BEAST FINGERS CL IMBIN G RESEARCH MARCH 2018 Optimizing Muscular Strength-to-Weight Ratios in Rock Climbing BY AMAN A N DERSO N A C K N O W L EDG E MENT S We want to thank Dr. Christoph Lutter, and Steven Low for their contributions to this paper. Thank you to Earth Treks Climbing and Fitness in Golden, Colorado, and Mountain Strong Training in Denver, Colorado for allowing us to conduct our research at their facility. The athletes of the Beast Fingers Climbing Team, and Denver University Climbing team. hangboard, campus board, and system participants were informed that they would Optimizing Muscular board. Many factors need to be taken into be apart of the study, that would be later account in order to keep a climber injury used to help correlate strength to the Strength-to-Weight Ratios in free while increasing performance. The climbing grading system. If they were still gaps of science within the sport have led to interested in participating, the test Rock Climbing a lot of disparate methods being claimed as continued. The climbers were informed effective. Thus, it is imperative to continue that they would be performing a set of BY AMAN ANDERSON to publish more research verifying the standardized workouts that would be logged applicability of different training methods and calculated to their weight. Climbers ABSTRACT INTRODUCTION to increase climbing performance. The who were injured or unable to perform the present study is designed to examine the required test were excluded from the study BACKGROUND impact of the strength-to-weight ratio of for safety. Climbers who only completed There have not been many studies on the role of muscular strength and finger strength and their he competitive climbing sport has particular upper body muscle groups that half of the test were also excluded from the relationship to climbing ability. grown significantly over the past 20 could account for the differences in final charts below, but some results may be years. Previously, most of the focus successful ascents of a range of climbers included within the written form of this OBJECTIVE To evaluate the role major muscle groups and finger of various studies have been from the easiest 10a to the hardest 5.14c. study to provide contextual application. strength strength-to-weight ratios in sport climbers dedicated toward injuries. Fortunately, more and boulderers to climbing ability in a gym setting. attention is starting to be dedicated to The present study has three goals. (i) to advance the science of the sport to produce further examine the role climbing has on METHODS Materials and Apparatus Strength measurements were taken using a force strong top-level climbers. In the last 20 the body, whether strength training is measuring device. Climbers were then given years, there have been international studies necessary. (ii) To standardize standardized exercises for different muscle groups During the test, climbers filled out a chart that have had a significant impact on the strength-to-weight (STW) ratios for the and then later weighed to calculate their that had a diagram of the human body, and strength-to-weight ratio. Climbers were then sport, dedicated to a climbers athletic ranges of climbing lead and bouldering on each muscle group had a box to record questioned on their highest redpoint in bouldering, performance, hand/forearm strength, VO2 grades. (iii) To further prevent risk injury and sport climbing using a standardized the force applied in lbs, and their strength max, and lactic acid threshold (Sheel, 2004). by quantifying a required minimum in questionnaire. to weight. On this form were fields to strength-to-weight ratios to ascend a route. record, gender, highest sport climb grade, RESULTS There are multiple factors associated with The majority of high level climbing athletes showed a climbing that make it difficult for climbers highest bouldering grade, and body weight. significant difference in overall muscular strength, Grades provided were for outside and and hand strength. High-level climbers reflected high and coaches to progress effectively. The METHODS inside. If a climber ascended the same ratios for each hand excelling above 100% of their adaptation of the body’s muscles and bones body weight on a 19mm wooden crimp, with the to external resistance is more rapid than the grade outside and inside, the result was highest being 120%. Women and men were both Participants merged into one field. tested. adaptation of the tendons (Burmitt & Cuddeford, 2015). In the case of climbing, it 15 male and 9 female athletes, ages 16 to The force scale used measured in lbs/kilos CONCLUSION seems muscular strength can only translate Though other factors play a role in successful 30, were drawn from a community sample up to 600lbs. Accuracy class:OIML III. Tare into positive motion if the tendons can climbing ascents, not limited to height, experience, and