Mountain Project Logo

Weight Training vs. Climbing

Original Post
TinaTurner · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Oct 2009 · Points: 0

This is kind of a dumb question, but it's been driving me nuts. One of my coworkers is a personal trainer, and I occasionally consult with her about nutritional/diet related things. Every time we talk, we get started on my exercise regimen, and she is always telling me that I need to lift weights. I end up smiling and nodding, because to me climbing is pretty equivalent to weight training. It is load bearing exercise, and while you don't isolate specific muscles the same way that weight trainging does, climbing seems like a more full body strength training exercise, and based on my knowledge of anat/phys should give equal benefit.

I'm not talking weight training to improve climbing, I'm talking climbing having similar physical fitness benefits to weight training. If I am climbing 3 days a week, isn't that enough as far as strength training goes- strictly from a physical fitness standpoint? I am assuming my trainer friend maybe doesn't understand the strengthening benefits of real, legitimate climbing. Because if you aren't a regular climber, it's kind of more floundering around than focused strengthening. Anybody know anything about the comparison?

redlude97 · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jun 2010 · Points: 5
TinaTurner wrote:This is kind of a dumb question, but it's been driving me nuts. One of my coworkers is a personal trainer, and I occasionally consult with her about nutritional/diet related things. Every time we talk, we get started on my exercise regimen, and she is always telling me that I need to lift weights. I end up smiling and nodding, because to me climbing is pretty equivalent to weight training. It is load bearing exercise, and while you don't isolate specific muscles the same way that weight trainging does, climbing seems like a more full body strength training exercise, and based on my knowledge of anat/phys should give equal benefit. I'm not talking weight training to improve climbing, I'm talking climbing having similar physical fitness benefits to weight training. If I am climbing 3 days a week, isn't that enough as far as strength training goes- strictly from a physical fitness standpoint? I am assuming my trainer friend maybe doesn't understand the strengthening benefits of real, legitimate climbing. Because if you aren't a regular climber, it's kind of more floundering around than focused strengthening. Anybody know anything about the comparison?
Climbing is a poor substitute for weight training if that is what you need. Most muscles are underutilized in climbing. If you goal is overall fitness climbing would not be the way to do it. You end up limited most of the time by finger and forearm fatigue before you other muscles are at failure. With that said nothing is wrong with just climbing, as long as you are aware that climbing's main benefit is getting better at climbing.
TinaTurner · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Oct 2009 · Points: 0

I don't climb for the physical fitness benefits- that's just the icing on the cake to me. But when she and I are talking nutritional deficits, boosting metabolism, etc etc she is always going back to strength training. Her logic being that muscle burns more calories than fat does, so increasing your muscle mass increases your metabolism, and strength training increases muscle. But doesn't climbing too?

The most "cut" and strong people I know are climbers- who don't weight train. They just climb. And maybe do some pullups or a hang board occasionally in the winter. And I am much more sore from a full day of climbing than I ever get from an hour of weights. I guess as far as increasing muscle mass, which in turn boosts metabolism, climbing would seem as effective as weights. But, I do see what you mean about weights going until muscle failure. Climbing rarely reaches full blown failure. I might not be able to climb anymore after doing a bunch of routes, but it's not generally an individualized muscle group failing.

Strength training and regular climbing seems like overkill to me if I am just trying to increase muscle mass. Just climbing seems to be enough for others...But I'm prob just being a baby because I really hate the gym and all things related to the gym. I'd rather hike, climb, bike, play volleyball- you know, fun things:)

redlude97 · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jun 2010 · Points: 5
TinaTurner wrote:I don't climb for the physical fitness benefits- that's just the icing on the cake to me. But when she and I are talking nutritional deficits, boosting metabolism, etc etc she is always going back to strength training. Her logic being that muscle burns more calories than fat does, so increasing your muscle mass increases your metabolism, and strength training increases muscle. But doesn't climbing too? The most "cut" and strong people I know are climbers- who don't weight train. They just climb. And maybe do some pullups or a hang board occasionally in the winter. And I am much more sore from a full day of climbing than I ever get from an hour of weights. I guess as far as increasing muscle mass, which in turn boosts metabolism, climbing would seem as effective as weights. But, I do see what you mean about weights going until muscle failure. Climbing rarely reaches full blown failure. I might not be able to climb anymore after doing a bunch of routes, but it's not generally an individualized muscle group failing. Strength training and regular climbing seems like overkill to me if I am just trying to increase muscle mass. Just climbing seems to be enough for others...But I'm prob just being a baby because I really hate the gym and all things related to the gym. I'd rather hike, climb, bike, play volleyball- you know, fun things:)
Nope. Most climbers get cut because they are dedicated and realize they need to shed excess fat, and do so by extreme dieting and/or extensive cardio. Climbing does not build muscle very efficiently compared to weight training. Most jacked/cut climbers get to where they are at through years of climbing, whereas a proper weight training regiment with the correct diet can get there much faster if that is your goal. Climb to climb, but don't fool yourself into thinking it is a replacement for weight training.
Colin Simon · · Boulder, CO · Joined Jan 2009 · Points: 370

