climber

Category Archives: Hangboard Beta

Extend Your Performance Peak with a Micro-Cycle

By Mark Anderson

You may recall from this post that I had an abnormally long and successful Fall 2016 climbing season. Typically after I send a hard project I take along break from climbing, but I sent my season goal-route (Shadowboxing) so early in the Fall 2016 season that I was still stoked to continue working (and hopefully sending) hard routes. In the past I’ve had great success sustaining high levels of power and fitness through regular Maintenance Training (discussed extensively here). That approach works well when you can count on many, regularly-spaced indoor training days, in which you are able to train long and hard. However, my outdoor days on Shadowboxing were too intense to permit quality maintenance training during my rare and sporadic indoor training days.

The other problem was that Shadowboxing was basically a long enduro climb, whereas most of my remaining projects were short power-fests. I had trained my body for endurance climbing and deliberately neglected power. I felt like I needed to top-off my power to have a chance at these projects, and widen my fitness base if I wanted to extend the effective length of my season into November.

After 8 weeks of training for Rifle endurance, I used a Micro Cycle to re-tune my power for short burly routes like 7 Minute Abs.

In order to accomplish those two training goals, I designed a “Micro-Cycle”—in this case a 17-day cycle (including rest days) that included Strength, Power, and PE sessions. My Micro-Cycle is illustrated below in the yellow box of Weeks 9-11 (Note, for detailed explanations of Weeks 1-8, see this post):

I started with a mini-Strength Phase, which included two full, “normal” 6-grip Hangboard workouts.  My third workout was a hybrid between Strength and Power Endurance (PE), comprised of a 4-grip Hangboard workout (including the four grips I felt were most relevant to my upcoming goals), then a 45-minute rest, followed by 3-sets of Route Intervals (for tedious details on my Route Interval, see this post).

Next I transitioned into a mini, hybrid Power and PE Phase. The “LB/C + PE” days consisted of ~45 minutes of bouldering (including Warmup Boulder Ladder, Hard Bouldering, and Limit Bouldering), then ~30-40 minutes of Campusing, followed by 3 or 4-sets of Route Intervals. The “LB/C” day included longer durations of bouldering and Campusing, without any PE training.  Note that I wrapped up every training session with 2-3 sets of my typical assortment of Supplemental Exercises.

The Micro-Cycle worked pretty well. On paper I was just as strong on October 3rd as I was on September 4th, and just as fit on October 11th as I was on September 20th. On the rock, I continued to climb well through mid-November, FA-ing the powerful 5.14b Double-O Ninja on November 4th, a full two months after the end of my initial, full Strength Phase. Normally I would be well past my peak (especially my power peak) at that point. Ultimately the limiting factor in my season seemed to be motivation—at times I struggled to stick to the training plan and continue going to the crag, especially in the wake of so much success (I realize that may sound counter-intuitive, or at least pompous, but in my case I tend to want to relax after sends, and often find failure more inspiring).

After two months of training for long pump-fests, a short and sweet “Micro-Cycle” helped re-tune my fitness for short, powerful routes like Double-O Ninja.

The next time you find yourself motivated to extend a Performance Peak, give your power a quick boost, or fine-tune your fitness to suit a particular goal route, consider a Micro-Cycle such as this. Keep in mind the workouts, frequencies, and scheduling described here are just one example. These variables can be manipulated in many ways to accommodate different goals.

New Anderson Brothers Podcast

by Mark Anderson

Last week Mike and I did another podcast with our friend Neely Quinn over at TrainingBeta.com.  You can check out the podcast here.

The interview runs about an hour and covers a wide variety of topics including:

  • What went into designing the Rock Prodigy Forge, and why we think it’s the most advanced hangboard on the market.
  • What we learned at the International Rock Climbing Research Association conference, what other research we are working on, which questions need further study.
  • How I trained differently for my ascent of Shadowboxing.
  • Mike’s recent 8a+ and 8b onsights in Europe.
  • Whether or not hangboarding causes forearm hypertrophy.
  • The secret to climbing hard with a family.
  • Questions & Answers from the Training Beta Facebook community
Mike crushing at the Schleierwasserfall

Mike crushing at the Schleierwasserfall

Hope you enjoy the listen, and if it generates any questions, please share them in a comment below, or (ideally) in the Rock Prodigy Forum.

Be sure to follow us on Instagram at @Rock_Climbers_Training_Manual

 

Review of the Latest Climbing Research

By Mark Anderson

IMG_2864

Our friends at Trango generously footed the bill to send Mike and I to the International Rock Climbing Research Association’s (IRCRA) annual conference, held in Telluride, CO earlier this month. Ben and Jason at Fixed Pin Publishing also stepped up big-time to provide attendees with complimentary copies of The Rock Climber’s Training Manual. The conference was a who’s who of climbing researchers, medical experts and performance gurus, providing a great opportunity for us to spread the word about our system of training and line of Trango training products. We had the opportunity to meet and compare notes with the likes of hangboard queen Eva Lopez-Rivera, Volker Schöffl (climber-surgeon and author of the landmark book “One Move Too Many”), mental master Arno Ilgner (author of The Rock Warrior’s Way), Ben Spannuth (badass sport climber and creator of the Bam Board), Eric Horst (author of the Training For Climbing series of books), as well as prolific climbing researches Phil Watts, Nick Draper and Vanesa Espańa-Romero.

IMG_2853

Mark discussing the evolution of hangboard technology that preceded the Rock Prodigy Training Center.

 

Our primary purpose in attending was to present our two papers: “Evaluating the Rock Prodigy Training Method” and “Finger Strength Improvements with the Rock Prodigy Training Center Hangboard.” We gave a 30-minute presentation covering both topics. It was a bit intimidating presenting pseudo-scientific material to a conference room full of PHD physiologists and researchers, but we were very well-received and generated a great discussion about the evolution of hangboards and the importance of ergonomics in training tools. A number of attendees came up after our presentation to compliment us on the Forge and RPTC designs (and ask where they can buy one in Europe!)

