Analysis of Tests Evaluating Sport Climbers' Strength and Isometric Endurance

Muscle strength and endurance in high-level rock climbers

The relative importance of key performance factors is poorly studied in high-level climbers. This study aimed to (1) determine the role of forearm muscle strength and endurance in high-level rock climbing, (2) and provide suitable dynamometric test parameters for muscle endurance assessment in high-level climbers. Six higher elite (redpoint Fr.9a) and eight elite/advanced (redpoint Fr.8a+) climbers performed one finger flexor maximal strength test and three finger endurance tests: a 30 s all-out test and a continuous and intermittent test at 60% of maximal voluntary contraction. Higher elite climbers had higher (p < 0.05) maximal strength, all-out test average force and continuous test force-time integral (all relative to body mass) than the elite/advanced climbers. These parameters correlated significantly (p < 0.05) with climbing performance, which has not been observed so far for continuous test scores. Unlike in previous research, intermittent test force-time integral neither distinguished climbing ability groups nor correlated significantly with climbing performance. Nevertheless, regression models comprising of intermittent and maximal strength test scores more strongly determined climbing performance than models including continuous or all-out test scores. Intermittent muscle endurance is among the performance factors in difficult rock climbing but appears to be less important than maintaining high forces during sustained muscle contractions.

Importance of shoulder girdle and finger flexor muscle endurance in advanced male climbers

Aim

This study aimed to: (a) assess the relationships between climbing performance and finger and shoulder girdle muscle endurance; and (b) provide evidence on the validity of the specialized exercise tests used for the purpose.

Materials and methods

28 male sport climbers (climbing ability 23 ± 2.43 IRCRA scale) performed four tests muscle failure, including two-finger hang tests (using 2.5 and 4 cm holds) and two variants of pull-up exercises (classical pull-ups and a combination of dynamic and isometric actions - the so-called Edlinger). Climbing performance and test results were subjected to correlation, taxonomic and regression analysis.

Results

The correlations between the results from all tests and climbing performance were notably strong ( r between 0.54 and 0.61) and statistically significant ( p < 0.05 ). The taxonomic analysis indicated that the two variants of each test type reflect two different latent variables 2.5 cm and 4 cm finger hang durations were highly correlated ( r = 0.76 , p < 0.01 ). A similar correlation was found between the results from the pull-up tests ( r = 0.72 , p < 0.01 ). Thus, the finger hang and pull-up test results were determined to a high extent (43% and 49%, respectively) by factors that cannot be assessed when only one test of each type is used. The regression model of the two-finger tests allowed individual endurance profiles to be assessed.

Conclusions

The muscular endurance of the elbow flexors and shoulder girdle muscles predicts climbing performance within the specific sport level studied to a comparable degree as finger flexor endurance.The use of two variants of a test intended to assess one physical ability provided important details on a climber's fitness.

Assessing the Impact of Neuromuscular Electrical Stimulation-Based Fingerboard Training versus Conventional Fingerboard Training on Finger Flexor Endurance in Intermediate to Advanced Sports Climbers: A Randomized Controlled Study

Competitive climbers engage in highly structured training regimens to achieve peak performance levels, with efficient time management as a critical aspect. Neuromuscular electrical stimulation (NMES) training can close the gap between time-efficient conditioning training and achieving optimal prerequisites for peak climbing-specific performances. Therefore, we examined potential neuromuscular adaptations resulting from the NMFES intervention by analyzing the efficacy of twice-weekly NMES-supported fingerboard (hang board) training compared with thrice-weekly conventional fingerboard training over 7 training weeks in enhancing climbing-specific endurance among intermediate to advanced climbers. Participants were randomly divided into the NMES and control groups. Eighteen participants completed the study (14 male, 4 female; mean age: 25.7 ± 5.3 years; mean climbing experience: 6.4 ± 3.4 years). Endurance was assessed by measuring the maximal time athletes could support their body weight (hanging to exhaustion) on a 20 mm-deep ledge at three intervals: pre-, in-between- (after 4 weeks of training), and post-training (after 7 weeks of training). The findings revealed that despite the lower training volume in the NMES group, no significant differences were observed between the NMES and control groups in climbing-specific endurance. Both groups exhibited notable improvements in endurance, particularly after the in-between test. Consequently, a twice-weekly NMES-supported fingerboard training regimen demonstrated non-inferiority to a thrice-weekly conventional training routine. Incorporating NMES into fingerboard workouts could offer time-saving benefits.