recruited via online advertisements for range:100%F.S. Zero range:4%F.S. The flexibility, or endurance of a climber, a climbers ability transfer and support the force. Another climbers interested in participating in the Min.cap.2kg; Resolution:0.1kg and Division: to recruit and sustain higher muscular forces in factor is that climbing is both dynamic and relative to their body weight, sustained higher study from 2016 till late 2017. Some of the 3000. The device was anchored to isometric in nature. In addition, there are climbing grades. participants were local to Colorado, from accommodate the standardized workout many different types of training methods the Beast Fingers Climbing Team, Denver procedure. Measurements were taken as a 5 that may utilized by climbers and coaches University Climbing team. All participants rep max. Climbers were asked to warm-up such as traditional resistance training, had been climbing for at least a year. The with at least 20 minutes of climbing before testing. 1 The force meter had multiple hand coaching staff and board of athletics. The attachments to measure accurately. For muscle groups tested were: Latissimus top-level climbers; subscapularis, weight ratio we have seen was from v14-v15 most exercises a rounded handle was dorsi (one arm) on a pulldown machine (one latissimus dorsi, and tricep. What we were climbers, where able to sustained forces attached. For the testing of finger strength, arm lat pulldown), Subscapularis muscle surprised by was the small margin of 115-130% of body weight on each hand the Grippul apparatus was used, with a (L,R), Deltoid muscle (L,R), Triceps muscle difference with the forearm, extensors, separately. We can only assume this is the 19mm climbing hold that was in-cut 15 (L,R), Biceps muscle (L,R), Hand (L,R), which are key players in grip strength. case for climbs 5.15a and beyond. Having degrees. Climbers were allowed to use chalk Forearm (L, R), Extensor (L,R). Furthermore, through the lens of this study, data on each climbing grade allows a before testing. it may show that a new metric is need to climber or coach to set attainable goals, and bring clarity to a climbers hand strength. walk a climber through performance Through our test, we were able to replicate markers to track success. To expand the RESULTS the pinch, slopper, jug, and pocket. Procedure research, a further look into the differences in muscular development of short climbers The bouldering measurements revealed If the research is expanded, this type of Prior to testing, participants were briefed versus tall climbers would be advantageous. top-level climbers had significant margins research could assist in injury prevention. on what they would need, and participated Short climbers are demanded upon to jump in the one arm lat pulldown, hand half Having quantified grade averages lets a in a screening for injuries. Local testing and pull, rather then reach and stand. crimp, and subscapularis (Fig 1). There was climber and coach better prepare their was performed at a local climbing gym, and less of a margin in forearm, bicep, tricep, bodies for routes that they wish to ascend. one test was remote. Participants in this and deltoid. For sport climbing, the one Routes range in difficulty by finger study were asked to climb for at least 20 arm lat pulldown did not provide a clear strength, pinch strength, sloper strength, in REFERENCES minutes to warm-up before testing. Testing difference in strength, with one outlier (Fig case of the biomechanics of a climb or Sheel, A.W. (2004). Physiology of sport rock approximately lasted between 30-40 2). Hand strength had a similar curve as subscap strength showed significant Progressing from less difficult climb to flexibility of a climber to sustain rest, and climbing. British Journal of Sports minutes. All procedures with the Denver bouldering showing significant differences margins, forearm strength martinis were higher difficulty, was where you began to find ways to be efficient in a climb. Further Medicine. University Climbing team were approved by between the 10a climber and a 14c climber, relatively the same, with the 14c climber see strength numbers line up with or work must be done to collect more strength Brumitt, J., & Cuddeford, T. (2015). Current showing significant gains. Tricep strength surpass body weight. The key strength data from climbers within each sport and concepts of muscle and tendon adaptation was strength did not have significant separator was finger strength. With hard bouldering climbing grade to make the data to strength and conditioning. International differences, nor did the deltoid. climbing requiring a climber to sustain more complete. What this study does is Journal of Sports Physical Therapy. 90%-100% or more of body weight on each opens the discussion to how we also The level of difficulty between climbs shows hand as shown in figure 3 and 4.