IMG_2858

The highlight for me was a long—albeit broken—conversation with Eva Lopez. We compared notes on hangboard training methods, hangboard design (Eva designed the innovative and popular “Progression” and “Transgression” hangboards), and laughed together about the many internet debates over whose hangboard routines are superior. [We heartily agreed that the climber’s strengths, weaknesses, and goals are surely the most important factor in selecting the optimal routine.]

The world’s foremost hangboard experts (in no particular order)? From left to right: Mark Anderson, Eva Lopez, Mike Anderson

I also learned (from the truly impressive Volker Schöffl and team) that there are a lot of climbing injuries I’d never even heard of. One key takeaway is that, if I ever have a serious climbing injury, I’m going to Germany to get it diagnosed and treated. Dr. Schöffl is on a whole different level when it comes to understanding and treating climbing injuries. He’s done extensive studies comparing the various treatment options (that he likely pioneered) on injuries that your local hand surgeon has probably never even heard of (let alone treated).

IMG_2861

Mike going through the survey results

 

Our secondary objective was to learn about the latest advancements in climbing training and injury treatment knowledge. There were some 35 papers submitted from a truly international cast of experts (including contributors from Australia, Austria, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Czech Republic, France, Germany, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey, UK, and perhaps the most remote relative to rock climbing: Michigan). Below is a BRIEF summary of the findings I found most interesting/relevant to performance-oriented climbers. I’ve tried to provide links where possible so you can dig into the details if you’d like more info. [At some point all of these papers should be posted to the IRCRA web site, but they did not seem to be posted as of the date this post was published]

    • Dr. Vanesa Espana-Romero of Universidad de Cadiz, Spain presented a review of the literature to update our understanding of the physiological components of rock climbing.  According to her summary of the research, the top 3 key attributes are finger strength (relative to body weight), finger intermittent endurance and upper body power. There is little or no correlation between systemic aerobic fitness (measures such as heart rate, VO2 Max, etc), however, climbers tend to have better local aerobic endurance (within the forearm muscles). Also, flexibility isn’t correlated to climbing performance…I still plan to stretch though.

 

    • Shaking of the hand “near the body” while resting increases re-oxygenation [thus improving recovery?] ~32% compared to simply relaxing your grip over a hold (and NOT shaking the hand). Presumably because placing the forearm under the level of the heart increases vasodilative responses, thus increasing blood flow. [Reference]

 

    • Time to failure when performing repeated crimp grip contractions (10s on, 3s off) at 40% of 1 Rep Max (1RM) was significantly increased in “cold” conditions (50 degF, vs. control of 75 degF). The temperature difference did not significantly affect 1RM. I recommend taking a copy of this study to your local climbing gym in hopes of convincing the management to turn down the thermostat. [Ref. “The effect of cold ambient temperatures on climbing-specific finger flexor performance” by KC Phillips, B Noh, M Gage, T Yoon]

 

    • Dehydrated climbers did not perform as well on a Treadwall test. [Ref: “Effect of hypohydration on climbing to failure on a treadwall” by KD Hewitt, T France, G Gonzalez, M Probst, et al]

 

 

    • If you want to improve your 1 Rep Max for a 5 second dead hang, training for 8 weeks with 3-5 sets of 1, 10-second rep (with 3 minutes rest between sets) is superior to training for 8 weeks with 3-5 sets of 4-5, 10-second reps (with 1 minute rest between sets). [Ref. “Comparison of the effects of three hangboard training programs on maximal finger strength in rock climbers” by E Lopez-Rivera & JJ Gonzalez-Badillo]

 

IMG_2863

Eva Lopez presenting her paper comparing three 8-week hangboard protocols.

 

    • The use of chalk significantly increases hang time to failure on a hangboard (compared to NOT using chalk). [Reference]

 

    • Intermediate-level climbers make more technical mistakes when leading routes than when toproping. [Ref. “Anxiety level and ability to climb routes in recreational indoor climbing” by P Czermak]

 

    • “High” climbing level and/or intensive finger training (such as campusing) correlates with risk for early onset osteoarthritis in the hands of young climbers. [Ref. “Long term Radiographic Adaptations to the Stress of High-Level and recreational Rock Climbing in Young Athletes” by P Hoffman, S Hinterwimmer, AB Imhoff, T Kupper, and V Schöffl]

 

    • Forearm compression sleeves might beneficially affect lactate removal after climbing. [Reference]

 

    • A couple different presenters showed research that supports the theory that “near term” finger strength improvements may be mostly due to neurological adaptations, rather than hypertrophy. However, nobody directly studied this.

 

IMG_2859

Mike and I discussing training philosophy with Eric Horst at the end of our presentation.

Thanks again to Trango for sponsoring our trip, and thanks to all of you who participated in the Rock Prodigy survey! If you have any questions about any of the research presented, or would like to discuss any of the finer points, please post up in the Rock Prodigy Forum.

