|
Post by jeffisnotfunny on Jul 29, 2015 18:01:08 GMT -7
Hey... just curious... I have completed several cycles, but after reading Training For a New Alpinism by Steve House, I was curious if I have been performing my ARC Phase completely wrong...
That book is super focused on heart rate based training for it's base cardio phase. When I go for a run following their protocol of 55-75% max HR, I feel like I can run forever, and I leave my workout feeling refreshed. Over time, the speed at which I can maintain that base heart rate has increased, but kept the same go forever effect.
When I have done ARC sessions in the past, I'm usually on the verge of pumping off the whole time and I will fight the pump for the 30-45 min per set. I was under the impression that ARCing was designed to help the body manage the pump/burning forearms, so I have always pushed to go faster/use smaller holds/steeper... etc. Am I doing this incorrectly? What heart rates are you guys ARCing at? Should I be doing base fitness or fighting the pump the whole time?
-jeff
|
|
|
Post by tedwelser on Jul 29, 2015 18:45:14 GMT -7
This issue was raised in an early thread also, and I will try to summarize my memory of what was said there. One of the key differences between ARC training for running and ARC-ing for climbing stems from which muscles are the limiting factor. In climbing the forearms are limiting and they are very small and exertions of the forearms are not going to raise the heart rate. In contrast in running you are engaging major muscle groups and the heart rate becomes a good proxy for exertion level.
I think another idea that was raised had to do with differences between forearms and leg muscles in terms of how exertion level blocks blood flow. The forearms tend to restrict blood flow at a much lower level of exertion than the anaerobic / aerobic threshold in running.
Finally, getting the ARC level right is a tricky thing. I would say that I try to work towards a controlled sensation of pump, but keep it in a manageable range. I like the metaphor of a weathermap-- light rain (pump) is blue, then green, yellow, orange, red, and finally pink. When I ARC I tend to stay in the orange range, and cycle around between yellow, orange and moments of red.
|
|
|
Post by jeffisnotfunny on Jul 29, 2015 18:59:36 GMT -7
I've been searching this forum, but unable to find the thread you mentioned.
I could see how the relatively small muscle size of forearm muscles and the fact that as you use grip strength forearm muscle expansion causes blood vessel occlusion. But when ARCing, you are technically using your whole body... ex... I have personally found great increases in calf strength and no longer need to do calf raises in the gym. I would imagine, the whole body workout of climbing produces a jump from a persons base heart rate.
Has anyone ARC'd w/a heart rate monitor before? What % of your max HR have you found yourself maintaining during a session?
|
|
|
Post by tedwelser on Jul 29, 2015 19:03:08 GMT -7
|
|
|
Post by jeffisnotfunny on Jul 29, 2015 19:29:04 GMT -7
I just read that thread... I guess, the issue i'm struggling w/in my ARC training vs other sports... In running for example, I can use my HR monitor to ensure I am maintaining my proper exertion level. I have found all the non-tech manners of monitoring my exertion to be ineffective. IE... I can maintain a level of breathing where I can have normal conversation and go well above my base training heart rate.
I am looking to a HR Monitor to help guide me in my effort level... unless there is a better way to monitor my exertion. Any suggestions???
|
|
|
Post by tedwelser on Jul 29, 2015 19:42:43 GMT -7
Hopefully someone else will chime in with an answer to your question. My guess is that a heart rate monitor is not going to provide a valid estimate of your pump because the error term will be much larger than the signal. The forearm exertion level is what you want to measure but the non forearm muscles can undergo far more variation than the forearm muscles independent of the pump.
The problem is that you could romp up a jug haul with a high heart rate and never get pumped or you could creep up a power sapping route and pump out. I suppose if you were ARC ing on a hangboard you might be able to use a HR monitor to measure your pump? Or otherwise it could work if yourestricted or standardized your non forearm muscle exertion rate.
|
|
|
Post by brendann on Jul 30, 2015 6:39:26 GMT -7
No need to chime in Ted, you hit the nail right on the head. The more you ARC the more perceptive of your pump/exertion levels you will become. My best outward gauge is sweat. Too many people wander around vertical terrain never breaking a sweat and then struggle with steep endurance.