The Connection Between Resistance Training, Climbing Performance, and Injury Prevention

BACKGROUND

Climbing is an intricate sport composed of various disciplines, holds, styles, distances between holds, and levels of difficulty. In highly skilled climbers the potential for further strength-specific adaptations to increase performance may be marginal in elite climbers. With an eye on the upcoming 2024 Paris Olympics, more climbers are trying to maximize performance and improve training strategies. The relationships between muscular strength and climbing performance, as well as the role of strength in injury prevention, remain to be fully elucidated. This narrative review seeks to discuss the current literature regarding the effect of resistance training in improving maximal strength, muscle hypertrophy, muscular power, and local muscular endurance on climbing performance, and as a strategy to prevent injuries.

MAIN BODY

Since sport climbing requires exerting forces against gravity to maintain grip and move the body along the route, it is generally accepted that a climber`s absolute and relative muscular strength are important for climbing performance. Performance characteristics of forearm flexor muscles (hang-time on ledge, force output, rate of force development, and oxidative capacity) discriminate between climbing performance level, climbing styles, and between climbers and non-climbers. Strength of the hand and wrist flexors, shoulders and upper limbs has gained much attention in the scientific literature, and it has been suggested that both general and specific strength training should be part of a climber`s training program. Furthermore, the ability to generate sub-maximal force in different work-rest ratios has proved useful, in examining finger flexor endurance capacity while trying to mimic real-world climbing demands. Importantly, fingers and shoulders are the most frequent injury locations in climbing. Due to the high mechanical stress and load on the finger flexors, fingerboard and campus board training should be limited in lower-graded climbers. Coaches should address, acknowledge, and screen for amenorrhea and disordered eating in climbers.

CONCLUSION

Structured low-volume high-resistance training, twice per week hanging from small ledges or a fingerboard, is a feasible approach for climbers. The current injury prevention training aims to increase the level of performance through building tolerance to performance-relevant load exposure and promoting this approach in the climbing field.

Pull-Up Performance Is Affected Differently by the Muscle Contraction Regimens Practiced during Training among Climbers

Sport climbing performance is highly related to upper limb strength and endurance. Although finger-specific methods are widely analyzed in the literature, no study has yet quantified the effects of arm-specific training. This study aims to compare the effects of three types of training involving different muscle contraction regimens on climbers' pull-up capabilities. Thirty advanced to high-elite climbers were randomly divided into four groups: eccentric (ECC; n = 8), isometric (ISO; n = 7), plyometric (PLYO; n = 6), and no specific training (CTRL; n = 9), and they participated in a 5-week training, twice a week, focusing on pull-ups on hangboard. Pre- and post-training assessments were conducted using a force-sensing hangboard, analyzing force, velocity, power, and muscle work during three pull-up exercises: pull-ups at body weight under different conditions, incremental weighted pull-ups, and an exhaustion test. The CTRL group showed no change. Maximum strength improved in all three training groups (from +2.2 ± 3.6% to +5.0 ± 2.4%; p < 0.001); velocity variables enhanced in the ECC and PLYO groups (from +5.7 ± 7.4 to +28.7 ± 42%; p < 0.05), resulting in greater power; amplitude increased in the ECC group; and muscle work increased in the PLYO group (+21.9 ± 16.6%; p = 0.015). A 5-week training period effectively enhanced arm performance, but outcomes were influenced by the chosen muscle contraction regimens and initial individual characteristics.

