any elite marathon runner who doesn't average around 100 miles a week, mostly around 120 miles a week. The most efficient ones can take it and become elite runners; those who can't drop out of marathon running. That's the nature of elite sport.
At elite level you'd be more like 5 - 6 min miles (plus sonm faster speed work I guess) so you've only got to around 10 - 12 hours of actual running giving you less than 25 hours of training based on your 1:1 ratio. And 8a ish isn't the equivalent of elite marathon running.
In reply to Ian Patterson:
I wouldn't get too bogged down in the actual distances as training time doesn't just involve running.
As for the time spent training, you came up with the figures;
My brother is a decent cyclist / triathlete (was sub 1 hour time trialist, won cheshire sprint triathlon, now mountain bikes and when he competes has a good chance of wining vetren events) though not at your level, and when he's at his fittest he was training up to 15 - 20 hours a week.
> (In reply to Serpico)
> [...]
>
> At elite level you'd be more like 5 - 6 min miles (plus sonm faster speed work I guess) so you've only got to around 10 - 12 hours of actual running giving you less than 25 hours of training based on your 1:1 ratio. And 8a ish isn't the equivalent of elite marathon running.
> [...]
>
> At elite level you'd be more like 5 - 6 min miles (plus sonm faster speed work I guess) so you've only got to around 10 - 12 hours of actual running giving you less than 25 hours of training based on your 1:1 ratio. And 8a ish isn't the equivalent of elite marathon running.
I wouldn't get too bogged down in the actual distances as training time doesn't just involve running.
As for the time spent training, you came up with the figures;
My brother is a decent cyclist / triathlete (was sub 1 hour time trialist, won cheshire sprint triathlon, now mountain bikes and when he competes has a good chance of wining vetren events) though not at your level, and when he's at his fittest he was training up to 15 - 20 hours a week.
In reply to Serpico:
I'm not sure we actually disagree that much - it is just the blanket comments about climbers not training hard compared to other sports that I'm arguing with. My observations are that at the upper end (say E5 / 8a upwards) most climbers put in a fair amount of time, effort and thought into there climbing and training. I've mixed with high club level cyclists and this idea that there's a whole load of committed athletes in cycling clubs who put all climbers to shame just isn't true in my experience. Obviously at the 'leisure' end of climbing things are different but there it's treated more as a pastime than a sport.
I'm not sure we actually disagree that much - it is just the blanket comments about climbers not training hard compared to other sports that I'm arguing with. My observations are that at the upper end (say E5 / 8a upwards) most climbers put in a fair amount of time, effort and thought into there climbing and training. I've mixed with high club level cyclists and this idea that there's a whole load of committed athletes in cycling clubs who put all climbers to shame just isn't true in my experience. Obviously at the 'leisure' end of climbing things are different but there it's treated more as a pastime than a sport.
In reply to Ian Patterson:
I'd guess that I do a kind of normal level of training for a keen climber and my average week would probably consist of two one hour sessions on the board in the week and a day out climbing at the weekend where my effective climbing time is probably about what Serpico estimated, so one hour. Giving a total time of three hours. That's shit all in training terms when compared to other sports. Also one hour of that is the event itself (i.e. climbing). I imagine that if you looked at other sports the ratio of training to competing would be very different to 2:1. I know competing isn't exactly the right term for the climbing but the point stands. Also the other two hours are just doing problems on a board until I feel a bit tired, hardly scientific and focussed.
There are limitations on training due to the nature of climbing (i.e. working the relatively small muscles of the forearm to failure takes less time than the big leg muscles) but even so I maintain that the huge majority of climbers do not train hard. And I don't just mean those who state they don't train, but also lots of those who do.
Having said all that the training threads on UKC and UKB have opened my eyes to the extent that some people do train, although I'd stick by my assertion that hard training is rare in climbing.
I'd guess that I do a kind of normal level of training for a keen climber and my average week would probably consist of two one hour sessions on the board in the week and a day out climbing at the weekend where my effective climbing time is probably about what Serpico estimated, so one hour. Giving a total time of three hours. That's shit all in training terms when compared to other sports. Also one hour of that is the event itself (i.e. climbing). I imagine that if you looked at other sports the ratio of training to competing would be very different to 2:1. I know competing isn't exactly the right term for the climbing but the point stands. Also the other two hours are just doing problems on a board until I feel a bit tired, hardly scientific and focussed.
