Mountain Project Logo

Is climbing nature OR nurture???

Jeff Chrisler · · Boulder, CO · Joined Jun 2009 · Points: 145

You haven't been climbing long enough if you think that anyone who puts in their time can reach 5.14. Sure, you can make huge leaps and bounds in your first two years, it's the years afterward when your improvements are more difficult and few and far between that the athlete is made.

When I started, I quickly went to climbing low 11s and v5 in my first year of climbing. It was when I started teaching then that I realized that wasn't SH--. A 14 year old kid who had never climbed before went to climbing mid 5.12s and V10 in 6 months, and teaching me more than a thing or two. At any rate, I'd agree with those who are saying 5.12 is a goal that I think most can reach with any sort of genetics. 5.13 and especially 5.14 only come with hard work and genetics. Move to Boulder... that will put things into their proper perspective.... 7 year olds schooling you on the wall and 50 year olds passing you on a bike without breaking a sweat.

Jason N. · · Grand Junction · Joined Mar 2011 · Points: 10
David Sahalie wrote:many kids at age 10 could climb at that level with training and focus. they weigh nothing, repair instantly, and small holds are bigger for them. so, i would say nurture for the focus to keep climbing and not play with dolls and trucks or whatever. i am much more impressed by a 50 year old doing 14a.
I think both ends of the age spectrum are impressive, and I'm sure we'll someday hear about the oldest person to redpoint 14a.
Ryan Williams · · London (sort of) · Joined May 2009 · Points: 1,245
JohnWesely wrote: Climbing recreationally at a mediocre level is the same as a 10 year climbing harder than any ten year old ever has? Really?
Yea, that's kind of what I got out of it on the first read.

Sampres, your question is interesting for sure. But I think you've GREATLY underestimated what it takes for a climber of any age or physical predisposition to climb that hard. Sure, she has it in her blood. Sure, she has a lot of things at her disposal that most of us don't. But none of that makes up for the fact that she works harder than maybe any of us to get to the point that she is at now.

You obviously don't understand what it might take for you to climb even a number grade harder, much less THREE! People who climb 5.14/V12 or however hard is considered to be HARD these days - they don't sit around wondering why a 10 year old girl can do it. They certainly don't come on MP.com and spray about how they can send 11b after two years. They are out climbing right now, or hanging on a finger board in their basement.

I'm not trying to put you down at all. It sounds like you have made some progress and that's cool. But everyone needs some perspective.
Jay Samuelson · · Colorado · Joined Nov 2006 · Points: 1,896

I'm sorry but genetics do not determine the ability to climb 5.14. People can keep thinking that they just got the short end of the stick and that's why they can't achieve that grade, but it's not true. Boulder (and Denver to a lesser degree) is a great example, seems like everyone climbs 5.14. Certainly they weren't all just gifted with 'good genetics'.

I'm not claiming everyone can climb 5.13 or 5.14, but it isn't genetics that is the limiting factor. Try again.

And saying that climbing doesn't really start until 5.whatever grade is just stupid and egotistical. Ask a .14+ climber where 'real climbing starts', your gonna cry.