Coming back to Training

I basically took this spring off.  Not from climbing.  But from training.  I was doing what most people consider training: Climbing and projecting boulder problems at the gym during the week and climbing outside and trying to send routes on the nice weekends.  I basically “let myself go back to my base ability.”  Of course, that’s not true..but it felt like it.  We are a product of our past training.  It turns out my “not-training” base is climbing 12d second or third go and onsiting 12a and b.  So pretty hard to complain right?  Now that I’m successfully married and honeymooned, its time to get serious with my training.  I think sometimes taking a break is really good – like I am so excited to train right now, I’m bursting with it!
Ryan Smith on Blood Raid 5.13a, New River Gorge.
I’m a dedicated student of training – like all of us right?  So what is my primary weakness?  My natural strength has always been my pure enduro.  I’m a big guy (for a climber) which means I have tons of gas in the tank.  Unless I’m at my limit, I rarely fail on a route because of enduro or power enduro.  Because of my previous hangboarding workouts, my finger strength is awesome – I can hold just about anything.  I will certainly do a new hangboard workout this winter, but I’m skipping my summer hangboard workout to focus on my true weakness:  Power.
If you’re not sure what your weakness is, I would first ask your friends.  Training your strength is good and fun, but its not effective for breaking through barriers.  There are also some online quizzes.  If you’ve never done core training – I’ll tell you right now.  Your weakness is your core.  Especially if you don’t climb “super smooth.”
My climber bro, Ryan’s primary strength is his power, so I’ve been consulting with him and today at the gym, he’s going to take me through a series of ring exercises he’s been doing.  I’ll be training on the rings for core, stabilizer muscles (super important), some pull, and I want to do flies to improve my compression strength – which flat out stinks.  I’m also going to do weighted pull ups as well as train for a one-arm pull up.  I would say right now my 50/50 focus will be the general pull stuff as I described above and the campus board.  Once I get a good base on the pull stuff, I’ll probably move into 80/20 campus board, ring stuff.  I have about ten weeks before I’m going to regularly climbing outside (its hot as crap here anyways.)
All that on top of running of course.  I love running.  Once I get it all sorted out, I’ll post my routines and see if I can get some input from you internet readers.
Lauren Brayack doing some training in Cartagena, Spain
Me doing a little bouldering on the Rock of Gibraltar

Adjustable Hangboard Mount (3.0) – Easiest yet!

Rock Prodigy Training Center  and Rock Prodigy Forge hangboards are revolutionary tools for developing elite finger strength. The split board design allows you to customize it to fit your body, improving the ergonomics, making it safer to train hard, and really boost your finger strength!

To really take the most advantage of the split design, you can mount the two halves in a way that allows the spacing and rotation to be adjusted on-the-fly…an “Adjustable Mount”.

The picture below shows one way to utilize the Adjustable Mount to enhance your training. In this pic, I’m training my “Index-Middle” 2-finger pocket. If you’ve tried this, you know that your fingers never fit in the pockets quite right because the middle finger is so much longer than the index. With the adjustable mount, I’ve widened the board spacing, and rotated the boards by placing shims under the outside mounting brackets (Counter-clockwise on the right, and clockwise on the left). This vastly improves the ergonomics, reducing skin wear and flapper potential. This makes a once-awkward grip really fun to train, and my IM 2F strength has improved substantially.

HB Rotation Montage

In two previous articles, we’ve presented methods for creating adjustable mounts: Adjustable Mount for the RPTC and Adjustable Mount 2.0 for the Rock Prodigy Training Center. The first method uses a “French Cleat” system:

5 Finished Backplate

RPTC mounted with French Cleat

The second method uses fence post brackets bolted to a backing board that allows it to slip over a fixed-mounted 2×10:

5 Finished Backplate

Fence brackets mounted to the RPTC. These easily slide over a 2×10 beam.

5 Finished Backplate

The RPTC with Adjustable Mount.

Recently we developed the all-new Rock Prodigy Forge, (see this post to understand how awesome it is: The World’s Most Technologically Advanced Finger Training System – The Forge)  This hangboard is super-kick-ass, but it’s a little shorter than the RPTC, so I wasn’t sure my “Adjustable Mount 2.0” would fit on it. Therefore, I had the motivation to finally try an idea I’d had for an easier Adjustable Mount, that I’ll describe now.

In a nutshell, this system is created by bending sheet metal into a U-shape, then simply epoxy-adhering them directly to the back of the board. With the right equipment, it takes about 30 minutes to create this.

Here’s the final product:

Finished Glued HB brackets

The RPTC (top) and Forge hangboards with adhesive-mounted brackets.

 

Here’s how to make it….

Start with the brackets. I used galvanized steel Simpson Strong Tie framing backets, and used a “bending brake” to bend them into the desired U-shape. If you can find some, try to get brackets that are already shaped to fit over a 2×4. I picked some up at home depot, the HTP37Z. These are about $2 each, and they are a pretty heavy duty gauge (16 Gauge):

2a74803c-8cc7-4a13-b722-3ae4b08908a9_400

This is another option, the A44 but more expensive, at $4.50:

53255b72-a1b3-4807-a092-818f612aa635_400

Here’s another option. It’s pre-formed, but it’s a thinner gauge of steel (18-Gauge), and a little smaller, so it would provide less surface area for adhesion. Most importantly; I haven’t tested it:

3f087ce8-19d0-4cb0-9dd6-ca290bf3a43e_400

OK, so you have your brackets. If you need to bend the brackets, measure them carefully and account for the material that will be used up in the corners for the bend radius. I suggest buying an extra bracket in case you mess up.  A bending brake is the best tool, which I have access to at the Air Force Academy’s Applied Mechanics Lab:

rw-combination-bending-brakes

A simple bench-top vice will work too:

44506_bv2-l

Here’s the desired shape:

20150804_133829

You need two brackets per half of the RPTC or Forge, so four total to mount a hangboard system.

Formed Bracket

THe HTP37Z bent into shape.

This step is critical!  For proper adhesion, you must prepare the surface of the steel brackets. I used a sand-blaster, but sandpaper, or a Dremel tool works too…it just takes longer. Sand the surface of the steel that will adhere to the RPTC or Forge to rough it up and remove any contaminants so that the epoxy forms a good bond. This is critical because the brackets will have a thin film of oil and other debris on them. Once you have treated the surface, don’t touch it or otherwise let it get dirty. The hangboard can be lightly sanded as well, but in my experience, simply wiping it down with a paper towel and solvent is adequate.