There are limitations on training due to the nature of climbing (i.e. working the relatively small muscles of the forearm to failure takes less time than the big leg muscles) but even so I maintain that the huge majority of climbers do not train hard. And I don't just mean those who state they don't train, but also lots of those who do.
Having said all that the training threads on UKC and UKB have opened my eyes to the extent that some people do train, although I'd stick by my assertion that hard training is rare in climbing.
In reply to Keeg:
I don't know you personally but given your climbing achievements I think it would be fair to argue that you on the upper end of the graph of natural talent for climbing - onsight E8 and Font 8a+ on a bit of bimbling around is a pretty good return (and I certainly don't think it makes any difference whether we count you ascent of Doug as onsight or flash).
I don't know you personally but given your climbing achievements I think it would be fair to argue that you on the upper end of the graph of natural talent for climbing - onsight E8 and Font 8a+ on a bit of bimbling around is a pretty good return (and I certainly don't think it makes any difference whether we count you ascent of Doug as onsight or flash).
In reply to all:
I'd also add that in many sports, such as running, there's access to structured group training sessions through the likes of running clubs etc. At these sessions, you meet up with like mided folk and probably a coach and follow a defined training program.
This kind of thing just isn't available in climbing and because of this, and the nature of climbing itself, training for most people is quite erratic and lacks focus.
I'd say most people do two sessions at the wall an a week and a day or two every weekend.
The "keen" amoungst us I'd say will have three wall sessions (or equivalent) and climb both days on the weekend. That, in my eyes, is quite a time commitment, even if the actual amount of time training/climbing is quite small.
I'd also add that in many sports, such as running, there's access to structured group training sessions through the likes of running clubs etc. At these sessions, you meet up with like mided folk and probably a coach and follow a defined training program.
This kind of thing just isn't available in climbing and because of this, and the nature of climbing itself, training for most people is quite erratic and lacks focus.
I'd say most people do two sessions at the wall an a week and a day or two every weekend.
The "keen" amoungst us I'd say will have three wall sessions (or equivalent) and climb both days on the weekend. That, in my eyes, is quite a time commitment, even if the actual amount of time training/climbing is quite small.
In reply to Ian Patterson:
In my schedule for last year/early this year a standard week would be usually training 6 days, split sessions, 6:30-9AM in gym then afternoon 4-9PM(minimum) in wall (doing very specific training). With certain exercises in-between sessions.
Normally 8(ish) hours a day with some bits on the rest day.
Include all the diet, 2x physio per week etc and that's not much time to earn money to pay rent or get to international comps when there's no financial support.
Drew
In my schedule for last year/early this year a standard week would be usually training 6 days, split sessions, 6:30-9AM in gym then afternoon 4-9PM(minimum) in wall (doing very specific training). With certain exercises in-between sessions.
Normally 8(ish) hours a day with some bits on the rest day.
Include all the diet, 2x physio per week etc and that's not much time to earn money to pay rent or get to international comps when there's no financial support.
Drew
In reply to galpinos:
The vast majority of runners are "fun" runners and I suspect the vast majority of cyclists have a similar approach. Likewise climbers. I suspect there is a similar distribution of time commitment and effort in all three.
> (In reply to all)
>
> This kind of thing just isn't available in climbing and because of this, and the nature of climbing itself, training for most people is quite erratic and lacks focus.
>
> This kind of thing just isn't available in climbing and because of this, and the nature of climbing itself, training for most people is quite erratic and lacks focus.
The vast majority of runners are "fun" runners and I suspect the vast majority of cyclists have a similar approach. Likewise climbers. I suspect there is a similar distribution of time commitment and effort in all three.
In reply to dirtbag1:
Now that is hard training, can't imagine that many even very keen climbers get close to that level of commitment.
Now that is hard training, can't imagine that many even very keen climbers get close to that level of commitment.
In reply to dirtbag1: Now that sounds close to Patxi Level training commitment. I feel truely humbled. Must start actually training at some point..
Cheers
Tim
Cheers
Tim
In reply to tommyzero: It is quite possible. I haven't been training as hard or constantly or effectively as I could, and climbed 7b+ in two years, and hardly do any redpointing, trying to focus on on-sighting and trad styles. Modern climbing training is simply at a point where 8a is no longer elite. I know quite a few people who regularly climbed 7a after a year of climbing.
