High end PE feels like HYP?

[Sam2]

Hi Mark/Mike:

Enjoying the book.  Taking me a while to digest everything, and it seems like the more I know the more questions I have.

I've been attempting periodized training thing for a bit now, though this is the first time I've bothered to do a PE cycle. Given that the only crag I'll be able to get to this fall stands a whopping 25 ft tall, I  decided on the following, which I thought fit in with the higher intensity PE workouts suggested in your book.

 6 reps x (80 s on/ 160 s off),

I'm doing this on a Treadwall 13 degree overhanging, using just the supertweek holds once mentioned on your blog (good suggestion!), and  smallish feet.  80 s is just shy of 1 lap of the board (i.e. ~18-20 ft of height gained).

So here is what I am wondering... this feels just like a HYP hangboard workout, including the "could do more" feeling right after the workout followed by ~6 hrs later feeling like my forearms have been run over by a truck, and needing 2 days off.  Looking at the workout, its clear it has the same overall structure/timing too!  Am I messing up PE, and the periodized cycle doing this (i.e. I'll get to the HYP cycle having already just maxed out HYP), or is this about right for this side of the PE spectrum?

[wellhung]

C'mon, no replies?

I'll give myself an answer: It seems that others (e.g. A. Barrows) would classify both as "Anaerobic Capacity" work, which should have a tell-tale powered out vs pumped out failure mode. So perhaps these workouts are primarily distinguished by the climbing vs isolated hanging component. So I am thinking that this type of workout should done be primarily done in the initial strength/base phase, not the later PE phase.

So a new question: Does rarely doing a PE phase have long-term consequences? Are PE gains cumulative beyond what is gained from "Anaerobic Capacity (e.g. repeaters)" and "Aerobic Capacity (ARC)" work?

[rob]

May 21, 2015 11:52:48 GMT -7 wellhung said:

So a new question: Does rarely doing a PE phase have long-term consequences? Are PE gains cumulative beyond what is gained from "Anaerobic Capacity (e.g. repeaters)" and "Aerobic Capacity (ARC)" work?

That's a very good question and one I would like to know the answer to. Mark, what are your thoughts?

I'm in a similar position to Sam2, as in my local crags rarely extent beyond 15 metres and therefore I am not really concentrating on base fitness at all this season, and minimising PE so that I can focus more on strength and power. When I visit places where I might need these attributes I figure I'll concentrate on them then, but I would like to know if PE accumulates from season to season, as in the book they mention that gains are made fast and lost fast in relation to PE.

[rob]

Aug 29, 2014 11:44:52 GMT -7 Sam2 said:

 6 reps x (80 s on/ 160 s off),

I'm doing this on a Treadwall 13 degree overhanging, using just the supertweek holds once mentioned on your blog (good suggestion!), and  smallish feet.  80 s is just shy of 1 lap of the board (i.e. ~18-20 ft of height gained).

Sounds like spot on PE training not hypertrophy to me. It's unlikey you would be training hypertrophy in this situation given the inconsistency in grip types, timing between holds, time spent holding each hold + the lack of progressive weight increases - but the times you are climbing for tie in perfectly with what Mike and Mark say in the book consitute the "PE window"

[MarkAnderson]

I don't have a good answer. I think PE is less cumulative than Strength, that's for sure. I can tell you what I do, and that should provide some good insight into my beliefs.

I only train PE if I have a need for it in the current season. Sometimes I go several seasons in a row without training it. Over the last few years I've rarely attempted a route at my limit with more than, say, 20 moves of really sustained climbing. When I do train PE, it's almost always high intensity/low rep PE, because that is what my goal routes are almost always like.

The problem with this data is that there is no Control Group. I haven't attempted any low-intensity/hi-rep PE routes recently, so I can't tell you if my "train it when you need it" strategy is creating a gaping weakness or not. I have periodically done hi-intensity/lo-rep PE routes (say, 30 moves or less without rest). I always struggle with these, but I do the PE training, and I always eventually send them. Maybe I wouldn't struggle as much if I trained PE every season. Or maybe if I trained PE every season, my power wouldn't be quite as good, and I wouldn't be able to do the moves on these projects (because 1-I wouldn't have as much time to devote to power training and/or maintenance, and 2-endurance and power are somewhat mutually exclusive).

The one bit of quantifiable data I have is my PE circuit itself, a 34-move circuit in the Lazy H that I've been using for PE training since about 2008 or so. I've gotten insanely better on that thing over the years, despite periodically making the holds worse to keep it challenging. I don't know what that means though. It seems like if I lay off it for a season or two and then get back on it with gusto, I will have improved (meaning, I can complete it with lest rest between sets, or complete more sets with the same rest, etc) despite doing no deliberate PE training. I interpret this as, I've gotten stronger/more powerful, so now the circuit is just plain easier relative to my strength/power (ie, the circuit requires a lower percentage of my max effort).

Bottom line, in my case, considering the type of routes I do, skipping PE training doesn't appear to have held me back substantially. If I were to travel more it might be an issue.

[amalec]

"not hypertophy" is a bit funny. Think of sailors hauling ropes all day: lots of submaximal work all day long, which doesn't fit an ideal "hypertrophy" work set, and yet Popeye. It may not be ideal for hypertrophy, but that doesn't mean your forearms aren't growing.

Of the physical attributes, strength tends to be the hardest to gain and the longest to atrophy; energy system specialization (alactic and lactic recovery for PE) tends to gain fast and lose fast. Remember that strength and power gains translate to PE as well. Energy system specialization and improvement persists as well (think about a professional soccer player, where there are similar cycles of sprint/rest, coming back from the offseason vs. an untrained person starting soccer. Both are going to get winded at first, but the professional is going to get back to fit shape much faster).