I used West System 105 Resin and 205 Fast Hardener, shown below, but any number of commercial adhesives will work, such as Gorilla Glue, Loctite, JB Weld, etc. The surface preparation is far more important than your choice of epoxy.

20150804_140100

If using a 2-part epoxy (which I recommend), make sure it is mixed thoroughly. Here, I’m using a paper cup and a tongue depressor that I’ve trimmed the end off of so that it is flat and can cleanly scrape the bottom of the cup. Follow the instructions for your epoxy carefully.

20150804_141342

Now glue the brackets on…. Take care to get proper alighment. On the Forge, the top edge should be parallel to the ground, so I used a straight edge, as shown below, to line up the brackets with the top edge of the board. This ensures the board will hang parallel to the ground. Don’t fret, if you make a mistake and the brackets are uneven, you can always add shim material afterwards to level it out.

20150804_134437

Once the brackets are in place with epoxy, they may drift a little before the epoxy sets, so tape them down with some masking tape. If your brackets have fastener holes, like mine, cover the holes with tape so epoxy doesn’t bleed through the holes. If it does, it can impede the brackets from sliding over your 2×10 (you can sand any excess epoxy off, but it’s a pain). You want to place the brackets as close to the outside edges of the board as possible to prevent unintended rotation when using the outer holds, such as the pinches.

Blank 2x10

A “blank” 2×10 mounted in my basement, ready to accept my bracket-equipped hangboards.

 

The back view.
The forge hanging on the 2x10.

Finally, let the glue dry and mount your 2×10, if not done already. Here’s an earlier article describing how to do that: How’s Your Hang? Now enjoy your adjustable mount!

If you’re skeptical and discerning like me; you may be wondering…how strong is this adhesive mount anyway? Well, since I have access to the best undergraduate mechanics laboratory in the world, and the best undergraduate students, I decided to find out. I assigned a group of cadets to investigate (Cadet Mike Hyde, Cadet Nate Dickman, and Cadet Tim Welkener). They are Mechanical Engineering students at the Air Force Academy, and this testing served as their final project for their Experimental Mechanics course (lest you think I’m abusing my powers 🙂 ). Trango donated some hangboards, and the cadets replicated the mounting system, then tested them to failure. Here are a couple pics of the testing:

Mounted Boards

Mounted boards – Note they only are using one bracket per board. This setup is not for “operational use”, only for testing. The bolted-on brackets at the bottom are used to ensure a solid connection for testing the epoxy-mounted brackets at the top of the boards.

 

MTS Test Setup

An MTS Tensile Test machine. This was used for static strength testing and fatigue testing (repeated loading and unloading). Here they are testing an un-formed bracket (the bracket is flat) to isolate the epoxy-polyurethane bond. This is the “pure shear” test.

Testing of 2x4 mount

The RPTC with bracket mounted over a 2×4 for testing.

2x4 loading condition

Close up of 2×4 mount.

The cadets did a few tests:

  1. Pure Shear Test – here, the brackets were flat and held in the hydraulic grips of the MTS machine. This test isolates the epoxy bond. They ran a couple variations to test different surface preparations and epoxy combinations, but found little difference that would matter to us. In these tests, a single bracket held over 3,000 lbs!  Consider that you will be hanging from four brackets (two per RPTC/Forge half), and the epoxy is plenty strong!
  2. Cyclic Fatigue Test – In this test, the goal is to determine if repeated loading and unloading weakens the bond over time. With our MTS machine, we can apply repeated loads very quickly. They performed two variations on this test: Cycle load of 0-200 lbs for 650,000 cycles and 0-400 lbs for 75,000 cycles. The bond didn’t fail in either of these tests. I perform 24 sets of hangs on 8 grips per workout, which is 144 hangs per workout, so 75,000 cycles is the equivalent of 520 hangboard workouts, or about 52 seasons of hangboarding. I think we’re good!
  3. Formed Bracket Test – This test is probably the most relevant to us because it test the entire system, not just the epoxy bond. Here, the bracket is bent into the proper shape and placed over a 2×4. This was another static strength test, meaning the load was not repeated, just gradually applied until failure. The system failed when the steel brackets deformed (un-curled from their U-shape) at a load of 624 lbs. Again, this is for only one bracket — you will be hanging from four brackets.

Here’s a picture of the epoxy bond after the shear test:

After Test failure

…And the deformed brackets:

Deformed bracket post testing

Here’s a of quick video one of the pure shear tests.

 

In conclusion, I think you can hang with confidence off your new adjustable mount!

Bolt Barrage

by Mark Anderson

In mid-November I learned some unfortunate news–the agency that manages my county’s open space lands had decided to begin regulating bolts on county land (among other climbing restrictions). A permit would be required to install any bolts or other fixed hardware, and development of new crags would require extensive environmental impact and trail building assessments. When they explained the intended permit evaluation process, it became clear that this would make it extremely difficult to develop new crags on Jefferson County Open Space land (though I’m optimistic it will still be feasible, albeit time-consuming, to add new routes to existing crags). The most significant area affected would be Clear Creek Canyon, where I’ve spent the vast majority of my climbing and route development energy over the past three years. Other affected areas include North Table Mountain, Cathedral Spires, and Three Sisters, but Jefferson County is peppered with rock outcroppings, some of which may hold substantial potential.

I spent quite a bit of time over the last two months attending meetings, coordinating with The Access Fund, The Boulder Climbing Community and interfacing directly with Open Space managers. Based on everything I was hearing, I wasn’t very optimistic, but open space officials did provide a temporary grace period, declaring at the public meeting on November 19th that it would remain a “free-for-all until January 1st”. That’s all I needed to hear.

One of the new crags I bolted in late November, tentatively named "Iron Buttress".

One of the new crags I bolted in late November, with the working title  “Iron Buttress”.  Though not very tall, the rock here is some of the best I’ve seen in Clear Creek.