In reply to jacobjlloyd: Yep, agree. Easily done. 1 year at 3 times a week + bags of determination + 100 falls later = redpointing F7a+. It's getting past that stage the hard bit I think. One would assume that it is possible to climb F8a within 3 years, you just need to train 5 times a week + tons of determination + loosing your girlfriend/wife/friends.
In reply to dirtbag1: You are a machine!
Four days a week climbing and my fingers/elbow are crying for mercy.
Good reading this thread, keep the insane training plans coming.
G
Four days a week climbing and my fingers/elbow are crying for mercy.
Good reading this thread, keep the insane training plans coming.
G
In reply to nbonnett: Depends on your interpretation of the word "Training" mate.
I think to me "real" training involves more of a structured approach rather than just going to the wall and climbing progressively harder problems/routes till exhaustion. The latter seems to consume the majority of my approach.
Cheers
Tim
I think to me "real" training involves more of a structured approach rather than just going to the wall and climbing progressively harder problems/routes till exhaustion. The latter seems to consume the majority of my approach.
Cheers
Tim
In reply to Tim Broughtonshaw: probably been debated on here before but i'll ask anyway: anyone have definitive knowledge on how much structured training Chris Sharma does? i thought his approach was pretty much climb lots with no defined training?
In reply to ksjs: yet thats what i assumed.. To be honest i think from past experience in looking into other sports. Unless you are a genetic god yourself i think you can glean the best information from studying the training regimes of those who have had to work hard to achieve their successes.
For me it appears clear that Sharma and Ondra are genetic gods and i think (apart from applying their same levels of determination and tenacity) i could gain little from studying them. Patxi however obviously is talented and gifted but its also abundantly clear that he has made and continues to make a large amount of sacrifices in order to succeed.
Cheers
Tim
For me it appears clear that Sharma and Ondra are genetic gods and i think (apart from applying their same levels of determination and tenacity) i could gain little from studying them. Patxi however obviously is talented and gifted but its also abundantly clear that he has made and continues to make a large amount of sacrifices in order to succeed.
Cheers
Tim
In reply to Tim Broughtonshaw:
i.e. to learn how to do a one armer (if that was a goal) studying the training techniques of someone who had excellent armstrength prior to climbing isnt gonna help those with a relative weakness in this area.
i.e. to learn how to do a one armer (if that was a goal) studying the training techniques of someone who had excellent armstrength prior to climbing isnt gonna help those with a relative weakness in this area.
In reply to Ian Patterson:
Yeah but you cant include time getting to the crag as training surely? In the same way walking to the swimming pool or athletics track wouldnt be classed as training time.
I see where your coming from these guys train bloody hard in the same way that committed amateur runners/cyclists/triathletes do.
> (In reply to tom290483)
> [...]
>
> That pretty much proves the point 25 hours+ would be relatively typical for many climbers, nowhere near british squad level, particularly if you include time getting to anf from the crag, Saturday and Sunday could easily be 20 hours, 3 sessions during the week another 6 to 10 hours.
>> [...]
>
> That pretty much proves the point 25 hours+ would be relatively typical for many climbers, nowhere near british squad level, particularly if you include time getting to anf from the crag, Saturday and Sunday could easily be 20 hours, 3 sessions during the week another 6 to 10 hours.
Yeah but you cant include time getting to the crag as training surely? In the same way walking to the swimming pool or athletics track wouldnt be classed as training time.
I see where your coming from these guys train bloody hard in the same way that committed amateur runners/cyclists/triathletes do.
In reply to Ian Patterson:
It depends on what level of athlete your talking about, not many runners for example do 25hrs of running per week (except for the occasional big volume week) the body simply cannot handle that level of impact which running places it under.
Top marathon runners will not run 26 miles in training, tops is probably about 20 miles. The body cannot recover quickly enough from much more than this in time for the next training session to be a constructive one.
However for a runner that does two sessions per day, normally an easy/steady paced run and then track work, the rest of the training time will be spent swimming/doing gym work/stretching etc.
> (In reply to Serpico)
> [...]