[quote]I guess as far as increasing muscle mass, which in turn boosts metabolism, climbing would seem as effective as weights.[/quote]

Pumping iron is way better for increasing muscle mass.

[quote]but it's not generally an individualized muscle group failing.[/quote]

Surely your forearms get pumped just like the rest of us. As opposed to your entire upper legs getting trashed from weightlifting.

[quote]And I am much more sore from a full day of climbing than I ever get from an hour of weights.[/quote]

If you took the same energy and motivation you have for climbing and used it to lift weights for an entire day, you'd probably be more sore. Google Mark Twight. Former alpinist and fitness nut.

TinaTurner · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Oct 2009 · Points: 0

Okay, so the take home message I'm getting from this is that strength training will get you results more quickly than climbing will. CLimbing will take years and years to gain more visible results. Which is what I figured as climbing progress happens pretty slowly for most folks. A person climbing for 3-5 years is still considered a relatively new climber.

But, no one has denied that climbing builds muscle. Muscle failure helps you build muscle faster, but you still build muscle without complete failure. Any load bearing exercise will produce increased muscle mass, however slow that may be.

I shouldn't be so skeptical of my trainer friend. But she gives the impression that I have a really low muscle mass just because I don't lift, when I actually feel pretty okay about my muscle situation. Since I started climbing (3 years ago) I have noticed visible differences in strength and muscle tone. Particularly in my arms, shoulders, calves, quads, and even my abs. SO I don't ever feel like muscle is my issue. But maybe it is... either way, thanks for the input. It's a really interesting discussion!

Bapgar 1 · · Out of the Loop · Joined Oct 2007 · Points: 90

Red is right on w/ his response. All of the cut climbers I know are that way because of extracurricular cardio, or they are simply climbing 5+ days a week, which is in itself enough of a cardio workout to keep the body fat low.
Strength is a hard one to quantify because it's so specific to what you're doing. I would agree w/ you in that climbing will slowly increase your strength but only in a very climbing specific fashion.
Just my 2cents but from all the years of training and working w/ climbers and strength athletes I would have to say that those people that weight train are overall "stronger" than those that only climb.

A huge part of success in climbing comes down to timing and how well you can precisely move your body through space. The elite climbers only climb because genetically they've started out w/ enough strength to weight that for them, physical strength is not their limiting factor, so they have no use for anything but very specific strength training such as campusing.

My question to Tina would be: what are your goals and how quickly to you want to get there. If you're talking about having a certain appearance/physique and or reaching a specific climbing goal, then yes, supplementing with a well designed weight training program will certainly get you to those goals faster than not.

As far as a personal example of climbing and muscle mass. I've weighed as little as the mid 150's up to high 180's, and during that time I've been climbing anywhere from 3-5 days a week and been between 5-10% body fat.

Joe Huggins · · Grand Junction · Joined Oct 2001 · Points: 105

Most of the trainers I know would tell you that it is necessary to exercise those muscle groups that oppose the groups used for climbing; or, to push and pull in opposition to climbing movement. Oppositional training is thought to help prevent some injuries. BTW-loved you in Beyond Thunderdome...

TinaTurner · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Oct 2009 · Points: 0

"My question to Tina would be: what are your goals and how quickly to you want to get there."

My goals are pretty general. I only talk to this trainer friend because I am a vegetarian, and am also trying to drop 15 pounds-ish. Being vegetarian can complicate things sometimes, so I am usually seeking advice from her about making good choices. My goal is to feel better and climb better. I'm not overweight, but my sense from the climbing articles I've read is that when it comes to improving climbing and your choice is either getting stronger or carrying less weight, carrying less weight is the better option. As I am not overly skinny right now (5'8" 140 lbs, started at 147lbs, goal is 132 lbs), I chose losing weight. Not to mention, I am quite happy with my exercise regimen, and don't intend to modify it. The only thing I would change is that I would like to be able to climb more than I already do- which can't really happen until I finish nursing school in 9 months. I have never felt that strength was my issue. Though more strength could never hurt.