Physical performance testing in climbing-A systematic review

Due to the increasing popularity of climbing, the corresponding diagnostics are gaining in importance for both science and practice. This review aims to give an overview of the quality of different diagnostic testing- and measurement methods for performance, strength, endurance, and flexibility in climbing. A systematic literature search for studies including quantitative methods and tests for measuring different forms of strength, endurance, flexibility, or performance in climbing and bouldering was conducted on PubMed and SPORT Discus. Studies and abstracts were included if they a) worked with a representative sample of human boulderers and/or climbers, b) included detailed information on at least one test, and c) were randomized-controlled-, cohort-, cross-over-, intervention-, or case studies. 156 studies were included into the review. Data regarding subject characteristics, as well as the implementation and quality of all relevant tests were extracted from the studies. Tests with similar exercises were grouped and the information on a) measured value, b) unit, c) subject characteristics (sex and ability level), and d) quality criteria (objectivity, reliability, validity) were bundled and displayed in standardized tables. In total, 63 different tests were identified, of which some comprised different ways of implementation. This clearly shows that there are no uniform or standard procedures in climbing diagnostics, for tests on strength, endurance or flexibility. Furthermore, only few studies report data on test quality and detailed information on sample characteristics. This not only makes it difficult to compare test results, but at the same time makes it impossible to give precise test recommendations. Nevertheless, this overview of the current state of research contributes to the creation of more uniform test batteries in the future.

Strength Training in Climbing: A Systematic Review

ABSTRACT

Langer, K, Simon, C, and Wiemeyer, J. Strength training in climbing: A systematic review. J Strength Cond Res 37(3): 751-767, 2023-The aim of this review was to provide an overview of the state of research on strength training in climbing and to answer the question how climbing performance, maximum grip strength, upper-limb strength endurance, maximum upper-limb strength, and upper-limb power as dependent variables are affected by different types of training. Moreover, we addressed the question which training methods and training parameters are most effective in increasing climbing and bouldering performance. Searches of MEDLINE (PubMed), SPORTDiscus, ProQuest, and Google Scholar were conducted for studies that met the following criteria: (a) examining effects of training on at least one of the dependent variables, (b) controlled longitudinal design with pretest and posttest, and (c) detailed information on training parameters and subjects. Twelve studies were included into the review. The quality of the studies was rated according to the PEDro scale, and the training interventions were classified according to training method (maximum strength [MS], hypertrophy [HYP], and endurance [END]), specificity (specific, semispecific, and unspecific), and static or dynamic exercises. For 9 of the 12 studies, effect sizes were calculated and the treatments compared. The results showed (a) positive effects of strength training on all variables, (b) a trend toward a mixture of MS and HYP or END training, (c) a trend toward semispecific exercise, and (d) similar effects for dynamic and static exercise with a trend toward a mixture of both. Coaches and athletes are recommended to combine static and dynamic semispecific exercises in a HYP and MS or END training.

Effects of Forearm Compression Sleeves on Muscle Hemodynamics and Muscular Strength and Endurance Parameters in Sports Climbing: A Randomized, Controlled Crossover Trial

Purpose: Wearing compression garments is a commonly used intervention in sports to improve performance and facilitate recovery. Some evidence supports the use of forearm compression to improve muscle tissue oxygenation and enhance sports climbing performance. However, evidence is lacking for an effect of compression garments on hand grip strength and specific sports climbing performance. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the immediate effects of forearm compression sleeves on muscular strength and endurance of finger flexor muscles in sports climbers.

Materials and Methods: This randomized crossover study included 24 sports climbers who performed one familiarization trial and three subsequent test trials while wearing compression forearm sleeves (COMP), non-compressive placebo forearm sleeves (PLAC), or no forearm sleeves (CON). Test trials consisted of three performance measurements (intermittent hand grip strength and endurance measurements, finger hang, and lap climbing) at intervals of at least 48 h in a randomized order. Muscle oxygenation during hand grip and finger hang measurements was assessed by near-infrared spectroscopy. The maximum blood lactate level, rate of perceived exertion, and forearm muscle pain were also determined directly after the lap climbing trials.

Results: COMP resulted in higher changes in oxy[heme] and tissue oxygen saturation (StO₂) during the deoxygenation (oxy[heme]: COMP –10.7 ± 5.4, PLAC –6.7 ± 4.3, CON –6.9 ± 5.0 [μmol]; p = 0.014, η_p² = 0.263; StO₂: COMP –4.0 ± 2.2, PLAC –3.0 ± 1.4, CON –2.8 ± 1.8 [%]; p = 0.049, η_p² = 0.194) and reoxygenation (oxy [heme]: COMP 10.2 ± 5.3, PLAC 6.0 ± 4.1, CON 6.3 ± 4.9 [μmol]; p = 0.011, η_p² = 0.274; StO₂: COMP 3.5 ± 1.9, PLAC 2.4 ± 1.2, CON 2.3 ± 1.9 [%]; p = 0.028, η_p² = 0.225) phases of hand grip measurements, whereas total [heme] concentrations were not affected. No differences were detected between the conditions for the parameters of peak force and fatigue index in the hand grip, time to failure and hemodynamics in the finger hang, or performance-related parameters in the lap climbing measurements (p ≤ 0.05).

