I've recently introduced density hangs as a change of stimulus and partly because they can be integrated with other forms of training and climbing. I have to say that they feel pretty hard, which may reflect the idea of continuing to failure (at least loss of form). That said, I am making fairly quick progress and am wondering how people increase the load? The usual guidance is to move to a smaller set of holds, but I'm on my smallest already and approaching three sets of forty seconds. Is it usual to add weight? Just wondering what people's experience is with these and whether they seem effective
Isolate fingers if you’re strong enough, do them on back three or front three.
OK. Obvious really. I must be having a bad day! Cheers
What's wrong with adding weight?
Last time I read into the subject, tendon density could be improved by loading at 70% of max for 30-40s.
For me to get to that 70% intensity I need to add ~20kg weight.
Good listen here: https://theprehabguys.com/podcast/talking-tendons-with-jill-cook/
That's useful to know and thanks for the link. I just hadn't seen adding weight discussed, so was wondering about people's experience, mainly for reassurance as I definitely don't want an injury! I'm not there yet and will take it gradually, but the 70% guideline is helpful.
Might have to start posting on UKC fit club, but then I'd really be committed!
A clarification if possible... by '70% of max' do you mean 70% of a maximum loaded hang that can be managed for 8-10 seconds? My max hangs are currently at 130% of bodyweight, so bodyweight is already more than 70% if you see what I mean...
Don’t think there’s anything wrong with adding weight.
From what I’ve read the main benefit of density hangs is long term injury ‘pre-hab’ therefore you need to do them consistently over a long time. The key for me then becomes making sure they are easy to do with very little equipment, I don’t always have weights with me but I can easily carry around a portable fingerboard which I take to crags for warming up anyway.
Fortunately at the moment I can do density hangs on the edges of my fingerboard at BW. If I progress beyond that I would probably just drop fingers as mentioned above, again, as that’s more accessible than having to have weights around all the time. Personally I’ve only ever really suffered ring and middle finger injuries, so not overly bothered about injury prevention on my index or pinky.
Similiarly, most of my injuries have tended to be on small edges rather than big edges - it made sense for me to do density hangs on smaller edges in grip types that felt weaker (for me it’s strict half crimp).
>... as that’s more accessible than having to have weights around all the time.
I've seen van life folk using 5l bottles of water looped through their belt instead of weights when using a board mounting inside their van. You just need more weight, it doesn't have to be a metal disc.
With all this talk of fingerboards at the crag and hanging off your van, my simple enquiry has led to me feeling somewhat inadequate! Clearly, I am not taking it seriously enough!
True, I don’t live in my van (would be hard work with toddlers). I am a fan of keeping stuff simple if possible though as it means you’re more likely to do it. I find setting up a pulley, putting on a harness / sling and arranging weights in water bottles or discs more faff than doing what I mentioned above.
I like simple too but it takes less than 60seconds to put on a harness and clip something to it. Most would probably consider this an acceptable level of faff.
Why are you doing them?
Tyler Nelson introduced them as a way of reducing the likliehood of injury in his simplest finger-training article https://www.trainingbeta.com/the-simplest-finger-training-program/
When it was pointed out to me I stopped doing them as I have almost certainly loaded the fingers enough over 35 years of climbing to have achieved that and have no history of finger injury.
There may be other strength benefits (tendon stiffness? increased finger stamina?) but I’m uncertain what they are.
All ears if anyone has a view?
Yes, I suppose that is partly what I was fishing for in the OP. A few people in UKC fit club include them in their programme, so I introduced them as a change in stimulus really - a sort of break between phases. If they do support resilience and stamina then all good, but I haven't heard anyone express clear gains yet. I suppose it is hard to isolate exactly what makes the (overall) difference to some extent when training elements are mixed into a programme.
I've yet to look at the link Ally mentioned up post, but I will over the weekend
They should reduce tendon stiffness (long slow loading), which is one of the reasons proposed for reducing injury risk.
Less stiff tendons are less likely to get injured. As a result though, you will probably get reduced rate of force development.
Thanks Mike. Think I’d rather risk injury.
> They should reduce tendon stiffness (long slow loading), which is one of the reasons proposed for reducing injury risk.
> Less stiff tendons are less likely to get injured. As a result though, you will probably get reduced rate of force development.
Had another at the Tyler Nelson article and that seems to contradict what you say in that he concludes that density hangs will improve creation of force:
https://www.trainingbeta.com/the-simplest-finger-training-program/
2. Connective Tissue Density
The next thing we need to discuss is how to increase the density (collagen thickness) and stiffness of the tendons, ligaments, and bones that allow our muscles to create movement across a joint. After all, these are the real limiting factors in most climbers’ ability to grasp small holds quickly, and not fall off.
A hard-to-visualize principle is that when we grab onto something statically (no objective joint movement) and hold for an extended period of time (30-45 seconds) our tendons are stretching slowly. As the tendon continues to stretch the individual fibers within it slide next to each other. This sliding disrupts the chemical bonds that attach the fibers as a unit. If we follow this type of slow static loading with adequate rest and nutrition, over time we create more bonds and thus denser connective tissues. While we load the tendons of the finger flexors, we also get stress (perpendicular force) to the pulley system of the fingers and the bones to which they attach.
By creating denser connective tissue, we create a more robust system overall. This means the fingers are not only capable of creating more force, but are also more resistant to injury and capable of withstanding the stress of hard climbing.
Yes, I read the paper again and there are plenty of references to improved strength and resilience through adopting the protocol, as well as reduced injury risk. I agree that after years if climbing and plenty of loading, the risk of injury is probably low, but I don't suppose it will do any harm to try something different.
