|
Post by erick on Feb 8, 2018 11:50:18 GMT -7
People have always said Sharma has bad technique, while continued to set new standards. I think this is a hold over from the traditionalist leader must not fall narrative. Back in the day technique was developed to keep you stable so you were never in a position to fall. So taking chances on a dyno was a strict no no. Now that falling is totally cool and it is being seen how efficient moving with momentum is we are still trying to figure out the which is better in which situation. As a super slow static sloth I am realizing that so much of the climbs which I learned super static and in control are now easier when I learn to apply momentum and deadpoints as much as possible, even at a place like Smith. But back when my finger strength was less I did not have the strength to climb in these more powerful patters effectively. So in many ways technique is dictated by the strength you can access.
In my (humble and probably misinformed) opinion the climber with the best technique is the one who has the most skill sets available to them and practice at applying them when needed. For each person depending on the move, the skill (slow and static or dynamic and fast) may be different based on there size and relative strength. Ondra is a great example, that guy is horrible to watch while climbing but he gets up the hardest stuff in the world really fast. I would hire a coach right away if they could tell me what movement skills I lack and give me repeatable and progress-able drills that will help me learn them. I just dont know that this formula has really been figured out yet.
|
|
|
Post by tetrault on Feb 8, 2018 12:27:28 GMT -7
In my (humble and probably misinformed) opinion the climber with the best technique is the one who has the most skill sets available to them and practice at applying them when needed. I would think this more a definition of a climber who has developed the most tools and options to choose from to employ good technique, but not necessarily the one who actually uses the best technique. If chosen wisely on on specific route ascent, then I do agree, it is likely that climber was able to climb with the best technique. Couldn't agree more with your last 2 sentences!
|
|
|
Post by daustin on Feb 8, 2018 12:53:53 GMT -7
These conversations around people lamenting the lack of technique and the pursuit of strength in climbing are a bit elitist in my opinion. There are no style points here. This isn't figure skating. There are not a dozen judges at the bottom giving scores out of 10 after a climb. This is another great point I neglected to comment on...
There was a lot of discussion after the Panel about how climbers who come from gymnastics, martial arts or dance have such "good technique." But, like you said, in those sports competitors are being judged directly on form/style. The reason a gymnast must do an Iron Cross without trembling is that ITS MUCH HARDER TO DO!!! Yet we apply the same standard in climbing despite the absence of style points. If the gymnast just needed to sketch through the Iron Cross, that is what they would do, in order to save strength for the next element.
Consider moving a foot from one hold to the next. With the "right" body position, this can be done "statically," removing the foot casually and slowly lifting it to the next hold. Or, with "bad" body position, it can be done by dragging/scraping/kicking the foot up to the next hold. The former looks much "better", but the latter allows the climber to keep weight on the moving foot, thus reducing the load on the hands and fingers. Plus it may avoid additional hand/foot movements to get in the "right" body position for the foot move. I don't think it's clear that one is better than the other, maybe they both have a place in the "good technique" quiver.
Another example to consider is Josune Beriatzu. She appears to dyno EVERY move on a hard route. To a casual observer, she might appear to be out of control or barely scraping through, compared to some strong guy locking off every move and dancing statically between holds. But clearly Josune's approach minimizes the expenditure of lock-off and finger strength, and clearly it would take much more practice to dial a route to the point that you could successfully latch every dyno. Isn't that good technique? Yet its the antithesis of Patrick Edlinger.
I took the comment about gymnasts, martial artists and dancers differently. I think the correlation between those sports and good technique in climbing is more about body awareness, control and mobility. The way I think about good technique is that it's moving your body to reduce the chance of failing due to muscular/physiological fatigue. Sometimes that might be moving like Edlinger, sometimes it might be like Beriatzu. My opinion is that a lot of the basic movement patterns that are commonly touted as keys of climbing technique (flagging, drop knees, heel hooks, etc.) are relatively easy to "master" to a reasonable degree -- say 80-90%. The real hard part of improving technique comes down to the last 10-20% of mastery, which I think requires significant body awareness to know that you can stick the move if you open your knee another 10 degrees to suck your hip in, or scum your toe on the blank wall to give that little extra resistance against a barndoor, etc. And in my experience (esp with bouldering), the need for great shoulder and hip mobility becomes more and more important in being able to put yourself in these positions that let you hang on for one more move. I'm not a gymnast, martial artist or dancer, so I can't speak from personal experience about how those activities led to better climbing technique, but I don't think the comparison is (or should be) about how those activities reward style points -- it's more about how they mandate extreme body awareness, control and mobility.
|
|
|
Post by willblack on Feb 8, 2018 16:04:08 GMT -7
I would be really interested in a "case study" podcast/discussion with different trainers detailing different plans for a specific climber. I think this would bring out a better discussion than an overall discussion on lots of vague topics like footwork, technique, core strength, finger strength, etc. I think this might entice Mr. Sjong to actually discuss real training principles instead of encouraging people to climb outside more and train less, which is what I felt like he did in this discussion. I would rather hear a whole hour of debate on how to train a specific climber than an hour of general training principles that can't be proven or disproven because everything is too general.
|
|
|
Post by Chris W on Feb 8, 2018 21:48:55 GMT -7
Overall Climbing Ability = Technique + Physical Ability + Mental Ability.
Solve for Technique:
Technique = Overall Climbing Ability - Physical Ability - Mental Ability
This makes a lot of sense to me. I've always considered myself a good "technical" climber (though I could just be deluding myself). Before I started my Rock Prodigy training, I on-sighted a 11c slab but could barely make it up a 5.10 overhang. I figured this was because I needed less finger strength and could "technique" my way up the route. Once I started training with the Rock Prodigy method, I saw very real and measurable increases in my finger strength and other physical abilities, and my redpoint numbers quickly improved. The mental ability part is a bit hard to figure out, because I know I can develop significant "redpoint anxiety" if the conditions are right, like my fall season.
|
|
|
Post by reboot on Feb 16, 2018 16:12:48 GMT -7
The topic of technique is way too broad to discuss in a single thread. But I'll say that the optimal techniques vary by person (based on their build/flexibility and other physical attributes) and the type of movement and the length/type of route.
For the discussion of classical static techniques vs modern dynamic/gymnastic techniques, one person I'd love to hear from is Robyn Raboutou, who competed (and was at the top) in the era of vertical walls and very static style to coaching today's youth at the wildly gymnastic bouldering style.
|
|
|
Post by suprcrmpr on Feb 21, 2018 2:50:16 GMT -7
To chime in, and (wildly?) paraphrase Ondra from some youtubeclip/interview I can't track down at the moment : The best technique is the most efficient one, not the prettiest.
In regards to his style which is "loud and fast", compared to the "dancing on rock" from yonder years.
Another interesting clip is Nalle's ascent of burden of dreams. It looks very anticlimactic. If you look at the actual ascent, it could be mistaken for a casual warm up. Nalle said this as well, and added that a climb at this level had to be 100% prescise and therefor look casual. The difficulty and insecurity of the moves did not allow for any adjustment.
|
|