New Alpinism

Dr. Crankenstein wrote:I was wondering what people are doing for the best approximation for alpine climbing. I live in Reno so I do have some opportunities to get up some this winter and will be doing some skimo but not at the frequency that I need to. Any ideas and recommendations are welcome.

You have great terrain near there. If you haven't already done so, extending your ski mountaineering to include overnights would teach you a ton about setting up camps in the snow, and seeing how it can sap your energy the next day. Here is an example of one:
sierramountaincenter.com/Wi…
I'm not suggesting that you use a guide, but there is a lot of good information there, including lists of what the difficulties are, and what you learn etc. In that example, there is some lower 5th class, and tons of 4 class climbing involved, intermixed with snow and/or ice patches. So, you'd typically be climbing on rock while wearing crampons, etc. That is a long route (several days), but there are plenty of shorter routes where you can learn tons.
I've done some of the CO fourteeners in the winter, and most were wild adventures compared to what they are like in the summer. The CA Sierras are probably even better, due to safer snowpack, and generally more solid rock.

Jon Rhoderick wrote:Has anyone seen technical climbing difficulty increase with the program?

Yes, definitely; however, I think that depends on your technical competence beginning the program.

I would say my 1 grade below redpoint I use for TFTNA is 5.10d, and I began the program with 5.10a or 5.9 as 1 grade below redpoint values.

The greater your climbing fitness and ability, the less likely you will see specific improvements from this program without specifically incorporating technical rock climb in the Climbing period.

Jon Rhoderick wrote:Has anyone seen technical climbing difficulty increase with the program?

I am on week 31 of a 34 week cycle (climbing specific phase). I've definitely seen an increase. Prior to doing this, I was about 50-50 on sighting 5.11- trad. I'm now about the same chances on 5.11+, I've redpointed 5.12a, and I haven't been able to do that in about 6 years. In all honesty, though, the biggest change has been the volume I can accomplish. I've had several 50 pitch 5.3-5.8 days during the endurance phase.

I modified the program a little bit to be more technical climbing specific. For example, some strength days were bouldering days. One day a week most weeks, one of my zone 1 training sessions was on a climbing gym auto belay on a 43 ft vertical wall with easy holds. Up to 90 minutes or up to 100 laps like a treadmill with approach shoes. Sometimes with a pack.

Averaged 15 hours a week in volume. basically alternating 10 hour weeks when I didn't get on real rock and 20 hour weeks I managed to get outside. The plan for me from the start was to do two full cycles back to back without exploiting the peak on my first cycle. So in a few weeks, I'll start over with an elevated baseline and the knowledge to modify things that worked and things that didn't work the first time.

since i got the book i noticed a huge difference. It's pretty heavy. like 4.5 lbs. I started a regime of bicep curls with the book, and my vein looks REALLY good. I wear a HRM while i do this, and I can always stay in zone 1. I figure at this point it means that my base endurance is really good.

@Tom: Great suggestions and I will absolutely be taking advantage of my location w/ easy access to the Sierra. I will especially be exploring the Sawtooths since they are so close to Reno. Side note, if anyone is in the area and would like to go on some missions I'm up for getting out there.

I was actually wondering about what people are doing for the best approximation for alpine climbing because I can't get out on trips like that every week (jobs are stupid) and I don't want to skip the work out because I can't make it to the mountains.

Dr. Crankenstein:
I'm lucky enough to have something close to do, when I'm short on time.

This picture was taken from my kitchen window. It takes me about 10 minutes to get to the base of that close hill, and then it is 450 feet of elevation to the top (at 8000 feet elev.). I can do a couple repeats on it before, or after, work on weekdays. It is trail-less, and loose (volcanic). I use it in the summer some (for thigh and ankle strength), but trail running is more fun in the summer. Even if there isn't snow cover, I have found it very useful in winter, to get used to the weight of my mountaineering boots, and a pack, before a trip. Extra weight seems to slow me down more than some people, so that is something I need to continue working on.
If you look close for tracks, you'll see that I also ski it once in a while. It is rare to have enough snow for that, though (this is AZ after all).