Conclusions: Forearm compression sleeves did not enhance hand grip strength and endurance, sports climbing performance parameters, physiological responses, or perceptual measures. However, they did result in slightly more pronounced changes of oxy [heme] and StO₂ in the deoxygenation and reoxygenation phases during the hand grip strength and endurance measurements.

Optimization of an Intermittent Finger Endurance Test for Climbers Regarding Gender and Deviation in Force and Pulling Time

Performance diagnostics of finger strength is very relevant in climbing. The aim of our study was to find modalities for an intermittent finger flexor muscle endurance test that optimize the correlation of test performance with lead climbing performance. Twenty-seven female and 25 male climbers pulled with 60% MVC and a work-to-rest ratio of 7:2 s on a fingerboard until fatigue. The highest correlations, R = 0.429, were found for women when 9% deviation in the required force and 1 s deviation in the required pulling time was tolerated. For men, the optimum was reached with the same time deviation and a force deviation of 6%, R = 0.691. Together with maximum finger strength the repetitions explained 31.5% of the variance of climbing ability in women and 46.3% in men. Consequences from our results are to tolerate at least 7% force deviation for women and 5% for men and to terminate the finger endurance test quickly after the force falls below the threshold.

The Effects of 10 Weeks Hangboard Training on Climbing Specific Maximal Strength, Explosive Strength, and Finger Endurance

The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of 10 weeks of hangboard training (HBT) on climbing-specific maximal strength, explosive strength, and muscular endurance. In total, 35 intermediate- to advanced-level climbers (8 women and 27 men) were randomized into a hangboard training group (HBT) or a control group (CON). The HBT program consisted of two sessions of 48 min per week using the Beastmaker 1000 series hangboard, and the following application to smartphone. Both groups continued their normal climbing training routines. Pre- and post-intervention, maximal peak force, maximal average force, and rate of force development (RFD) were measured while performing an isometric pull-up on a 23 mm deep campus rung and jug holds. In addition, finger endurance was measured by performing a sustained dead-hang test on the same rung. The HBT increased peak force and average force in 23 mm rung condition, average force in jug condition, and utilization rate øl,.- in peak force to a greater extent than CON (p = 0.001–0.031, ES = 0.29–0.66), whereas no differences were detected between groups in RFD (jug or 23 mm), peak force in jug condition, utilization rate in RFD, average force or in dead-hang duration (p = 0.056–0.303). At post-test, the HBT group demonstrated 17, 18, 28, 10, 11, and 12% improvement in peak force, average force, RFD in 23 mm rung condition, average force in jug condition, utilization rate in peak force, and dead-hang duration, respectively [p = 0.001–0.006, effect size (ES) = 0.73–1.12] whereas no change was observed in CON (p = 0.213–0.396). In conclusion, 10 weeks of HBT in addition to regular climbing was highly effective for increasing maximal finger strength compared with continuing regular climbing training for intermediate and advanced climbers.

Tests and Procedures for Measuring Endurance, Strength, and Power in Climbing—A Mini-Review

The interest in climbing is rapidly growing among professional and recreational athletes and will for the first time be included in the 2021 Tokyo Olympics. The sport has also gained increased scientific attention in the past decades. Still, recommendations for testing procedures to predict climbing performance and measure training effects are limited. Therefore, the aim of this mini-review is to provide an overview of the climbing-specific tests, procedures and outcomes used to examine climbing performance. The available literature presents a variety of tests and procedures. While the reliability of some tests has been examined, measures of validity are scarce, especially for climbing-specific endurance tests. Moreover, considering the possible combinations of climbing performance levels, disciplines, and tests, substantial gaps in the literature exist. Vague descriptions of the participants in many studies (e.g., not specifying preferred discipline, performance level, experience, and regular climbing and training volume) further limit the current knowledge and challenge comparisons across studies. Regarding contraction types, dynamic strength- and power-tests are underrepresented in the literature compared to isometric tests. Studies exploring and reporting the validity and reliability of climbing-specific tests are warranted, and researchers should strive to provide a detailed description of the study populations in future research.