>
>
> Obviously true from the actual climbing time but your is still spending that much of their free time. And the running analogy doesn't really work - this mythical runner spending 30 hours a week, the 'vast amount' (lets say 25 hours) of which is running would be running over 200 miles a week based on a conservative 7 minute mile!
>> [...]
>
>
> Obviously true from the actual climbing time but your is still spending that much of their free time. And the running analogy doesn't really work - this mythical runner spending 30 hours a week, the 'vast amount' (lets say 25 hours) of which is running would be running over 200 miles a week based on a conservative 7 minute mile!
It depends on what level of athlete your talking about, not many runners for example do 25hrs of running per week (except for the occasional big volume week) the body simply cannot handle that level of impact which running places it under.
Top marathon runners will not run 26 miles in training, tops is probably about 20 miles. The body cannot recover quickly enough from much more than this in time for the next training session to be a constructive one.
However for a runner that does two sessions per day, normally an easy/steady paced run and then track work, the rest of the training time will be spent swimming/doing gym work/stretching etc.
In reply to flaneur:
Ah! So that's where I've been going wrong. Note to self: must stop enjoying it. Remember, you're not here to have fun. On the plus side, you can remain a lardyarse.
> (In reply to tommyzero)
>
> [...]
>
> It is just that most climbers don't know what hard (training) work is or are not prepared to put the hours in and suffer in way that club runners or cyclists do.
>
> [...]
>
> It is just that most climbers don't know what hard (training) work is or are not prepared to put the hours in and suffer in way that club runners or cyclists do.
Ah! So that's where I've been going wrong. Note to self: must stop enjoying it. Remember, you're not here to have fun. On the plus side, you can remain a lardyarse.
In reply to tommyzero: I don't think climbers are willing to suffer. Runners , swimmers and all athletes involved in sports with a tradition of training, balance their love of the sport and the enjoyment it brings them with the need to suffer to make improvements. Going climbing is fun. Hard regular climbing is exhausting but still fun. Training is specific, hard, dull but effective. Training hard pushes you beyond what you thought was possible.
In reply to marcusinbristol:
I suffer far more when I run than when I am training for rock climbing, but this is not because I am trying harder and putting more effort in - far from it! I think it because the muscles in my legs are much bigger than the muscles in my forearms and therefore subject me to propotionately more pain when pumped; it is just the different natures of the activities. I imagine that cycling and rowing etc. hurt more for the same reason. A similar effect is noticed when suffering from cramp; cramp in the hand is merely uncomfortable whereas cramp in my thigh is ther most excruciating pain I have ever experienced!
> (In reply to tommyzero) I don't think climbers are willing to suffer.
I suffer far more when I run than when I am training for rock climbing, but this is not because I am trying harder and putting more effort in - far from it! I think it because the muscles in my legs are much bigger than the muscles in my forearms and therefore subject me to propotionately more pain when pumped; it is just the different natures of the activities. I imagine that cycling and rowing etc. hurt more for the same reason. A similar effect is noticed when suffering from cramp; cramp in the hand is merely uncomfortable whereas cramp in my thigh is ther most excruciating pain I have ever experienced!
In reply to marcusinbristol: so, can someone tell me why / how, if youre continually trying to climb harder but simply go out and climb, you are not still training i.e. gaining more power, refining movement skills or building stamina etc? thus fun & progress is possible!
In reply to ksjs: You are training but just not specifically training your weaknesses, which is the quickest way to get better. Climbing around at random is a fun way of doing it, but people tend to gravitate towards their own style of problems, meaning the gap between their preferred styles just increases.
In reply to tommyzero:
i would love to know how hard people train to climb 8a.
my friend has written an article in one of the mags next month about it, but im still not convinced.
one of the subjects does no training, has been climbing for 7 years and did the first 8a he tried on his second go, the other has been climbing for 3 years and trains lots and did the same 8a in a couple of sessions.
i guess it just depends on if you care about climbing hard quick, totally dooable.
i never could tho, got to 6c rp in my first 3 years, this year ive got up to 7a+ os, no training, because its boring
i would love to know how hard people train to climb 8a.
my friend has written an article in one of the mags next month about it, but im still not convinced.
one of the subjects does no training, has been climbing for 7 years and did the first 8a he tried on his second go, the other has been climbing for 3 years and trains lots and did the same 8a in a couple of sessions.
i guess it just depends on if you care about climbing hard quick, totally dooable.