I just sort of take offense to the whole "you need more muscle thing" because it seems like something you say to a sedentary girl who has a really low muscle mass- which I am not and don't. Losing seems like a good choice for me. Just losing the 7 I have has made me feel much better climbing and on approaches. In general I am happy with my strength, but the extra poundage I'm carrying doesn't allow me to utilize it efficiently. And due to this, I don't know that weight training is the end all be all answer for me...

Mike Lane · · AnCapistan · Joined Jan 2006 · Points: 880

There is a woman named Aereli here on MP who gives out pretty much the last word in advice with topics related to physiology and training. But while we wait for her could I interject a few bullet-points:

  • Climbing works on the longer slow-fire muscle cells while weights target the fatter quick-firing cells. Thus, weight training expands fatter cells, creating mass; climbing tightens the longer cells creating definition, but this process takes longer.
  • You don't need to think in terms of seeing results from climbing as taking years, its more related to frequency and intensity. If you can log in 8-12 hours a week of hard cranking where you keep an elevated heart rate going and stay sweaty, the "cut" effect will show up in a couple months. But you will also suffer some tendon issues on this path.
  • With hard climbing training, you can develop a well-chiseled back and shoulders that is hard to obtain with weights, b/c of the different muscle cells you are developing.
  • Many climbers are into the "outdoors/adventure" fitness model which is alien to the typical personal trainer. The common denominator is intensity. They blaze up the trails with heavy packs. They mountain bike and tele ski as often as climbing and often at a high level. They are typically very high energy folks with perfectly neat homes b/c they do not sit down. I am not one of these people. Most of these people top out at 6-8% body fat max, and are lean and sinewy. A trainer has no idea how to get those kind of results out of a client.
  • I think the bottom line in regards to your OP is that climbing is an Isometric exercise while weights are load movement/resistance.
Scott Bower · · Fort Collins, CO · Joined May 2003 · Points: 25

One other obvious difference between weights and climbing is that climbing doesn't heavily load the biggest muscles in your body (glutes, hamstrings, quads, spinal extensors). Weights will if you do the more useful exersises (mainly squats and deadlifts).

Building these muscles up is the best way to increase muscle mass and metabolism, but for the most part they won't help your climbing much. They will help on the approach, though.

Aerili · · Los Alamos, NM · Joined Mar 2007 · Points: 1,875
Mike Lane wrote:There is a woman named Aereli here on MP who gives out pretty much the last word in advice with topics related to physiology and training.
Thanks for the compliment, Mike (er, I think it was a compliment!). But to be fair, there are several others who have given and continue to give pretty damn good advice too. :)

I want to say a couple things about the rest of your post as well.

Mike Lane wrote:Climbing works on the longer slow-fire muscle cells while weights target the fatter quick-firing cells. Thus, weight training expands fatter cells, creating mass; climbing tightens the longer cells creating definition, but this process takes longer.
Um, well, not exactly. Everything you do fires what is called slow twitch muscle cells first (even powerful movements), then, if the recruitment requirements are great enough (i.e. increased strength output is required, or the speed of the movement is high), intermediate and then fast twitch cells are fired additionally.

Climbing uses all types of muscle cells and firing rates. Climbing is mostly "slow," but movements such as deadpoints, dyno's, bouldery moves, or any fast movement will require fast twitch fibers to be called upon.

Weight training does not necessarily recruit only fast twitch fibers, either. People who do 50 push-ups or 50 pull-ups are not really recruiting their fastest muscle fibers at all. If I lift a small weight many times, it is not going to require the fastest fibers either.

As for climbing "tightening the longer cells," um, that makes no sense to me.

Mike Lane wrote:With hard climbing training, you can develop a well-chiseled back and shoulders that is hard to obtain with weights, b/c of the different muscle cells you are developing.
For most people, I would agree that climbing will give them a more chiseled back and shoulders, but not because of using "different cells," only due to the volume of resistance training. If you also did that much volume in a regular weight room, you would get a similar effect.