|
|
|
Post by joev9 on Jul 30, 2015 6:59:52 GMT -7
I think you could use an HR monitor for your ARC but the "zones" would not be the same as for running. What you would need to do is experiment (might take a couple weeks of data) with the monitor doing different levels of ARC'ing, easy, moderate, hard, really hard and figure out where your HR range is for each of those. Then you can set zones and work to stay within whatever one you want to be in for the particular workout.
|
|
|
Post by tedwelser on Jul 30, 2015 11:58:48 GMT -7
No need to chime in Ted, you hit the nail right on the head. The more you ARC the more perceptive of your pump/exertion levels you will become. My best outward gauge is sweat. Too many people wander around vertical terrain never breaking a sweat and then struggle with steep endurance. I tend to build up towards a pump and then manage it back down. I have steep terrain and I try to work some big muscle groups into my ARC sessions for general fitness. Sweating is a good minimum threshold, though it's really condition specific. This was Tuesday. 30 min of ARC in 94 degrees with high humidity. Today I actually cut apart some old socks to wear as wrist bands and ankle bands to keep my hands and feet somewhat dry. You know you are climbing in the midwest in the summer when your shoes and chalk bag are almost always wet.
|
|
|
Post by brendann on Jul 31, 2015 19:07:04 GMT -7
I think you could use an HR monitor for your ARC but the "zones" would not be the same as for running. What you would need to do is experiment (might take a couple weeks of data) with the monitor doing different levels of ARC'ing, easy, moderate, hard, really hard and figure out where your HR range is for each of those. Then you can set zones and work to stay within whatever one you want to be in for the particular workout. This won't work because, as Ted pointed out, you can manipulate your heart rate independent of your pump level. Imagine slowly crimping up a vertical route, keeping your heart rate low but pumping out. You could alternatively sprint up an easy route, engaging your legs and getting your heart rate up while not pumping out. You can also see this dichotomy in hard handboard workouts (low HR, high pump) and pull-up sprint sets (high HR, low pump)
|
|
|
Post by jeffisnotfunny on Aug 1, 2015 12:54:19 GMT -7
So unfortunately, it seems as if there is no way of specifically knowing if you are using the correct amount of effort. You need to use clues from your body (pump, sweat level... Etc). Thanks. I was hoping to find a way of being more precise.
|
|
|
Post by patterner on Aug 18, 2015 20:05:36 GMT -7
Hi guys, newbie here, but I thought I'd chime in. I'm Chris, used to climb (mostly just indoor), got out of it, now on the back side of 40 and way past the wrong side of 250# and trying to get back in shape and get back into climbing. Perhaps there's an inverse correlation here? Higher HR, easier route with more leg engagement, less pump. Lower HR, less leg engagement, more pump. I think joev9 had a good idea up ahead. Work out the zones based on perceived level of pump, but in this case, to decrease pump, *increase* HR on a more leg centered route. I would think a couple of weeks of data would be enough to at least get you a baseline that you could use for further refinement. All this assumes a base level of fitness that's way higher than mine right now...my heart starts cranking going up a ladder.
|
|
|
Post by jessebruni on Aug 19, 2015 8:44:29 GMT -7
All this assumes a base level of fitness that's way higher than mine right now...my heart starts cranking going up a ladder. Therein lies one of the problems with using a HR monitor. As your fitness goes up your heart rate will go down, but you may still be getting just as pumped.
|
|
|
Post by Anonymous Badger on Jan 9, 2019 17:36:50 GMT -7
I realize this thread is dead, but I found it in 2019, so others might, too. I used a HR monitor for several months worth of climbing in 2018, including at least a dozen ARC sessions, because it seemed like a brilliant idea. I concluded the same thing that Ted guessed above: HR is much more strongly tied to the route's style and therefore the engagement of your larger muscles (core, legs, back) and seems largely independent of forearm pump. I also used it for hangboarding and don't remember being able to draw any useful conclusions about what % max to aim for. I'll take more data this year, but don't hold your breath - I think the forearm muscles are just too small.
|
|
|
Post by MarkAnderson on Jan 9, 2019 17:57:32 GMT -7
It’s always helpful to get data points like that, even if it shows no benefit. At least then we know our logic is sound and we don’t need to waste our time going down that path.
|
|