i never could tho, got to 6c rp in my first 3 years, this year ive got up to 7a+ os, no training, because its boring
In reply to edinburgerboulderer53: not sure i agree, surely bouldering is ideal training as it:
a) gives stacks of moves which is perfect for trad
b) is often powerful or requiring power endurance so perfect for sport
this assumes youre not taking it easy on yourself and doing loads of problems that dont tax you i.e. you need to be trying things that you find properly difficult with a range of styles (short, long, steep, vertical and slabby etc).
also, i dont think working your weaknesses is the quickest way to get better in a certain sense. yes, to be a more all-round climber this is a good thing. if however by better you mean higher grades then pick something that plays to your strengths.
a) gives stacks of moves which is perfect for trad
b) is often powerful or requiring power endurance so perfect for sport
this assumes youre not taking it easy on yourself and doing loads of problems that dont tax you i.e. you need to be trying things that you find properly difficult with a range of styles (short, long, steep, vertical and slabby etc).
also, i dont think working your weaknesses is the quickest way to get better in a certain sense. yes, to be a more all-round climber this is a good thing. if however by better you mean higher grades then pick something that plays to your strengths.
In reply to ksjs:
Would totally agree.
Grade progression: Play to your strengths.
All-round ability: Address your weaknesses (of which most of us have loads!)
Mick
> (In reply to edinburgerboulderer53) also, i dont think working your weaknesses is the quickest way to get better in a certain sense. yes, to be a more all-round climber this is a good thing. if however by better you mean higher grades then pick something that plays to your strengths.
Would totally agree.
Grade progression: Play to your strengths.
All-round ability: Address your weaknesses (of which most of us have loads!)
Mick
In reply to mark_wellin: In reply to mark_wellin: ive climbed 2 8as so not lots to go on but this is my experience: except for a stint of 4x4s earlier this year and quite a bit of timed deadhangs with added weight 2 winters ago i have never done any structured training. i would say i dont train and have managed to improve through experience and sticking at things.
you shouldnt generalise but i honestly believe many people simply dont realise that with a bit of focus and sustained effort theyd probably smash their personal best by some margin. that said some people just dont like the idea of hanging round a boulder and falling of the same single move time after time or indeed going back session after session to the same crag to fail on the same route. i think however this is the 'price' youve got to pay.
also, climbing with good climbers makes a big difference as your norms change and i think you somehow imbibe some of what they do and almost up your game sub-conciously (or at least give yourself a hard time such that you perform better).
the fact remains that we have pretty low quality sport 5s / 6s in the UK, the style is often cruxy (versus long stamina affairs in Europe which are arguably more negotiable) and our weather can be testing. not really the ideal recipe to inspire people.
id be interested to hear what the 8a you refer to was - i must get on it
you shouldnt generalise but i honestly believe many people simply dont realise that with a bit of focus and sustained effort theyd probably smash their personal best by some margin. that said some people just dont like the idea of hanging round a boulder and falling of the same single move time after time or indeed going back session after session to the same crag to fail on the same route. i think however this is the 'price' youve got to pay.
also, climbing with good climbers makes a big difference as your norms change and i think you somehow imbibe some of what they do and almost up your game sub-conciously (or at least give yourself a hard time such that you perform better).
the fact remains that we have pretty low quality sport 5s / 6s in the UK, the style is often cruxy (versus long stamina affairs in Europe which are arguably more negotiable) and our weather can be testing. not really the ideal recipe to inspire people.
id be interested to hear what the 8a you refer to was - i must get on it
In reply to Serpico:
I agree...
>
> 30+hrs climbing time isn't 30+hrs training time in the same way that a runner would describe their training. If a runner claims 30hrs training time then the vast majority of that time will actually be spent running/training, compare that to 30hrs of 'climbing time' where the majority of time will be spent belaying/standing around chatting/hanging on the rope...
> I reckon for a typical 6hr day at the crag less than an hour is actually spent climbing on average.
> 30+hrs climbing time isn't 30+hrs training time in the same way that a runner would describe their training. If a runner claims 30hrs training time then the vast majority of that time will actually be spent running/training, compare that to 30hrs of 'climbing time' where the majority of time will be spent belaying/standing around chatting/hanging on the rope...