Dr. Crankenstein wrote:@Tom: Great suggestions and I will absolutely be taking advantage of my location w/ easy access to the Sierra. I will especially be exploring the Sawtooths since they are so close to Reno. Side note, if anyone is in the area and would like to go on some missions I'm up for getting out there. I was actually wondering about what people are doing for the best approximation for alpine climbing because I can't get out on trips like that every week (jobs are stupid) and I don't want to skip the work out because I can't make it to the mountains.

Box steps with pack and boots, and gym climbing with pack and boots are reasonable simulators. I've done the former, and it kicked my ass. The latter is coming up in the training rotation in a month or so.

Anyone tried the weighted step ups as recommended as a strength exercise (I'm not talking about the weighted step ups for muscular endurance).

I have experience in doing regular lifts (front squat and back squat), and am contemplating trying the step ups for strength (in addition to or as a substitute for one of the squats - I would otherwise do both front and back on different days).

Box step ups seem like a good way to get some balance / one-legged stabilization work that seems fairly sport - specific. That said, looks like it could be awkward for doing as a low-rep max-strength movement.

Anyone done these and care to weigh in? Have ideas about box height?

I did box steps two different ways: for strength, a 24 inch box while holding two dumbbells that just barely allowed me to get up, and then on a 20 inch box with lighter dumbbells for endurance. For me, two 70 pound dumbbells was really heavy for 1-5 reps on the 24", and 50s seemed reasonable for 10 or more reps on the 20". Pistols and lightly weighted pistols were decent, too, but I have some mobility trouble in my right ankle from breaking it 10 years ago. Makes it hard to sink into my heel on that foot, resulting in some unreasonable pressure on that knee.

Jaredj- Have been doing the box step-ups as part of Max Strength component for a couple of months. I just set the bar in front of a squat rack, bring the bar onto my upper back from the rack, and do my allotted step-ups. Handy, too, because I can then turn around and do weighted crossovers while hanging underneath same bar (gotta' be careful not to torque it off the rack, of course). Great exercise for strength and balance. One of my partners suffers from bad knees, and, for whatever reason, his knees are bothered by using the bar but not by using dumbbells. See what works best for you.

I like step ups. I've gone as high as 34" as a flexibility and high step climbing movement and just body weight. But as a strength movement lower of course - with the lower the box the higher the weight used. I'm a long time weight lifter and think the step ups work the hiking and climbing muscles better than squats - with the side benefit of balance development. For endurance work I don't think a real high box is necessary.

I just started my Base Period two weeks ago and I've been doing back squats and box steps as part of my Max Strength routine. I do the back squats with 185 lbs and the turn around and to the box steps w/ the same weight and a 15 in. block (I put isometric hangs between the two). I've been thinking about lowering the weight and changing to overhead squats and a higher box but haven't pulled the trigger on it yet. I've found this routine to be strange because I can just barely do the 4 reps at that weight in both exercises but I'm not sore or tired at all the next day like the book suggested I would be. What do you guys think, should I change to the overhead squats and higher box?

Overhead squats are a different animal than regular squats - they require more flexibility and the use of shoes with some heel lift is often the difference between being able to do them - or not. They are probably a better fit than heavy back squats for climbing as they can give shoulder stability some help and isolate the legs in a unique manner. Overhead squats should be done to rock bottom - not just to parallel - they will work you in a different way than back squats and require much less weight. They are not an exercise to do for higher reps without a break in period as the shoulder girdle will fatique. I'm not sure how high you mean when you say "higher" on the step ups - but "stretchers" as I call them are fun once in a while too (those are to a limit height box). There is no reason you couldn't run a few weeks of one - then change to the other for a while. The different exercises and methods of doing them are all good.

On the step ups topic, ... you guys are making me feel weak! I use just 60 lbs with a 18" step. I admit to having weak thighs, lol.
I don't push off though. Here is a trick to check if you are pushing off of the lower foot: flex your toes upwards until they touch the top of your shoe. There is some sort of neurological thing that happens that keeps you from pushing off. Try it as a test to measure progress, not necessarily for all your workouts.
Pushing off makes for a different exercise, not necessarily inferior. You get to use a higher step, and get larger range of motion, if you push off. You can also use more weight. It just depends on what you are trying to get out of the exercise, and what gives you the results that you want.