I'm going to keep them going for six weeks, partly because they are easy to integrate into other exercises and then re-evaluate.
> after years if climbing and plenty of loading, the risk of injury is probably low
Haha, if only.. I reckon of serious sport climbers I know over 30, a significant proportion are more limited in what they can train/do by injury than anything else. Maybe I just hang out with a bad crowd..
Back on topic, I've done these in the past sometimes (back when people just called them long duration isometrics or long hangs) and have seen good gains. IIRC Dunning used to use long hangs too back in the day. Didn't stop him or me getting injured all the time though! (Though my injuries aren't really tendon or pulley related)
Tyler’s explanation in that article is quite contradictory and confusing sadly, as with a lot of his explanations... I don’t believe he’s saying that Density Hangs alone will improve RFD, but that the increased connective tissue density will allow the tendon to tolerate higher forces.
He goes on to say “training density makes the muscle-tendon unit robust enough to tolerate the forces created by rapid loading.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CgcR5J1dwcY&t=1172s
3:13 - 20:10 in this lecture with Prof. Keith Barr explains the concept of how long slow loading reduces the risk of injury really well.
Fair warning on injuries noted! Good to see gains noted - presumably training gains such as increasing time, load and / or smaller holds? Strikes me that those should translate pretty well onto rock
Dropped an email to the man himself. Don’t understand the relationship between recruitment and tendon stiffness though.
Hi Tyler
Another quickie from your article
The article suggests that density hangs improve force development and increase tendon stiffness. Other sources state that long slow loading reduces tendon stiffness that in turn could reduce force development.
Can you clarify your position on this to clear up an online debate
Best, Simon
Hi Simon,
Different components of the protocol will do different things to the tendon. Density hangs should reduce tendon stiffness by promoting recruitment. Velocity hangs should promote tendon stiffness. Recruitment pulls are the moderate velocity, short duration component which should be done in the middle of the stiffness continuum. A linear model for programming the fingers would be density hangs, recruitment pulls, and velocity hangs.
Tyler
This is why I love this site! I chuck out a simple question in the OP based on my ignorance of the subtleties of training and I learn loads! I think that the linear model mentioned makes intuitive sense - density hangs do feel as if they promote recruitment over a longer timescale than recruitment pulls. I haven't paid much attention to the velocity hangs as yet, but I know they were part of the protocol.
Derek - I think you’ll like these two videos and find them pretty instructive - I know I did. The first video created a stir recently and a few have jumped bandwagon but don’t get too excited otherwise the second might be a bit of a downer.
youtube.com/watch?v=sBTI9qiH4UE&
youtube.com/watch?v=EfSSXW9Eq2Y&
Ive also created a Facebook group called Grey Power (50+Climbers) which you might like to join
Great share and very interesting indeed, thanks.
Thanks also to Derek for starting one of UKCs more useful threads!!!
That's just astonishing! I haven't watched the second one yet, but the first is really interesting. I have been planning to set up some new edges and I think this might inspire me to experiment with smaller edges anyway. I used to do tiny ones back in the day. There are some things in the video I don't currently do - one arm hangs for example - but I am getting to the point where I am feeling strong enough to bring these in. I shall have a stiff drink before watching the second, in case it proves disappointing! Thanks for Grey Power invite - I shall try to do it justice this year!
Cheers Matt. I often find the training ones are really useful, although sometimes hard to see the wood for the trees. They usually have something to inspire a bit more effort or a new angle on some aspect of development. I'm definitely going to keep training through the year, even when I can get back on the rock.
The second one is also good - a useful counterbalance with clear explanation. I'd reflect that I've been training strength through max hangs, without having previously done the protocols that might prevent injury or build basic resilience (longer hangs or the alternative in the first video). That said, it comes on the back of trying to do some climbing over the summer / autumn, which generally provided lower loads over longer periods. That probably provided a reasonable base for strength work. Interesting stuff.
> Derek - I think you’ll like these two videos and find them pretty instructive - I know I did. The first video created a stir recently and a few have jumped bandwagon but don’t get too excited otherwise the second might be a bit of a downer.
I caught the Hooper's video last week. I'm quite impressed by the guy's attention to detail and general knowledge. The fact that being a climber, he makes scientific knowledge useful in ways we can use. He backs up his arguments and I've checked some out and they hold up. I definitely wouldn't recommend this protocol for beginners, or beginner fingerboarders.. what do you think?
> Ive also created a Facebook group called Grey Power (50+Climbers) which you might like to join
I'm no fan of FB but will check this out. I suggested a hub on UKC for those 50+ interested in developing, but was pooh poohed
On the face of it, the "results" in that first video are unbelievable - accordingly, I don't believe them. I have never heard of the star of the show. You're a bit of a training expert: is there anything in his history that implies I shouldn't dismiss this as nonsense?
There’s been discussion on UKB and Reddit and a few actual experts such as Tyler Nelson have passed comment.
The test scores at the start were out of whack with his climbing ability (Font8B) and more in line at the end. This suggests that he was inhibited in some way at the start (tendon malfunction or overtraining) and that the light training load released that potential.
A few people are experimenting with it so will be interesting what gains or otherwise are reported.
Having read (some of) that, I'm sticking with "nonsense." 😀
The second BMC Members Open Forum webinar took place on 20 March. Recently-appointed BMC CEO Paul Ratcliffe, President Andy Syme and Chair Roger Murray shared updates on staff changes, new and ongoing initiatives, insurance policy changes and the current...