In the next three days I bolted four routes in Clear Creek. The first two were lines I had been eying for years, but figured I wasn’t quite good enough to climb yet. Well, there was no longer time to wait for my abilities to catch up to my imagination! While approaching the cliff to install those first two lines, my eye caught a well-hidden alcove along the highway, and the next day I returned to have a closer look. It never ceases to amaze me how you can pass by something literally a thousand times and not notice a line staring you right in the face. The next day I returned to bolt two radically steep lines shooting out the clandestine cave. It may be a few years before I’m able to climb the harder of these, but it’s tough to judge a line’s difficulty from rappel, so who knows?

These lines will all be really fun jug hauls. There are two other new lines at this crag not shown.

These lines will all be really fun jug hauls. There are two other new lines at this crag not shown.

Over the next two weeks I continued working my way through the canyon. Last spring I conducted a fairly comprehensive “survey” of Clear Creek, bushwhacking around the canyon in search of hidden gems. I have a “black book” spreadsheet detailing the potential, so I had a good idea how to prioritize my time. Depending on your aesthetic standards, there could be a lifetime of new routes remaining in the canyon. I didn’t have a lifetime, so I focused on the best rock and the lines most appealing to me personally (in other words, the hardest lines). By early December I had bolted 16 new lines in the canyon, including breaking ground on three new crags. But, I was starting to scrape the bottom of the barrel in terms of quality, so I turned my attention elsewhere.

For the past several years I had been curious about a nearby area. From a distance it was obvious there was a great deal of rock, but a complicated approach had deterred me from exploring more closely. Realizing it was now or never, I dusted off my gaiters and snow kit and set out for some recon. I’m glad I did.

When I saw this wall I knew I'd hit pay dirt. Note the rope which gives an idea of the wall's steepness. The rock on this cliff is flawless.

When I saw this wall I knew I’d hit pay dirt. Note the rope which gives an idea of the wall’s steepness. The rock on this cliff is flawless.

Over the month of December I returned eight times, adding 25 more new lines in the process (for a total of 41 routes between November 20 and December 24th!). We’ve had way above average snowfall so far this winter, and so, many of those outings were fairly intense. I was routinely crawling on all-fours through 2-3-foot snow drifts, up steep, loose, and heavily vegetated slopes. On the worst days it would take me close to 30 minutes to get only a hundred yards from the car. At various points, trudging through the powder-coated talus, I sunk chest-deep into the pits between boulders. I can’t count the number of times I face-planted when a foot got tangled in the underbrush, but the worst incident resulted in an Urgent Care visit to flush out a corneal abrasion I received when a tree branch snapped back suddenly, whacking me in the eyeball! Thanks to the marvelous invention of steroid eye drops I was back in action three days later 🙂

Another section of the previous cliff from below, with bolts in.

Another section of the previous cliff from below, with two routes in.

The cold was harsh on my batteries and on some days I got as few as 18 holes drilled (compared to 30 on a good summer day), but in the end I think I got around to all of the very best lines. There are now lines on five distinct cliffs, and room for easily another 25 lines if someone is willing to do the work (and paperwork) in the future. The rock is magnificent, and this is hands down the best new crag I’ve discovered. I can’t wait till the summer thaw so I can return to climb some of these.

Another cliff, this one composed of bullet-hard quartzite. The leaning arete left of center will easily be in the 5.14-range, and to the right of that are five more lines that I would guess will range from 5.8 to 5.12.

Another cliff, this one composed of bullet-hard quartzite. The leaning arete left of center will easily be in the 5.14-range, and to the right of that are five more lines that I would guess will range from 5.8 to 5.12.

Now that January is here, the county has released the final Climbing Management Plan. Unfortunately they didn’t concede a single point on the new bolting regulations (including opting not to eliminate the clearly un-safe permit requirement for one-for-one bolt replacement), so I’m glad I got some routes in before the end of the year. However, they did compromise on a number of other items that affect the average climber much more directly than route development.  Specifically, they significantly reduced the size of proposed seasonal raptor closure areas and eliminated a proposed ban on temporary project draws. Watching the Access Fund and the BCC in action I can say they did a tremendous job fighting for our interests. I can assure you that your donations are very well spent. Without a team of experienced advocates that could respond at a moment’s notice, the outcome would have been far worse. In particular, Tony Bubb of the BCC was a marvel to behold. He got everybody together and kept pressing for the best possible outcome when others were ready to give up. Without him I’m certain the seasonal raptor closure would have been much worse. Thanks to everyone who attended meetings, sent in comments or donated money in the past. Please consider making a contribution to the Access Fund or becoming a member if you aren’t already.

The area also boasts a number of steep slabs with bomber, well-featured rock like this.

The area also boasts a number of steep slabs with bomber, well-featured rock like this.

In other news, if you are a Forge user and you have not already done so, please consider taking the Rock Prodigy Forge Survey for a chance to win something awesome.  The information from the survey will be used in a new research paper.  More details on the survey can be found here.

Finally, below is a mini-guide to a new Clear Creek crag I developed a while back called “The Banana Stand.” I was waiting to share this information until construction on the Peaks-To-Plains bike trail was completed (since the construction traffic makes the approach much more difficult), but with the new bolting rules I think it’s best to publish it now.  Some Banana Stand action shots can be found here.

Banana Stand Topo

Banana Stand Topo.

