I'm starting to wonder if I have misinterpreted how hard I should be trying on linked boulder circuits. I have assumed that I should be giving it 100%, which often goes as follows: Toward the end of my later sets, as heavy fatigue starts to set in, my form starts to unravel. My movement becomes more desperate and less controlled, but I keep going until I come off the wall essentially against my will. I feel like the alternative would be to more voluntarily end the set when I become so fatigued that I can no longer execute every move with good form and control, which I guess would be more like 95% effort.
The reason for my question is that, while training has significantly reduced the occurrence of injuries for me, it seems that the few finger tweaks that I have acquired seem to have been caused by LBC's, of all things. I suspect it's the desperate latching of holds the final moments of my LBC sets that are the issue here. For that reason, I'm leaning more toward the 95% option for next time.
I'm curious what a typical point of failure is like for other people on here. Are you clawing your way up with every ounce of remaining energy, or calling it quits before your form starts to come apart? And would calling it quits result in less effective PE training?
Post by MarkAnderson on Apr 14, 2017 8:20:59 GMT -7
The vast majority of the time I'm doing what you call "100%" (the occasions that I don't are caused by lack of will). It's hard to say if that's "right" or not. I periodically see coaches saying stuff like "training to failure is failing to train." IME most people seem to favor catchy slogans over empirical data, so I'm probably "wrong."
Practically speaking, if your circuit is giving you tweaks, perhaps you can tweak your circuit to make it safer. If you must have tweaky moves, put them in the front of the circuit so you can do them when you aren't so tired. If you slapping for holds at the end, make them friendly holds.
The last problem on my circuit does have some fairly big moves involving medium crimps. It isn’t anything I would normally think of as tweaky because I do all those moves open handed, but I guess that even an open handed crimp can become tweaky if my movement is sloppy enough. So I agree, it makes sense to reduce tweakiness toward the end. At the same time, I need to keep it difficult enough. I guess my challenge will be determining which is safer: Bigger/friendlier holds with bigger moves, or small holds (that can be open-handed) with smaller moves…
I have similar fears when redlining on standard boulder problems. You can switch to foot-on campus intervals for a similar PE workout with more control over move length and hold size. You risk injuring your mind with boredom.
I agree with Mark. I work my LBC's until my fingers uncurl because I simply can't hang on to the holds any more. I also make sure the LBC is as "safe" or ergonomic as possible. I've done things like used more skin friendly holds, added intermediate holds, changed moves to make them more shoulder joint friendly. When I'm doing LBC's though, I don't worry about "ouch, that was stupid" injuries; I worry more about overuse injuries, like elbow tendonosis from hammering the same moves over and over again.
Thanks for all the pointers. Seems pretty clear now that I haven't necessarily been over-trying on the LBC workouts, but that I could take a lot more factors into consideration as I re-design my circuit.
On my last PE phase (resulting in a minor finger injury) I did the LBC’s on the moonboard. For reference in case anybody is interested, this was my circuit: “JPB Hot Weather”(V5), downclimb mini-jugs that I added, “Drop Dead Tenryu”(V5), downclimb mini-jugs, “Wuthering Heights” (V4). Like I said, I don’t think any of it is particularly tweaky, but I believe there’s room for improvement as far as making it even friendlier and safer.
One thing to consider is downclimbing on worse holds to back off the intensity (and therefore potentially tweakiness) of your up-climbs. I.e. instead of going down mini jugs between your two V5s, maybe go down a V2 or a V3 and drop your up climbs to V3-4. This can also help create a more sustained, deeper pump than having big intensity swings between the up and down climbs.
With the 40 degree overhang, the mini jugs feel like V3- to downclimb. In other words, the downclimb feels noticeably easier than the upclimbs, but not to the point where I feel like I'm resting or de-pumping. Is the intent to achieve consistent intensity (i.e. climbing down should feel just as hard as climbing up)? I always assumed that the downclimbs are there more to keep your pump sustained or growing for the next problem, but not so much that you are redlining during the downclimb. I could see the value in wanting the intensity to be as consistent as possible though.
Got it -- no, I think you're on the right track then. I guess depending on the quality of the jugs, a juggy downclimb could potentially feel much easier than V3- and get you into more of a resting/de-pumping situation. But it sounds like that's not the case, so it's a moot point!