Mike Lane wrote:I think the bottom line ... is that climbing is an Isometric exercise while weights are load movement/resistance.
Hmmm..."load movement/resistance" doesn't mean anything to me. Climbing is only mainly isometric in nature wrt hand/forearm contractions and lock-off positions, otherwise everything about it is isotonic in nature, just like most traditional forms of weight lifting.

Climbing vs lifting weights with the same muscles are not "perceived" as being different by your body. Resistance is resistance, regardless of how it occurs.

To the OP:
TinaTurner wrote:I'm talking climbing having similar physical fitness benefits to weight training. If I am climbing 3 days a week, isn't that enough as far as strength training goes- strictly from a physical fitness standpoint?
Climbing is weight training for the muscles that are called upon to do the movements required for the routes/problems you engage in. Climbing is not equivalent to a standard, whole body weight room conditioning workout.

Of course climbing builds muscle. But it is not really that systematic, and it tends to over-develop one side of certain joints, leaving one prone to overuse injuries. It also doesn't do much to develop lean mass in the lower body (calves/feet being the exception, unless you only climb overhanging stuff), which will give you the most metabolic boost.

If you were my client and wanted to lose a few more pounds, I would say you should continue climbing, do high intensity interval cardio workouts 2x a week and weight train in moderation the muscle groups that get neglected in climbing (aka prehab workouts) 1-2x per week (more if you climb less, less if you climb more), and lastly--REALLY watch your calorie intake. Cut down.

Fwiw, I'm a climber and a trainer (BSc ex sci, NSCA CSCS, blah blah blah) Hope that helps!
TinaTurner · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Oct 2009 · Points: 0

Great posts and great info, thanks!

Really my only argument was that just because I don't lift, doesn't mean that I don't have adequate muscle mass. Sure, I've had to climb 2-4 times per week for 3+ years, and hike to ridiculous places, and go to the climbing gym, etc etc to have the muscle I have. And yes, I realize I could have acquired this same muscle mass much much faster by lifting for a couple of months. But just because it's taken me a longer time to build the muscle that I have doesn't mean that it's not the "right" kind of muscle, or that I even have less muscle than a girl who goes to the gym and lifts 3 days a week for an hour. I don't know that my trainer friend even has a higher muscle mass than me. I'd guess that we are probably pretty similar. She is not a "hard core" body builder type, and I am not a "hardcore" climber. So why is what I'm doing wrong or not as productive?

But, I understand better now the difference between the type of muscle built in climbing, and the type of muscle built from lifting.

And on a somewhat unrelated side note- I used to be big into lunges. Will these have a similar effect as squats and deadlifts? Any extra strength type training I would do is at home (though I only really do ab work now), and lunges with weights is the best I can think of to mimic those. Plus, I like lunges:).

TinaTurner · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Oct 2009 · Points: 0
Aerili wrote: Climbing is weight training for the muscles that are called upon to do the movements required for the routes/problems you engage in. Climbing is not equivalent to a standard, whole body weight room conditioning workout.
Thank you! This is what I was trying to say, and answers my question on top of it. That's what was getting me confused. From what I know of anat/phys, climbing should be similar to weight training. I just didn't know if it had the same full body effect. I assumed it did, just because the muscle groups seem so diverse. I do a climb one day, and my glutes will be so sore the next day. The next time I go out, my shoulders will be sore. I thought maybe it was comprehensive because depending on the style and where you are climbing you target different muscles each time. But I see what you mean. The consistency is lacking, and while certain muscles are targeted again and again, others are only tapped into sometimes.

But what about the whole picture of climbing? When you consider an approach that's steep and arduous with a heavy pack on your back. Pounding straight up a hill for 30 or so minutes seems like it would count for something? I'm a girl, so I rely pretty heavily on my legs to climb as well.
Peter Beal · · Boulder Colorado · Joined Jan 2001 · Points: 1,825

I am not a personal trainer so I will not comment on the physiology here except in the most general terms. First, muscle mass per se is not a desirable goal in developing climbing strength. There is no point in carrying a single ounce you do not need to help you do a move. Climbing is not about exerting maximum effort moving a giant load, it is about moving your body efficiently and accurately where you want it to go. Body weight stays relatively consistent most of the time while climbing and in fact most climbs spread out this load across the body, especially on those strong leg muscles

Aerili's recommendation of prehab exercises seems spot on. Climbing at higher grades typically targets finger flexors and upper arm/shoulder muscles and not much else. That's because most of the time you don't need much else. Spend your time learning to climb better and if you are convinced that you actually need to develop a specific strength, go ahead and lift. However you will, if you want to be a better climber, probably be best advised just to climb more on harder moves.