Ryan Williams · · London (sort of) · Joined May 2009 · Points: 1,245
Jeff Chrisler wrote:You haven't been climbing long enough if you think that anyone who puts in their time can reach 5.14. Sure, you can make huge leaps and bounds in your first two years, it's the years afterward when your improvements are more difficult and few and far between that the athlete is made. When I started, I quickly went to climbing low 11s and v5 in my first year of climbing. It was when I started teaching then that I realized that wasn't SH--. A 14 year old kid who had never climbed before went to climbing mid 5.12s and V10 in 6 months, and teaching me more than a thing or two. At any rate, I'd agree with those who are saying 5.12 is a goal that I think most can reach with any sort of genetics. 5.13 and especially 5.14 only come with hard work and genetics. Move to Boulder... that will put things into their proper perspective.... 7 year olds schooling you on the wall and 50 year olds passing you on a bike without breaking a sweat.
Just to set things straight, there are a few dozen places that could be inserted for Boulder. It ain't the center of the universe ya know ;)
Ryan Williams · · London (sort of) · Joined May 2009 · Points: 1,245
Jay Samuelson wrote:I'm sorry but genetics do not determine the ability to climb 5.14. People can keep thinking that they just got the short end of the stick and that's why they can't achieve that grade, but it's not true. Boulder (and Denver to a lesser degree) is a great example, seems like everyone climbs 5.14. Certainly they weren't all just gifted with 'good genetics'. I'm not claiming everyone can climb 5.13 or 5.14, but it isn't genetics that is the limiting factor. Try again. And saying that climbing doesn't really start until 5.whatever grade is just stupid and egotistical. Ask a .14+ climber where 'real climbing starts', your gonna cry.
Yea, I kind of agree. Genetics is more of a PLUS factor than a limiting factor if you ask me. I'm not sure that I could ever climb 5.14, but then I haven't really tried have I? Maybe it's genetics that is holding me back, but I'll probably never put in the work it would take to find out.
Jeff Chrisler · · Boulder, CO · Joined Jun 2009 · Points: 145
Ryan Williams wrote: Just to set things straight, there are a few dozen places that could be inserted for Boulder. It ain't the center of the universe ya know ;)
Of course there are places that could be inserted... but yes, it is the center of the universe :)
Jeff Chrisler · · Boulder, CO · Joined Jun 2009 · Points: 145
Jay Samuelson wrote:I'm sorry but genetics do not determine the ability to climb 5.14. People can keep thinking that they just got the short end of the stick and that's why they can't achieve that grade, but it's not true. Boulder (and Denver to a lesser degree) is a great example, seems like everyone climbs 5.14. Certainly they weren't all just gifted with 'good genetics'. I'm not claiming everyone can climb 5.13 or 5.14, but it isn't genetics that is the limiting factor. Try again. And saying that climbing doesn't really start until 5.whatever grade is just stupid and egotistical. Ask a .14+ climber where 'real climbing starts', your gonna cry.
Sure, a lot of people in Boulder climb 5.14. That doesn't mean anything. It (like other places) are a mecca for strong climbers who want to get better and enjoy being close to a lot of climbing areas in a nice town.

Of course, I am not saying genetics are the only limiting factor, but I am saying that they are a factor as much if not more than the work put in. If it makes you feel better that you can put your work in and eventually climb 5.14, great.. go do it!

The link above is interesting in that Horst says that both genetics , mental, and technical ability play an equal role for climbing ability. I'd love to see how he came up with those pie charts especially the one essentially saying that genetics and less technical ability affect elite sprinters more than climbers.
Tom Hanson · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jan 2001 · Points: 950

I'm not suprised that the child of two world class climber/trainer's would be the youngest to pull down at that grade.

Nature: Genetics that include optimal body type (ape index),
and possible inate personality traits.

Nurture: Environment. Accessible climbing and
mentor/role model. Other motivational factors .

To become a world class climber would appear to require a combination of both of the above.

What I find interesting is that there are climbers who defy this logic.

Look at John Long, Layton Kor, Steve Petro, all top level climbers in their day. All contradict the genetic model.

Look at what a high level several Slovakian climbers achieved in the eighties and nineties. They were hardly affluent, but had passion.
What about that viral video of the "Monkey Man" in India?

I've also known a couple of climbers who, though carrying many extra pounds, negative ape index, and other hinderances such as permanent injury, etc. pull off climbs at extremely high standards.

Go figure?

Sampres Jennings · · Utah · Joined Mar 2012 · Points: 0
Tom Hanson wrote:I'm not suprised that the child of two world class climber/trainer's would be the youngest to pull down at that grade. Nature: Genetics that include optimal body type (ape index), and possible inate personality traits. Nurture: Environment. Accessible climbing and mentor/role model. Other motivational factors . To become a world class climber would appear to require a combination of both of the above. What I find interesting is that there are climbers who defy this logic. Look at John Long, Layton Kor, Steve Petro, all top level climbers in their day.
+1

Ryan Williams: Genetics is more of a PLUS factor than a limiting factor if you ask me. --- Great point. I think that is more or less how I am looking at this. Being a natural climber is helpful but at the end of the day not the final determining factor if you can or not.

