|
|
Post by jonfrisby on Jan 3, 2015 11:39:09 GMT -7
Not sure what the best thing to call this is - but basically, I'm struggling on the second move when campusing. I can do a 1-4 on the smallest rungs, but am far weaker making the following move. I can sometimes do a 1-4-5 (the 1-4 being nearly automatic), cannot do a 1-4-6 at all, and can pretty easily do a 1-4(match)-6, and can almost do a 1-4(match)-7. I think the brunt of the problem is body strength because I have tried to do a 1-4-6 on large rungs and this is quite difficult. What exercises have people tried to work through this issue? TYIA!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by daustin on Jan 3, 2015 18:31:01 GMT -7
I'm far from a campusing expert, but I think one way to tackle this might be by starting with smaller 1st moves to make the 2nd move a bit easier, and progress from there.
So instead of trying a 1-4-5 or even 1-4-6, try a 1-2-5 or 1-3-5, etc.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonfrisby on Jan 4, 2015 13:05:19 GMT -7
That seems like a good idea - maybe I can split my max ladders between 1-4-5 and what you're suggesting to try to get the best of both skills.
|
|
|
|
Post by MarkAnderson on Jan 5, 2015 9:24:29 GMT -7
The 2nd move will always be much harder, because on the 1st move you can use two arms to initiate motion, whereas on the second move you're primarily using only the upper one arm (with some marginal assistance form the lower arm). Dan has the right idea; it's better to emphasize more "symmetric" ladders. However, there is definitely some benefit to pushing the first move and going from there. That type of move is encountered quite a bit outside, perhaps even more than a symmetric ladder, so it definitely has relevance. Furthermore, if you have some long-term interest in doing 1-4-7 or something, you will eventually need to improve your ability to initiate momentum from the 1-4 position, so it wouldn't hurt to start building that strength/technique now.
When I was at the point where 1-4-7 was about my limit, I spent most of my sets attempting 1-4-7 and 1-4.5-7.5, but I also saved some sets to attempt 1-5-best_effort a couple times (leading with each hand) since I knew that someday I wanted to do 1-5-8.
|
|
|
|
Post by slimshaky on Jan 5, 2015 14:03:33 GMT -7
one thing that i have been working on (i call them offsets) is basically just doing the 2nd move. instead of starting with both hands on 1 (ie B1), i start with left hand on 1 (ie L1), right hand on 4 (i note this as L1/R4 in my notes). then, i try to throw left hand to 7 (L7). so basically L1/R4 -> L7. this basically skips the first move and allows me to focus on the power, and probably just as important in my case the coordination to do the 2nd move. i already know i can do the first move, over and over and.... i try to focus on the things that give me the most problem.
mark, what do you think of this approach? i imagine it has pros and cons. the first con that i can think of is that by only doing one move i might be able to latch the hold, but am i really latching it well enough to do another move? given how crappy i am at basic ladders, this might be a considerable con.
|
|
|
|
Post by MarkAnderson on Jan 5, 2015 16:16:31 GMT -7
It can't hurt to try it, other than the opportunity cost of not doing more worthwhile exercises instead. My initial thought was that if you can't do L1/R4 -> L7, at least you've learned you certainly can't do 1-4-7, so you might as well work on something else (like the component pieces). However, if you are using momentum to your advantage, 1-4-7 could actually be easier than L1/R4 -> L7. Something to keep in mind.
Bottom line, I think it's useful to break up complex moves and work them individually when rock climbing; I don't see why it would be any different here. You need to work the momentum piece too, but you may have to do that with an easier ladder, like 1-3.5-6 or whatever. Also, hitting the middle rung well is probably the most import piece, so be sure to work on that plenty. That's one good thing about doing 1-4 over and over and...