Banana Stand Mini Guide Page 1

Banana Stand Mini Guide Page 1

Banana Stand Mini Guide Page 2

Banana Stand Mini Guide Page 2

Banana Stand Mini Guide Page 3

Banana Stand Mini Guide Page 3

Designing a Home Training Wall

by Mark Anderson

A home climbing wall offers many advantages to the performance-oriented climber. Chief among them are:

  • Convenience – with a wall literally in your backyard, commuting time and cost is eliminated along with most other excuses for skipping workouts. Those with families or pets can train with their loved ones without disturbing others, and the gym is open 24-7!
  • Control – you are the supreme dictator of your home wall. You call all the shots, including everything from the type of terrain, to grip shapes, to temperature and music selection. You can even decide whether or not shirts are required 🙂
  • Solitude – this is also a drawback of a home wall, but solitude can be a huge plus for training enthusiasts. Certain activities, like ARCing and Linked Bouldering Circuits, can be very difficult to do in a crowded public gym.
  • Route-setting privileges – For performance oriented climbers, this is the primary advantage of a home wall. First and foremost, if you can set your own routes, you can tailor them to your goals and weaknesses, allowing you to get the most from your training. Furthermore you can decide when to add new routes and when to take them down. You can afford to spend a few months or even years working a problem without worrying about the gym staff stripping it at any random moment….
  • “Benchmarking” – Piggy-backing off the last point, home wall users can leave “benchmark” problems or circuits up for many seasons or years, allowing them to gauge their fitness and progress over time. This can be extremely motivating as problems that were initially mega-projects gradually evolve into warmups.
Limit Bouldering on my home wall -- "The Lazy H Barn"

Limit Bouldering on my home wall — “The Lazy H Barn”

This is not a detailed step-by-step guide to home wall construction, but rather, this post will discuss some top-level design philosophies for home climbing walls. Even if you are a member of a good gym, adding a small, supplemental “woody” can help you get the most out of your training.

The first step in building your home wall is selecting a good space. Generally the taller the wall the better (up to at least 12-feet or so). Most home interiors top out at 8 feet, so a garage, basement, attic, shed, barn or other out-building may be the best option. You want your wall to be protected from the elements, so if you select an exterior building, ensure it is at least somewhat protected from moisture. The ability to control the environmental conditions to some extent is a big plus too. Most walls will be too hot more often than too cold, and it’s usually easier to add heat to a space than it is to remove it, so favor a location that is generally relatively cold (such as a basement or shaded room) as opposed to one that is generally warm (like an upstairs room or building with lots of southern exposure).

Another factor to consider is the wall’s proximity to your living spaces. Some folks are more social and will use the wall more if it’s centrally located. I like to have no distractions and complete control over my man-cave, so my detached barn works well for me. That said, I regularly have to post hole through knee-deep snow to get there in the winter, which can be a deterrent to training. If nature calls mid-session, it can be a major pain to get back to a bathroom. I think the ideal option for me would be a detached building that is adjacent (within 10-feet or so) to my house, so I could be isolated, but with easy access to/from the house.

The Lazy H Climbing Barn.  Not a bad venue—isolated, with ceilings up to 12-feet high, and located at a nice cool altitude of 7400-feet.

The Lazy H Climbing Barn. Not a bad venue—isolated, with ceilings up to 12-feet high, and located at a nice cool altitude of 7400-feet.

Once you’ve identified the perfect venue, you’re ready to start designing your wall. Three major factors will drive your design:

  1. The size and shape of your available space
  2. Intended uses of the wall
  3. Long term climbing goals

Space will be a limiting factor for virtually everyone, so it’s important to consider how you plan to use the wall, and prioritize those activities to ensure you create the best terrain for the most important activities. Rock Prodigies might perform any of the following training activities on a home wall:

Determining which activities are most deserving of limited real estate is personal, but here are some things to consider.

  • Your ability and experience level will likely influence your training priorities (and therefore your terrain priorities). Those relatively new to climbing tend to benefit more from ARCing and other skill-development activities, while advanced climbers will often spend more time on Limit Bouldering, Campusing and PE training.
  • Every activity will require some type of warm up, so warmup terrain should be a high priority. Fortunately Warm Up Terrain and ARC Terrain can be very similar.
  • ARCing requires the most terrain, so those with limited space will have a hard time building a suitable area for ARC training. However, ARCing can be one of the most difficult things to do in a public gym. If you’ve had trouble ARCing at your gym (due to crowds, unsuitable layout, poor hold selection, infrequent hold spacing, etc), AND ARCing is a priority in your training, consider ARC terrain a high priority. One way to overcome a small space is to build a wall with very high hold density. This allows for long, circuitous routes in a small area while minimizing the need to retrace your steps.
  • Hangboarding can be done just about anywhere and does not require high ceilings. If you have the option to set up a hangboard in another space (like a closet or the corner of a rarely used room), then do that, and save your precious home wall space for climbing terrain. If that’s NOT an option, consider building a removable hangboard mount that allows you to remove the board whenever you aren’t in a Strength Phase.
  • Limit Bouldering is arguably the best use of a home wall for several reasons. First, it demands the least space, so even those with a small area can usually build something that works for Limit Bouldering. Next, it’s becoming increasingly difficult to find goal-route-specific Limit Bouldering terrain in public gyms. I’ve ranted about this on many occasions, but in a nutshell, public gyms are looking more and more like American Ninja Warrior obstacle courses than representations of actual rock. To get the most from Limit Bouldering, it must be done on realistic terrain and holds. The best bet may be to create such terrain yourself.  Another advantage of LB terrain is that it is relatively steep, allowing more climbing distance within a given vertical height.
Steeper walls provide more travel (but don't let that be the driving factor in your wall design).

Steeper walls provide more travel.  That said, maximizing travel should NOT be the driving factor in your wall design.  The driving factor should be maximizing utility, and an overly steep wall will be useless for some activities (like ARCing).