I don't think I am a special climber because I am climbing in the 11's. Are you kidding me?? I offered that up as a point of comparison and to be honest about my level of climbing. Don't think I am that disillusioned.

Jeff: That was a good article! Thanks for posting.

Oh and Boulder is a great place...but it's one of MANY great places. Let's remember that.

It is a combination of both but in my mind environment goes a lot further than innate ability. You can have all the raw ability in the world but unless you learn to control those skills through discipline and training I don't think it does one that much good. I will also standby that most extremely serious and dedicated climbers can reach the 5.14 level through painstaking hard work and training.
Sampres Jennings · · Utah · Joined Mar 2012 · Points: 0
Jay Samuelson wrote:I'm sorry but genetics do not determine the ability to climb 5.14. People can keep thinking that they just got the short end of the stick and that's why they can't achieve that grade, but it's not true. Boulder (and Denver to a lesser degree) is a great example, seems like everyone climbs 5.14. Certainly they weren't all just gifted with 'good genetics'. I'm not claiming everyone can climb 5.13 or 5.14, but it isn't genetics that is the limiting factor. Try again. And saying that climbing doesn't really start until 5.whatever grade is just stupid and egotistical. Ask a .14+ climber where 'real climbing starts', your gonna cry.
+1 I agree 100%!!
Peter Beal · · Boulder Colorado · Joined Jan 2001 · Points: 1,825

If I could add my 2cents here, can anyone think of any other athletic pursuits where a 10 year old reaches such a standard? Maybe a better question to ask is whether climbing is mature enough to actually start asking these questions. In other sports the answer is yes. In climbing so few elite athletes train, at least in a truly meaningful sense of the word, that we really don't know if 5.14 or 5.15 is actually anywhere near the point where genetics really matter. All we know is that less weight and stronger fingers indicate higher performance.

Dismissing "nurture" here is premature as well. I know Robyn fairly well and she is an excellent teacher and a driven competitor and climber who knows the sport inside out. I can think of few children climbing who have the resources that Brooke has. Climbing requires resources way beyond a local track or playing field. When those resources are more widely available to more kids we may see some really remarkable things happening. Recent events are a pointer in this direction.

Greg D · · Here · Joined Apr 2006 · Points: 883
Sampres Jennings wrote:A few days ago Brooke Raboutou (age 10) sent God’s Own Rock (5.14a) becoming the youngest female and American to climb such a high grade. What I am wondering is: what is the big deal? Before you jump on me for being a hater hear me out. I am relatively new to climbing (2 years) and I am climbing at a 5.11b and V4/5 level respectively. Having no real background (family or friends) in climbing, being in my early 20’s and having to work a full-time job to pay my way through college I think what I am doing (and other people like me) is just as impressive if not more so than Brooke. Brooke comes from a pretty elite climbing background, hell two world-class climbers “made” her: Robyn and Didier Raboutou. She has unlimited resources, training and support in her desire to be a climber. Her parents got her started at age 1. Yes - age 1. Age plays a huge factor – kids just don’t feel fear like adults. Kids can learn very quickly. Kids can bend, twist and move in ways most adults cannot. Emotionally and mentally a healthy kid is disconnected from “real-world” problems. So why make a big deal when a 10-year old sends a 5.14a? I’m not saying don’t congratulate and support her but national and international news? I think that’s crazy and unwarranted. Brooke has a lot of talent. No doubt. But she also had a VERY unique environment to grow up in and has access to resources 99.9% of us “normal folks” can only dream about. She doesn’t have to work. She doesn’t have to stress about school or bills, or her health or life. She can just be a kid. It makes me wonder if Brooke was not in the exact cozy situation she finds herself in would she be climbing at the level she is today? Hell, would she even be climbing? Is climbing nature or nurture?
Wow. There is nothing impressive about either one of you. The sad truth, she will be sick and tired of climbing by age 14. Then she may go on to do something impressive, she may not. You, on the other hand, my friend, have missed some very key aspects of life value. You are both just climbing rock and your post is so full of ego and excuse and grades and, and, and.....

I feel bad for you. Climbing is a totally personal experience. The greatest rewards take place in many ways. For me, sharing the experience with a friend is number one. Climbing near my edge is number two. Emphasis on "my edge".