Upper body rate of force development and maximal strength discriminates performance levels in sport climbing

The aim of this study was to assess and compare the maximal force and rate of force development (RFD) between intermediate, advanced and elite climbers using several different methods for calculating RFD. Fifty-seven male climbers (17 intermediate, 25 advanced, and 15 elite) performed isometric pull-ups on a climbing-specific hold while the RFD was calculated using several absolute (50, 100, 150, 200, and 250 ms from onset of force) and relative time periods (25, 50, 75, 95, and 100% of time to peak force). The maximal force was higher among elite climbers compared to advanced (ES = 1.78, p < 0.001) and intermediate climbers (ES = 1.77, p < 0.001), while no difference was observed between intermediate and advanced climbers (P = 0.898). The elite group also showed higher RFD than the other two groups at all relative time periods (ES = 1.02-1.58, p < 0.001-0.002), whereas the absolute time periods only revealed differences between the elite vs. the other groups at 50, 100 and 150 ms from the onset of force (ES = 0.72-0.84, p = 0.032-0.040). No differences in RFD were observed between the intermediate and advanced groups at any time period (p = 0.942-1.000). Maximal force and RFD, especially calculated using the longer periods of the force curve, may be used to distinguish elite climbers from advanced and intermediate climbers. The authors suggest using relative rather than absolute time periods when analyzing the RFD of climbers.

Grip Strength-Endurance in Ambitious and Recreational Climbers: Does the Strength Decrement Index Serve as a Feasible Measure?

The present study investigated the time course of repetitive maximal isometric grip strength, depending on the arm position, laterality (dominant vs. non-dominant side), and climbing level. The intervention aimed to provide a feasible indicator of maximal strength-endurance in climbing. Seventeen recreational (climbing level (CL): 6.8 (SD 0.5) on the Union Internationale des Associations d’Alpinisme (UIAA) metric scale) and eleven ambitious (CL: 8.7 (SD 0.6) UIAA metric scale) climbers (age: 27 (8) years; BMI: 21.6 (1.9) kg/m²; ape index (arm span divided by body height): 1.05 (0.18); training volume: 2.2 (1.0) h/week). Participants completed maximal isometric handgrip strength (F_max) tests in four positions (left and right hand beside the trunk as well as left and right hand above the shoulder) plus twelve repetitive work-relief cycles, lasting 4 and 1 s where isometric strength, heart rate, and perceived exertion were recorded. F_max differed between groups in nearly all positions. A large side × position × time × group interaction was observed for repetitive isometric grip strength (p = 0.009, η_p² = 0.71). However, subsequent post-hoc tests did not reveal a significant difference between groups during each testing position. Additional correlation analysis between asymmetry and CL showed an inverse relationship for ambitious climbers (r = −0.71). In conclusion, the degree of grip strength decline did not relevantly differentiate between ambitious and recreational climbers. Thus, the time course of handgrip strength seems to mainly rely on maximal grip strength during the first contraction.

Force-Velocity-Power Profile in High-Elite Boulder, Lead, and Speed Climber Competitors

PURPOSE

To compare the force-production capacities among boulderers, lead climbers, and speed climbers during a pull-up test using a force-velocity-power profile.

METHODS

In total, 24 high-elite climbers (11 boulderers, 8 lead climbers, and 5 speed climbers) did 2 pull-ups at different percentages of their body mass (0%, 30%, 45%, 60%, and 70%). Force-velocity-power profile analyses were performed with the use of an accelerometer for each load. The intraclass correlation and coefficients of variation were calculated. A 1-way analysis of variance was performed with a Tukey post hoc test to assess the difference between the groups.