  • Campusing is important for advanced climbers, but it is trained relatively infrequently (maybe 4-6 times per season). I love having my own campus board, but if space were limited it would be the first thing to go. Campusing at a public gym is a piece of cake, since no one ever uses the campus board, instead opting for whatever flavor-of-the-month Crossfit exercise is trendy at the time 🙂 That said, your local gym’s board may well be a disaster. If that is the case, consider setting up a removable campus board, or building it in a separate space so you can maximize the climbing terrain on your home wall.
  • There’s nothing worse than trying to get through a Linked Bouldering Circuit at a crowded gym, constantly dreading some unsuspecting climber will interfere with your workout. Fortunately, LBCs can be done on the same terrain (sometimes even the same problems) as Limit Bouldering, so if you have LB terrain, you have LBC terrain. Only a very lucky few will have suitable terrain for Route Intervals, so those are best done at a public gym. Usually this is fairly easy to do since you only need to monopolize a single route (as opposed to say, ARCing, where you are constantly traveling against the grain, or LBCs that require the use of 6 or more boulder problems).

In summary, I think the highest priorities are Warmup terrain, which can double as ARC terrain in a pinch, and Limit Bouldering terrain, which can also be used for LBCs. That said, it is possible to warm up on a hangboard. It’s not fun, but plenty of Rock Prodigies do it. It is NOT possible to Limit Boulder on a hangboard, so LB terrain will be the top priority for all but complete beginners (who would benefit more from ARCing). If you have extra space, throw in a Campus Board if power is a priority in your training, or add more ARC terrain if Skill-Development is a higher priority. If you have an embarrassment of riches like me, add both!

A slightly overhanging wall like this one can be used for both ARCing and Limit Bouldering.  Include an assortment of large holds for ARCing, and small, realistic holds for Limit Bouldering.  However, the disadvantage of less steep walls is that they will provide less climbing travel (in the direction of the wall) for a given ceiling height.

A slightly overhanging wall like this one can be used for both ARCing and Limit Bouldering. Include an assortment of large holds for ARCing, and small, realistic holds for Limit Bouldering. However, the disadvantage of less steep walls is that they will provide less climbing travel (in the direction of the wall) for a given ceiling height.

Now that you’ve figured out your training priorities, what does that terrain look like for you? Ideally we could have a wide variety of wall angles, but most of us will have to make some tough choices. The final consideration is your goals, relative to your ability. Since this is your terrain, it should be specific to your goals. If you live in Bend, Oregon, climb exclusively at Smith Rock (where routes are rarely steeper than 10 degrees overhanging), and your ultimate, lifetime climbing goal is a redpoint of the dead vertical To Bolt Or Not To Be, it will be easy to determine what your goal terrain looks like.

The author climbing Smith Rock’s To Bolt Or Not To Be

The author climbing Smith Rock’s To Bolt Or Not To Be.  Photo Mike Anderson

The rest of us will need to do an informal survey of our favorite climbing areas.  Fortunately most of us have a relatively narrow range of angles that we really like. Furthermore, if you live in North America, terrain steeper than 20 degrees overhanging is quite scarce. Look through some photos of your favorite crags or goal routes and estimate the cliff angles to come up with a range of steepnesses that are representative of your performance preferences. Also, you’re not building the wall solely for the ensuring training cycle—it should be something you grow into, so dream big when considering potential goal routes.

PNG 150dpi

The approximate steepness of a few of my recent goal routes.  Photos (L) Ken Klein and (C) Adam Sanders.

Once you have a sample of goal-route angles, add a few degrees of steepness and then use those augmented angles to inform your wall design. The reason for this is that artificial holds, especially footholds, will always be bigger than the outdoor holds they emulate. Furthermore, small holds are hell on your skin, to the point that they can create skin injuries that will limit the duration of your training sessions, and may even impact your outdoor climbing. It’s better to go with slightly larger, more comfy holds, and compensate by kicking the angle back a bit further. Plus you can downsize holds much more easily than you can change the wall angle. Erring on the side of “too steep” will give you the potential to grow into your wall as you improve.

You now have a range of angles to train for. It’s tempting to build a wide assortment of angles with tiny increments between them to perfectly match every goal route on your list. However, the best artificial walls have only a few large planes (or even one) of a consistent angle. For some reason, this just feels better. The Lazy H has a variety of angles, but I spend 95% of my Limit Bouldering on one uniform wall, approximately 12-feet wide by 11-feet high. All the aretes, roofs, dihedrals and other features were fun for the first week or two, but the single consistent plane sees all the action. If you have a lot of space, go with two angles—one optimized for warming up/ARCing at your ability level, and one optimized for Limit Bouldering at your ability level. If you have more than a lot of space, like a huge barn, only then consider including some other angles, but mark my words, much of that extra terrain will be neglected.

xxxx

When bouldering (including Warmup Boulder Ladder problems and Limit Bouldering), I spend the vast majority of my time on this wall.  It’s wide, uniform surface allows for a high concentration of smooth-yet-challenging problems.

One final note: invest in quality hand holds! The smaller your wall, the more essential this is, because each hold on your wall represents an opportunity cost. If your holds suck, the wall won’t be fun to use, and that will certainly impact your training. When I’m having fun in the Lazy H, my sessions are longer, more intense, and more productive. You can read some of my hold recommendations here and here.

Later this month I’ll provide a brief virtual tour of the Lazy H, detailing the dimensions and angles of each wall, what I like about it, and what I would do differently.

Adjustable Mount 2.0 for the Rock Prodigy Training Center

The finished adjustable mount. Keep reading to learn how to make your own.

The finished adjustable mount. Keep reading to learn how to make your own.

In a previous article, we showed you how to build an Adjustable Mount for your Rock Prodigy Training Center so that you can take maximum advantage of the built in ergonomics of the most innovative fingerboard on the market. While it gets the job done, the French Cleat technique described in that article is difficult to execute, and the result is bulky. We’ll show you an alternate method here that can be built for about $20 in parts and an hour of work.

The finished product is shown above, and the backside view is shown below. It uses “Door Stop” hardware I found at Home Depot to drape accross a 2×10 (or 2 x whatever you like..) Besides being much lighter and lower profile than the French Cleat, this design is also extremely portable. this mounting system could be hung from any 2×8, if you were on the road and needed to get your training in…think of the possibilities…

Rear view of the finished adjustable mount.