Your discussion of grades exemplifies your depth.
Josh Wood · · NYC · Joined Apr 2012 · Points: 120

There is a big difference between living in an environment friendly for climbing and being nurtured. And you can be a great youth climber without being nurtured. I often climb at the same gym as Ashima Shariashi (spelling?), 3 time ABS champion and at 10 years old, one of the few women to ever climb V13. She is not in any way being nurtured. Yes, she does have Obe Carrion coaching her. And yes her dad (who doesn't climb) does take her to they gym almost everyday. But nobody is nurturing her. They're pushing her. I've seen her get frustrated when she falls. That comes from trying extremely hard, and having your coach make you try again and again. Nurtured is when your coach let's you give up, and there's no way anyone can succeed like that. I don't know Brooke, but I'm just guessing she's getting pushed more than nurtured.

Ryan Williams · · London (sort of) · Joined May 2009 · Points: 1,245
Greg D wrote: Wow. There is nothing impressive about either one of you. The sad truth, she will be sick and tired of climbing by age 14. Then she may go on to do something impressive, she may not. You, on the other hand, my friend, have missed some very key aspects of life value. You are both just climbing rock and your post is so full of ego and excuse and grades and, and, and..... I feel bad for you. Climbing is a totally personal experience. The greatest rewards take place in many ways. For me, sharing the experience with a friend is number one. Climbing near my edge is number two. Emphasis on "my edge". Your discussion of grades exemplifies your depth.
A little harsh and judgmental, but excellent points none the less.
DexterRutecki · · Cincinnati, Ohio · Joined Mar 2012 · Points: 0
Sampres Jennings wrote:I am relatively new to climbing (2 years) and I am climbing at a 5.11b and V4/5 level respectively. I think what I am doing (and other people like me) is just as impressive if not more so than Brooke.
Hahahahaha

Hahahahaha

No, climbing an 11b after climbing for 2 years is not impressive AT ALL. A 10 year old climbing 14a is pretty damn impressive.
Phil Lauffen · · Innsbruck, AT · Joined Jun 2008 · Points: 3,098
Greg D wrote: Wow. There is nothing impressive about either one of you. The sad truth, she will be sick and tired of climbing by age 14. Then she may go on to do something impressive, she may not. You, on the other hand, my friend, have missed some very key aspects of life value. You are both just climbing rock and your post is so full of ego and excuse and grades and, and, and..... I feel bad for you. Climbing is a totally personal experience. The greatest rewards take place in many ways. For me, sharing the experience with a friend is number one. Climbing near my edge is number two. Emphasis on "my edge". Your discussion of grades exemplifies your depth.
+1
Finn The Human · · The Land of Ooo · Joined Jul 2008 · Points: 106

I'm a pretty strong believer in the 10,000 hour rule. That is, it takes approximately 10,000 hours of doing a task before you have "mastered it" (what mastery actually means may vary depending on the task).

I've been climbing for approximately 5 years, with a year off due to injury, and the normal constraints of school and full time work. I definitely haven't climbed for 10,000 hours. Those kids on the other hand, have been climbing and training since they could walk. They haven't had adult responsibilities to take away from their climbing time.

All in all, they've just had way more experience than me. Why would I be surprised (or upset) that they climb harder than me?

Sure, genetics plays a role in your climbing ability, but I'd say the biggest difference between them and me is that they have grown up in an environment tailored to encouraging climbing at a high level.

tl;dr: I may be older than those kids and I may be able to beat them in an arm wrestling contest, but the fact of the matter is they've climbed a shit ton more than me.

APBT1976 · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Nov 2011 · Points: 55

Blah blah blah blah.

GO climb whatever level and enjoy it for whatever reason it brings you enjoyment.

Fuck i guess if worrying about how much better others are at a given task then you and why go ahead and trip out on that. Sooner or later in life hopefully you get to a point you could give a fuck and then and only then will you get to the good stuff!

€ $t0& 960 €® · · Colorado · Joined Mar 2012 · Points: 55

Nature

Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

General Climbing
Post a Reply to "Is climbing nature OR nurture???"

Log In to Reply

Join the Community

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

Get Started.