> I reckon for a typical 6hr day at the crag less than an hour is actually spent climbing on average.
I agree...
In reply to ksjs: If you don't want to feel like a prat and thoroughly pissed off when you're being spanked by V5s having just done your first V10 then working your weaknesses is important.
In reply to @ndyM@rsh@ll:
True-ish.
But Usain Bolt is crap at marathons, I wonder if he working his endurance weaknesses?
It all depends on your personal end goal.
True-ish.
But Usain Bolt is crap at marathons, I wonder if he working his endurance weaknesses?
It all depends on your personal end goal.
In reply to @ndyM@rsh@ll:
It's only important if you make it so. If you feel like a prat and pissed off as a result of this happening then you've only got yourself to blame.
I came back to Blighty for a week's climbing this summer with a mate from Barcelona. After five days of climbing around Wales, we hit the grit and had to lower our grades by several notches (because we're limestone sport-climbing wussies who can't smear :P )
We didn't beat ourselves up about it though - we just accepted that it was a different style of climbing which we're not so good at! We still had fun. By contrast, had we not climbed higher grades at Pembroke, we might well have been disappointed with ourselves, because steep limestone is what we climb all the time.
My point is that the only person who's going to be disappointed with the grades you climb is you, because only you put the pressure on yourself!
> If you don't want to feel like a prat and thoroughly pissed off when you're being spanked by V5s having just done your first V10 then working your weaknesses is important.
It's only important if you make it so. If you feel like a prat and pissed off as a result of this happening then you've only got yourself to blame.
I came back to Blighty for a week's climbing this summer with a mate from Barcelona. After five days of climbing around Wales, we hit the grit and had to lower our grades by several notches (because we're limestone sport-climbing wussies who can't smear :P )
We didn't beat ourselves up about it though - we just accepted that it was a different style of climbing which we're not so good at! We still had fun. By contrast, had we not climbed higher grades at Pembroke, we might well have been disappointed with ourselves, because steep limestone is what we climb all the time.
My point is that the only person who's going to be disappointed with the grades you climb is you, because only you put the pressure on yourself!
In reply to ksjs:
This is a good point. I've not yet led 7a, but I've never tried as hard as some of the top guys/gals do, either. Steve McLure did Rhapsody in four days, which was considered fast. I've never tried any route for four days! I reckon I could climb 7a if I was on the same route for four days. That enormous (40m, I think) DWS/Psicobloc that Sharma put up in Majorca took him 40 attempts!
But I guess that for the folk that find training boring, they'd also find this kind of approach boring too. There's an awful lot of resting and pondering goes hand in hand with all these attempts on a really hard project.
This is a good point. I've not yet led 7a, but I've never tried as hard as some of the top guys/gals do, either. Steve McLure did Rhapsody in four days, which was considered fast. I've never tried any route for four days! I reckon I could climb 7a if I was on the same route for four days. That enormous (40m, I think) DWS/Psicobloc that Sharma put up in Majorca took him 40 attempts!
But I guess that for the folk that find training boring, they'd also find this kind of approach boring too. There's an awful lot of resting and pondering goes hand in hand with all these attempts on a really hard project.
In reply to dirtbag1:
Haha! That's just I was was trying to say, but in a more concise and understandable way
> But Usain Bolt is crap at marathons, I wonder if he working his endurance weaknesses?
Haha! That's just I was was trying to say, but in a more concise and understandable way
In reply to @ndyM@rsh@ll: youre right, very possible to climb lots of V5s, get good at them and do nothing harder. TBH though id bet a small fortune that if youve done V10 youll be doing V5 very quickly unless its a total sandbag / very specific style.
In reply to agibb:
Time to find out?
Mick
> (In reply to ksjs)
>
> I've never tried any route for four days! I reckon I could climb 7a if I was on the same route for four days.
>
> I've never tried any route for four days! I reckon I could climb 7a if I was on the same route for four days.
Time to find out?
Mick
In reply to agibb:
again, definitely not some people's cuppa but the satisfaction of unlocking something piece by piece or having a moment where you do an unplanned move but it happens to be the perfect solution can be very very rewarding. like some large-scale puzzle or 3D chess really.
then, when it all comes together on the redpoint, it is even more satisfying. definitely not fast food. give it a go you might surprise yourself...