Rear view of the finished adjustable mount.

The base board is 3/4″ plywood, which the RPTC and Door Stop hardware mount to (with T-Nuts). I had some nice scrap plywood laying around that I used, but you could use a lower grade to save some money. I used my RPTC to trace out the shape for the base boards, and cut it with a jig saw, which is ideal for cutting curves. Before you cut, plan out where the screws for the RPTC are going to be, and where the bolts for the door stops will go so that they don’t interfere. It’s a good idea to drill the holes for the Door Stop hardware before you cut, but it isn’t necessary.

Cutting the 3/4" plywood base board with a jig saw. Use safety glasses!!!

Cutting the 3/4″ plywood base board with a jig saw. Use safety glasses!!!

I left about a 1″ margin at the top of the board, as shown in the next photo.

Note the ~1" overlap at the top of the RPTC.

Note the ~1″ overlap at the top of the RPTC.

Here is how I laid out the bolt holes for the door stops:

Laying out the holes for the Door Stop. You'll want to mount this as close to the top of the baseboard as possible.

Laying out the holes for the Door Stop. You’ll want to mount this as close to the top of the baseboard as possible.

Every climber should have a bucket of 5/16″ T-Nuts laying around, but you may need to pickup some 3/4″ x 5/16″ bolts and washers. You’ll want to torque these pretty tight so that the T-Nuts suck in to the plywood and are flush with the plywood. This will ensure the RPTC can be mounted to the base board without interference from the T-Nuts.

Torquing the bolts into the T-Nuts.

Torquing the bolts into the T-Nuts.

Here is the finished backplate with Door Stops, bolts, and washers:

The finished backplate.

The finished backplate.

And this is the front view, showing the T-Nuts flush with the plywood for easy mounting of the RPTC:

The front side of the backplate. Note the T-nuts are flush with the plywood to allow you to mount the RPTC flush.

The front side of the backplate. Note the T-nuts are flush with the plywood to allow you to mount the RPTC flush.

The next step is to mount your RPTC on the base boards. Carefully select your screws (length in particular) so that they DO NOT protrude out the back of the plywood. If they do, you’ll need to cut them off with a cutoff wheel or grinder, and that’s a pain you should try to avoid.

Selecting the right length screws from my collection to mount the RPTC with.

Selecting the right length screws from my collection to mount the RPTC with.

Here are the finished adjustable mounts with RPTC halves mounted:

The RPTC mounted on the base plates.

The RPTC mounted on the base plates.

At this point, if you throw your RPTC up on a 2×10, you’ll notice some slop in the mounting. The Door Stops are not 1.5″ deep like a 2×4, they are deeper, which leaves a gap. You may be able to live with this gap (and in my experience, it isn’t a problem). If not, you’ll need to mount shims on the backside of the 2×10 to “widen” the 2×10 and eliminate that gap. Something in the range of 3/8″ to 1/2″ shim will work. I used 3/8″, and this works well for me.

Shim material mounted to the back of the 2×10 that I use for my cross beam:

Shims added to the back of my 2x10 cross beam. And a poop tube (for some reason?)

Shims added to the back of my 2×10 cross beam. And a poop tube (for some reason?)

Cutting out the shim material with my Jig saw:

Cutting the shims.

Cutting the shims.

Finally, if you are accustomed to your hangboard residing at a particular height, you will want to relocate your cross beam. As I described in this article on how to mount a hangboard, I like the bottom of my board 81″ off the floor. The adjustable mount will raise the level of your board a few inches, so you may need to lower your crossbeam by a corresponding amount. If you have other boards or holds mounted on your crossbeam, you might want to just live with it, and build yourself a platform as described in the aforementioned article.

Lowering my cross beam to account for the increase in height provided by the door stops.

Lowering my cross beam to account for the increase in height provided by the door stops.

Here is the finished product, and the happy new owner of an adjustable hangboard:

The finished product.

The finished product.

Focus – New Post on RCTM.com!

Check out my new post on “Focus” over at RockClimbersTrainingManual.com:

“Focus is all about summoning maximum concentration and attention at the moment it is crucially needed.  Most climbers think of this when its time to send, but the ability to summon and maintain sufficient focus is also vital during daily training.  With training cycles that last for months, often involving several weeks of training on plastic, maintaining this focus can be quite a challenge.  When I have to post-hole through two feet of fresh snow to get to the Lazy H for a workout, the moment of tying in for a difficult send may be the furthest from my mind.  Regardless, the effort & attention given to the ensuing workout, completed two months before booting up below my project, could have as much bearing on the eventual outcome as the effort put into the redpoint attempt….”  Continue Reading

Adjustable Mount for the RPTC – New Post on RCTM.com!

Check out my new post on “Adjustable Mount for the RPTC” over at RockClimbersTrainingManual.com:

“Ever since I first conceived of the Rock Prodigy Training Center, I’ve been pondering a cheap and simple mounting system that would allow for instantaneous spacing adjustments. Once the RPTC was unveiled I got a number of great ideas from other climbers. Julian Marks suggested a “French Cleat” system in this Mountain Project thread, which uses two pieces of angled lumber to create an integrated hook on the mounting structure that slides along a fixed receptacle…”  Continue Reading

The vision for the Trango athlete team is to find climbers who embody our brand’s values and support them in their climbing endeavors. We focus on the character of the climber, their passion for the sport, and their desire to contribute to the community.

Meet the Team

Featured Events

There are currently no upcoming events.

All Events

Partners

The American Alpine Club American Mountain Guides Association Access Fund Leave No Trace - lnt.org

Archives

Authors

Facebooktwittergoogle_pluspinterestmail
eGrips Tenaya Fast Rope Descender

© Trango - All Rights Reserved