Today I spotted a very muscular young man at RMNP who was struggling with a fairly easy problem. His main issues were finger strength and technique, strengths that are hard to develop in Nebraska where he was from. But he clearly spent time in the gym working out.

TinaTurner · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Oct 2009 · Points: 0

Yes, that's why my logic has been to lose weight rather than lift. I climb in all genre's, and am not strictly a steep sporty climber- Nor do I want to be that. I prefer cracks, and trad, and granite, but I sport climb in the summer some too. I just want to improve overall. And I think losing the excess will help.

And I agree, as far as my climbing goes, losing weight and climbing more is probably the answer.

Kevin Stricker · · Evergreen, CO · Joined Oct 2002 · Points: 1,197

Take up alpine climbing, and you should quickly realize your weight loss goals while having fun. Let's take a look at the standard alpine day VS you typical weight gym routine to determine it's effectiveness.

Alpine - Get up early at least once a week, hike for 2-3 hours usually uphill just to approach your route. Climb for 3-6 hours depending on your goal, then scramble and hike back to civilization for another 2-3 hours. Total Cardio 4-6 hours, Climbing 1.5-3 hours ( assuming 1/2 of your time is spend belaying).

Gym Rat - 1 hour of cardio 3-5 times a week ( 3 to 5 hours total), 1 hour weight routine 3-5 times a week (50% or more of the time spent resting) so 1.5 to 2.5 hours a week weight training.

It should become quite obvious why you don't see too many chunky alpinists. It should also be noted that when you spread your workout out over a whole week you have to work much harder to just start burning fat as you have to deplete your glycogen stores with every workout.

It is easy for personal trainers to generalize what types of excercise everyone needs...after all that is how/why they are paid in the first place. I agree with Aerili that antagonistic training is beneficial for climbers to balance muscles. But I feel that there are plenty of ways that climbers can stay fit without weight training. Especially during the summertime alpine rock season.

Blitzo · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Dec 2005 · Points: 44,395

Be sure that your weights are heavy.

Russ Walling rowing with 150 pounds.

Aerili · · Los Alamos, NM · Joined Mar 2007 · Points: 1,875
TinaTurner wrote:But, I understand better now the difference between the type of muscle built in climbing, and the type of muscle built from lifting.
There is no different type of muscle. Muscle is muscle. (Edit: talking about skeletal muscle here.) Lifting with weights also does not have to = building mass if you do it right.

TinaTurner wrote:And on a somewhat unrelated side note- I used to be big into lunges. Will these have a similar effect as squats and deadlifts? Any extra strength type training I would do is at home (though I only really do ab work now), and lunges with weights is the best I can think of to mimic those. Plus, I like lunges:).
Lunges do not typically work back extensors as much as squats and deadlifts, and neither squats or lunges work the posterior chain the way deadlifts do (posterior chain = back extensors, glutes, hams, calves in a synergistic fashion). But otherwise, yes, it's a compound lower body exercise.

Kevin Stricker is correct that alpine will burn calories like all get-out. You will be eyeing the rack of candy bars in no time sans guilt. The only downside for some people is that the gnarly descents involved can wreak havoc on knee joints and such, and when knee joints hurt a lot, the answer is...weight training.

As for Blitzo's picture, why does Russ Walling keep his dumbbells tied up like an S&M scenario gone wrong??
Mike Lane · · AnCapistan · Joined Jan 2006 · Points: 880
Aerili wrote: doesn't mean anything to me.
Sometimes I just don't know where the shit I say comes from. I think I must enjoy getting people to make a "WTF?" face, even if I can't see it.
And yes, it was meant as a compliment even with the wrong spelling.
Kevin Stricker · · Evergreen, CO · Joined Oct 2002 · Points: 1,197
Aerili wrote: As for Blitzo's picture, why does Russ Walling keep his dumbbells tied up like an S&M scenario gone wrong??
That's so when he drops the weight on his foot he doesn't have to worry about it rolling over his hand as he is squirming on the ground in agony.
Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

Training Forum
Post a Reply to "Weight Training vs. Climbing"

Log In to Reply

Join the Community

Create your FREE account today!
Already have an account? Login to close this notice.

Get Started.