> There's an awful lot of resting and pondering goes hand in hand with all these attempts on a really hard project.
again, definitely not some people's cuppa but the satisfaction of unlocking something piece by piece or having a moment where you do an unplanned move but it happens to be the perfect solution can be very very rewarding. like some large-scale puzzle or 3D chess really.
then, when it all comes together on the redpoint, it is even more satisfying. definitely not fast food. give it a go you might surprise yourself...
In reply to ksjs: I'd agree bouldering is perfect (assuming you're willing to get spanked learning to do moves you can't do). Most people won't stick at this long unless they really want that problem. However constantly trying the same move you're falling from is not only a good way of getting injured but will take a long time to force the body out of those natural plateaus. And at the end of the day after all that effort you've only learned how to do that one move.
Secondly you and I are coming at the same problem from a different angle. You rightly suggest focusing on your strengths will get you up to 8a quicker. However it means that you'll tick one very specific style of 8a. Cool if it's a dream route and you just want to do that, fine by me. But I'm considering that you want to be able to climb 8a. The difference, you rock up to ANY crag see an 8a and say 'no matter what moves are on that, I've got a method and the experience to figure out a way around it.'
(PS a lot of this comes down to what you define as training, personally I don't consider bouldering 'training' as I really enjoy it as a discipline unto itself and want to improve my bouldering. Training to me is the rubbish bit you don't really want to do)
Secondly you and I are coming at the same problem from a different angle. You rightly suggest focusing on your strengths will get you up to 8a quicker. However it means that you'll tick one very specific style of 8a. Cool if it's a dream route and you just want to do that, fine by me. But I'm considering that you want to be able to climb 8a. The difference, you rock up to ANY crag see an 8a and say 'no matter what moves are on that, I've got a method and the experience to figure out a way around it.'
(PS a lot of this comes down to what you define as training, personally I don't consider bouldering 'training' as I really enjoy it as a discipline unto itself and want to improve my bouldering. Training to me is the rubbish bit you don't really want to do)
In reply to edinburgerboulderer53: variety is the spice of bouldering! so hopefully youre not spending months on the same move but i take your point. i get a great deal out of bouldering and while its definitely not my main focus i dont just see it as a means to an end.
my intention would be to get to a point where i could manage most 8as at most crags in reasonable time (reasonable is obviously subjective but 3-5 sessions doesnt seem a million miles away or too slack).
so far, i dont believe a lack of training has hindered me but how can i really know if i havent actually trained? for what its worth i figure that if i can flash/work V4-7 very quickly then its not power or strength thats stopping me on routes and that, just through working a route, i will gain any stamina thats lacking. only time will tell if my thinking is flawed...
my intention would be to get to a point where i could manage most 8as at most crags in reasonable time (reasonable is obviously subjective but 3-5 sessions doesnt seem a million miles away or too slack).
so far, i dont believe a lack of training has hindered me but how can i really know if i havent actually trained? for what its worth i figure that if i can flash/work V4-7 very quickly then its not power or strength thats stopping me on routes and that, just through working a route, i will gain any stamina thats lacking. only time will tell if my thinking is flawed...
In reply to edinburgerboulderer53:
You don't need to 'train'. You need to subject your body to stresses in response to which it supercompensates. How you do that is up to you.
You don't need to 'train'. You need to subject your body to stresses in response to which it supercompensates. How you do that is up to you.
In reply to ksjs:
its on portland, the cuttings called fighting torque.
i think it is a soft touch but probably still 8a, not that i can comment... i top roped it and it felt nails. the guy that never trains is just naturally strong, and really doesnt care about grades, so he has no idea what his limit is, i think he could do 8b and boulder 8a if he tried his hardest.
the moral of this story is.... just try harder stuff, get strong doing the hard stuff you aspire to, unless you want to reach the big numbers (8b and up), or reach something quickly, then train... simples!
its on portland, the cuttings called fighting torque.
i think it is a soft touch but probably still 8a, not that i can comment... i top roped it and it felt nails. the guy that never trains is just naturally strong, and really doesnt care about grades, so he has no idea what his limit is, i think he could do 8b and boulder 8a if he tried his hardest.
the moral of this story is.... just try harder stuff, get strong doing the hard stuff you aspire to, unless you want to reach the big numbers (8b and up), or reach something quickly, then train... simples!
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...