In reply to kenr:
> The emerging modern scientific view is that stretching most muscles for most sports is at best a waste of time - (and often actually harmful). The question in one scientific study reported during this last year was, How _much_ does stretching weaken muscular performance?
Incorrect on a number of levels. The strength power losses from stretching are due to viscoelastic stress relaxation which is temporary. If you do a sport specific warm-up you should even be able to attenuate this process.
> The obvious exception for climbing is to get more Range-of-Motion in lateral hip rotation, i.e. pressing the knees outward and backward - in a "plié" configuration (to get the buttocks closer to the wall for front-facing balancy face-climb moves.) Stretching is valuable for that.
Supports above.
> Possibly another exception for climbing might be the ability to step the foot up onto higher holds.
Yes.
However that is mostly a _strength_ problem. But then after you've first developed the strength to lift the weight of your leg much higher than any normal person, only then is there some Range-of-Motion flexibility concern with getting the foot up ridiculously high.
Partially correct.
> Most climbers already have sufficient _passive_ flexibility (by pulling the knee up with their hands) to step much higher -- what they lack is the special muscular strength to move the knee up that high while the hands are busy doing other things.
You are overgeneralising here.
> Ken
> P.S. Theory:
> It would be a rather unexpected result, if millions of years of fiercely selective mammalian evolution (or divine design?) has resulted in the great majority of human (and animal?) individuals developing muscles of the wrong length. Correct.
> Yet more unexpected that almost all of them with muscles that are wrong in the same direction: Too short.
The muscle 'length' typically doesn't change, generally what varies is the ability to tolerate the sensation of stretch into the lengthened positions. Injuries and adhesions excluded, these will show changes in 'length.'
> You'd think that with such a supposedly inaccurate process of design + development, that some significant number of humans (and animals) would have muscles that are too long - (and would be getting special treatments to shorten them).
The hypermobile people (gymnasts etc) face this issue, that's why they have to do a lot of strengthening to stabilise their joints.
> I can believe that a small minority of humans (and animals) has muscles that are too short, but the idea that the great majority of us have this problem seems rather implausible.
Again it's more a matter of stretch tolerance. also for every 'short' muscle you are likely to find a 'long' antagonist. As pointed out by others, we evolved as hunter-gatherers and now are largely desk-bound, diet also looks an issue.