Anyway, rather than starting at L1/R4, you might try starting at L1/R3 or L1/R3.5, and then bumping to R4, then immediately pulling through to L7. This would increase the odds of hitting R4 well (as opposed to when starting from B1), while allowing you to incorporate some momentum into the move to L7. It might be an easier way to practice going straight into the second move. If you pull that off, then you could gradually move the starting position of your right hand down the board towards 1.
|
|
|
|
Post by jonfrisby on Jan 5, 2015 20:02:39 GMT -7
Thanks everyone - daustin, I took your recommendation and started with a 1-2-4, which was pretty easy, and was able to get a 1-3-5 by the end of the session! I definitely feel like it works things a bit differently than going for a max first move does, and I think that splitting my time between the two exercises is really valuable in terms of rounding out the skill set. I also think the method you suggest helps a lot with what Mark calls using momentum to my advantage, as I was much better able to continue momentum (Mark's blog post awhile back on hip swinging is a good example), whereas when I do a 1-4-5, I'm not as able to keep moving side to side as fluidly, not to mention continuous upward movement.
I really wish I had access to a board with intermediate rungs like you do Mark. They seem really valuable. By the way, it really blows my mind that Ben Moon could do the 1-5-9. When I tried for fun to do a 1-5 on big rungs, I felt like there was no way I could even reach that high!!
|
|
|
|
Post by slimshaky on Jan 6, 2015 10:21:59 GMT -7
It can't hurt to try it, other than the opportunity cost of not doing more worthwhile exercises instead. this is a good point, but also brings up another question. if we are really looking at developing power, is a 3 move exercise necessarily better than a single move exercise? i think the single move exercise might be better in terms of absolute clutch dumping power. but, also as you kind of pointed out, i do several sets of these along with the basic ladders and max ladders in the hopes that i can focus on individual building blocks and try to string them together. last night was my best campus workout so far. it was one of those beautiful nights where the temperature in the garage was perfect and skin friction was immaculate. i pretty much nailed every set i tried. super psyched about this as i find it really challenging (and frustrating sometimes). |
|
|
|
Post by MarkAnderson on Jan 6, 2015 15:41:32 GMT -7
if we are really looking at developing power, is a 3 move exercise necessarily better than a single move exercise? i think the single move exercise might be better in terms of absolute clutch dumping power. That's a fair question. I don't recall if I put this in the book, but I've definitely written about it before somewhere. In my view a Max Ladder really boils down to the second move. The last move is trivial, and the first move is usually trivial (unless you're a short person trying 1-5-...). Granted, the quality of the latch at the end of the first move has a big impact on the second move, but there is only one move where you're really screaming and going all out. I think it's better that it's not the first move, because there's value in the build up to it, in terms of acquiring momentum, improving arousal, and the fact that it requires greater coordination. Usually in hard climbing you have to do a succession of hardish moves to reach a make-or-break crux move. It's pretty rare that you step off a ledge or the ground and immediately attempt the crux move. It would be interesting to test, but I think it would be harder to do a limiting 2nd move if you skipped the first move. I think the recoil action at the end of the first move helps to initiate the second move. If you watch a high jumper, they don't just stand next to the bar and then leap. Part of the run up is just to create speed, but they also make big bounding strides as they approach to build tension in their leg muscles. |
|
|
|
Post by slimshaky on Jan 6, 2015 15:48:10 GMT -7
cool, that makes sense. now that i seem to be improving at the max ladders i will likely fade out the offsets. i like your example about hard climbing. i often run into routes where 'setting up for the crux' kind of ends up being a crux of its' own, and hopefully the ladders and max ladders will provide some experience to relate to these sorts of situations.
|
|
Sander
Junior Member
Posts: 61 
|
Post by Sander on Jan 12, 2015 2:47:12 GMT -7
In my (very limited) experience, the half rungs are extremely helpful in progressing to bigger max ladders. I try to keep the ladders relatively symmetrical. Up to now, I've been progressing through a series of ladders that looks like 1-3-5, 1-3-5.5, 1-3.5-5.5, 1-3.5-6, 1-4-6, 1-4-6.5, etc... So far this worked for me.
I also noticed that the second move gets harder when the distance covered in the first move is bigger. For example: 1-4-6 initially felt harder then 1-3.5-6. After trying it a couple of times and - this is key! - focussing on pushing down with the lower hand, the difference diminished. Hope it can help you as well!
|
|