RESULTS

Regarding force, the coefficient of variation ranged from 1.00% to 6.18% and the intraclass correlation ranged from .98 to .99. For velocity, the coefficient of variation ranged from 2.75% to 6.62% and the intraclass correlation ranged from .84 to .95. The linear regression slope showed R2 to be between .93 and .99, confirming the high quality of the linear relationship between velocity and the external force produced during a pull-up. Boulderers presented significantly higher (P < .05) maximal power (+22.30% and +26.29%), mean power for the pull-up at body weight (+23.49% and +25.35%), and theoretical maximal velocity at zero force (+23.92% and +21.53%) than lead and speed climbers and a more significant curve increase (+35.21% compared with lead climbers).

CONCLUSIONS

The reliability of the method was shown to be high. Moreover, boulderers were able to develop an important external force and had the capacity to maintain high speed when force production increased.

Importance and Diagnosis of Flexibility Preparation of Male Sport Climbers

The objective of the study was to verify the relationships between sport skill levels and to identify the tests that accurately diagnose flexibility of sport climbers. This study examined 60 competitive advanced–higher elite male 7b–9a redpoint (RP) climbers. The athletes performed commonly used flexibility tests (stand-and-reach, straddle sit, straddle stand) and climbing-specific flexibility tests. Significant correlations were found between sport skill levels for the straddle stand test (r = −0.48) and the straddle sit test (r = −0.41). No significant correlations were observed between climbing-specific flexibility tests and sports skill level of climbers. Hip abduction evaluated using the straddle sit and straddle stand tests were significantly correlated with sports skill level and thus can be approached as a tool to diagnose flexibility of climbers. Flexibility is very specific and difficult to diagnose in climbing, but it should be developed.

Acute effects of kinesio taping on muscular strength and endurance parameters of the finger flexors in sport climbing: A randomised, controlled crossover trial

Kinesio taping (KT) is a commonly used intervention in sports and, recently, KT has become popular among athletes competing in sport climbing and bouldering events. However, evidence on the effect of KT on grip strength and endurance is still controversial. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate immediate effects of KT on muscular strength and endurance of the finger flexor muscles in sport climbers. Twenty recreationally-trained active sport climbers (10 men, 10 women) aged 28.5 ± 10.6 years performed one familiarisation trial and subsequently, in a randomised crossover design, two test trials either with (TAPE) or without (CONTROL) KT over the finger flexor muscles. Test trials consisted of three performance measurements (hand grip strength and endurance, finger hang, and lap climbing) at intervals of 48 h in a randomised order. We observed no significant differences in the parameters of hand grip peak force, fatigue index, finger hang time, lap climbing distance and time, or maximum blood lactate values after lap climbing between the TAPE and CONTROL trials (p > 0.05). The participants' climbing ability was significantly correlated with the intra-individual performance changes between the TAPE and CONTROL conditions for the fatigue index (r = -0.598, p = 0.005), but not in any of the other performance-related parameters. Therefore, KT over the finger flexor muscles neither enhanced hand grip strength and endurance nor the sport climbing performance parameters of finger hang, lap climbing distance and time, and maximum blood lactate values after lap climbing.

The role of physique, strength and endurance in the achievements of elite climbers

PURPOSE

The primary aim of this study is to determine the principal somatic and motor determinants for elite climbers.

METHODS

Twenty climbers were examined [age: 28.5±6.1 years].The runners were divided into two groups based on their climbing level, according to the International Rock Climbing Research Association (IRCRA). Elite climbers represented a 8b-8c Rotpunkt (RP) climbing level (n = 6), and advanced climbers represented an 7c+-8a RP level (n = 14). The following measurements were assessed: height, weight, lean body mass, upper limb length, arm span, and forearm, arm, thigh and calf circumference. The BMI, Rohrer ratio, and Ape Index were also measured. The following motor tests were assessed: a specific test for finger strength, an arm strength test, and a test of muscle endurance (hanging from 2.5 and 4 cm ledges). In addition, pull ups were used to measure muscle resistance to fatigue.

RESULTS

Elite climbers recorded significantly higher values for finger strength than advanced climbers (129.08 vs. 111.54 kg; t(18) = 2.35, p = 0.03) and arm endurance (33.17 vs. 25.75 pull ups; t(18) = 2.54, p = 0.02). In addition, the calf circumference was significantly lower in elite climbers than that in advanced climbers (34.75 vs. 36.93 cm; t(18) = 3.50, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

The results suggest that elite climbers have greater finger strength and arm endurance than advanced climbers.