[rob]

Wow thanks Mark, good to hear your approach, sounds like we're on the same page. As you say, one way to determine the effects of skipping PE would be to try a previously sent route/ circuit. I don't have the luxury of a non- changing circuit, but I could try this with outdoor routes, comparing seasons with vs. Without PE phase.

Amelec,you make a good point. To corroborate your analogy using the soccer players, I remember my exercise physiology teacher in university making some comment that once the percentage of a certain muscle fiber type increases, even when this is reduced it is easier to regain the previous state than starting from fresh. Maybe this could translate into PE someway, not sure.

[jcm]

May 22, 2015 16:06:53 GMT -7 amalec said:

Energy system specialization and improvement persists as well (think about a professional soccer player, where there are similar cycles of sprint/rest, coming back from the offseason vs. an untrained person starting soccer. Both are going to get winded at first, but the professional is going to get back to fit shape much faster).

I think that this is an important point that might be getting lost here.  Although PE is an "easy come / easy go" trained attribute, once you have built it up once (or many times) it will come back more quickly. As such, a seasoned sport climber (i.e. Mark) who has trained PE extensively in the past, and climbed high-level PE routes, can safely neglect PE for many seasons, and then quickly train it back up when it is needed.  The situation is different for someone who has never trained PE at a high level, such as a strong boulderer, or an up-and-coming climber who is just breaking in to "hard" sport climbing.  Neither of them has developed that type of PE in the past, and it will not come quite so quickly when they want to train it up.

Compounding this is the skill-set factor.  Like many things in climbing, PE is as much a set of mental and technical adaptations as it is a physical adaptation.  Good PE is not just about having a well developed anaerobic phosphate energy system; it is about breathing, pacing, "flow", maintaining precision as you fatigue, and summoning try-hard to do that 17th hard-ish move in a row.  You won't learn these middle-intensity skills unless you spend some time in the middle-intensity zone; all the ARCing and bouldering in the world won't teach you how to effectively climb in the PE zone.  Again, someone like Mark who has learned those skills can ignore them for a few seasons, and then refresh them in a short time frame when they are needed.  For someone who has not yet learned those skills, it will take a lot longer to build them up.

The upshot of all of this is that I'm a bit concerned by the strategy expressed here and in other threads-- ignoring PE and "training for the long term" by only doing strength/power.  Again, this works great for the seasoned sport climber who has developed their PE in the past.  However, it seems like some of the people pursuing this are 5.11 climbers who have not yet learned/trained the sort of PE required for sustained harder routes.  If these climbers do spend several years "training for the long term", they would risk developing a critical shortcoming that, once recognized, could take several more years to overcome.  For this sort of climber, a more balanced long term approach is warranted.

[rob]

I agree with many of your comments jcm, PE is part psychological and a skill as well as a physical attribute. I also agree beginner climbers should take an "all encompassing" approach to improvement.

However, for those - like myself - climbing above 5.11 and who feel they have a good understanding of their weaknesses and goals, both short and long term, I think its very important for them to be able to use this knowledge to tailor the RPT program to them as individuals, even if this means missing out phases all together.

I hope that mixing up seasons like this will also allow me to "experiment" with myself and compare progress from season to season and further use this to make the program more specific to my climbing goals.

[jcm]

May 23, 2015 10:56:44 GMT -7 rob said:

However, for those - like myself - climbing above 5.11 and who feel they have a good understanding of their weaknesses and goals, both short and long term, I think its very important for them to be able to use this knowledge to tailor the RPT program to them as individuals, even if this means missing out phases all together.

I agree 100%; identifying your weaknesses relative to your goals, and then tailoring a training plan to target those weaknesses, is the most important step toward developing as a climber.  For those of us with lopsided abilities and glaring weaknesses, this may mean omitting entire phases (such a PE).

An interesting caveat is that the strategy I criticize in my post above, regarding skipping PE and only doing strength/power, is exactly the strategy I pursued for 6 months this winter.  Call me a hypocrite... I left this out of my first deliberately, so as to not complicate the point.  As it turns out, I am exactly the individual that would benefit from neglecting PE to focus on other things.  I have a deep background in base fitness (many years as a trad climber) and PE (several years after that focusing on and training for endurance routes at Maple, Rifle, etc). Endurance if what I enjoy and excel at, but by over-focusing on it for many years I developed serious shortcomings in finger strength and power.  To rectify this I followed the "skip PE" strategy, doing a ton of hangboarding over the winter, with some power phases too.  It was exactly what I needed, and it worked. I made remarkable gains in strength/confidence on crimps, and during a bouldering performance phase in February I had some good successes.  My PE definitely suffered, but within about 4 weeks of returning to sport climbing and Treadwalling, the "flow" and the ability to recover at rests has returned.  Now, the PE is back, I'm in the beginning of a performance phase and the outlook is rosy.

So, skipping PE is great and works...for some climbers.  Still, I often find myself cringing when this strategy is discussed.  There are many, many climbers for whom this strategy is not appropriate, necessitating the disclaimer (my first post) to go alongside the positive testimonials (this post).  For further discussion of "Who is in and who is out" on this strategy, see this post from the always-insightful Kris Hampton: www.powercompanyclimbing.com/2013/10/the-highlow-approach-part-3-are-you-in.html

[rob]

Thanks for the insight into your experiences jcm, and for the article, it was an interesting read. I think he highlights some important points about losing footwork/ climbing related skills if opting for a program focusing on strength/power and minimising endurance work - which is I think what you are also suggesting. I agree, experience should be gained in all areas before really speRCTMkicksAssing in one or two aspects of training.