Overhead squats are primarily a shoulder flexibility exercise. Don't bother with them if your goal is to improve leg strength. Squats are still the best of the best.

However, if you really want to rip your quads then try this exercise; perform a wall squat (with back against the wall and upper thighs parallel to floor, make sure lower back is pressed against the wall). This exercise should be done with weight on your shoulders, I would recommend a bar with 40-50 lbs. Alternatively you can place your heavy pack on top of your thighs but you will need 70 lbs or so. Anyway, hold in static position for 60 seconds and then immediately perform 10 jumping squats. Wait 60 seconds and repeat for three more circuits - if you can. This will grow some hair on your chest and will have your quads begging to stop.

beytzim wrote:Overhead squats are primarily a shoulder flexibility exercise. Don't bother with them if your goal is to improve leg strength. Squats are still the best of the best. However, if you really want to rip your quads then try this exercise; perform a wall squat (with back against the wall and upper thighs parallel to floor, make sure lower back is pressed against the wall). This exercise should be done with weight on your shoulders, I would recommend a bar with 40-50 lbs. Alternatively you can place your heavy pack on top of your thighs but you will need 70 lbs or so. Anyway, hold in static position for 60 seconds and then immediately perform 10 jumping squats. Wait 60 seconds and repeat for three more circuits - if you can. This will grow some hair on your chest and will have your quads begging to stop.

I totally disagree with this post. Overhead squats are one of many exercises that require a certain basic level of mobility to even do them properly. But the exercises themselves aren't "for increasing that mobility." Pistol squats are an analogous example. If you have limited range of motion in your ankles, you just can't do the exercise. But, that doesn't mean pistol squats are a good exercise to increase your ankle flexibility!
I also disagree with saying that a "wall squat" is an especially good exercise for climbers. Putting your back against a wall removes much of the challenge to the core stability muscles that climbers really need. "Back against wal" squats/holds have been verified to be beneficial for downhill/alpine skiers (who spend much of their time in that exact position), but for nobody else that I know of.
Sorry, beytzim. Nothing personal. I've liked many of your other posts!

The lifting of weights targeted towards climbing opens up a huge area for discussion. The most obvious problem is that lifting can easily result in weight gain if done in a normal weight training manner - which may (or may not) be beneficial to one's goals. I think the biggest problem with lifting is that it often leads to doing as much lifting as climbing - which is not going to make a better climber generally speaking. It's easy if you live far from any actual climbing to think working out with weights can be the same as climbing for climbing harder routes - it can not. That said it can be a good thing - but getting weight lifting advice from a "lifter" may not be the best place to look - unless they are also serious climbers.

The thing that weight training can do exceptionally well is balancing strength across joints which can help with injury prevention and rehab.

Chris Rice wrote:The lifting of weights targeted towards climbing opens up a huge area for discussion. The most obvious problem is that lifting can easily result in weight gain if done in a normal weight training manner - which may (or may not) be beneficial to one's goals. I think the biggest problem with lifting is that it often leads to doing as much lifting as climbing - which is not going to make a better climber generally speaking. It's easy if you live far from any actual climbing to think working out with weights can be the same as climbing for climbing harder routes - it can not. That said it can be a good thing - but getting weight lifting advice from a "lifter" may not be the best place to look - unless they are also serious climbers. The thing that weight training can do exceptionally well is balancing strength across joints which can help with injury prevention and rehab.

^+1 nice post

As this thread is about the House/Johnston book, I'll note that the strength training programs in the book are tailored to build strength without weight. For example, in the max strength cycle, the book warns against going to failure in 5 reps-- basically you're wanting to go to about 85% of muscle exhaustion in this phase. I do think that the weight training/rock climbing debate is interesting, but there's no question in my mind that strength training, done properly, does translate into alpine climbing and mountaineering.

I've been working with the book for a few weeks, and think I've got a base period routine that fits around my 8-5 job and my ability as a novice mountaineer/climber. I do the same workout on Mon and Wed nights: core, strength (including the pullup routine, and 45-60 min of steep hill walking with a 20%BW pack). This takes about 2.5 hours each Mon/Wed night. Then on the weekend I do a long (4,000-8,000' gain, 8-15 mile) hike with a 20 lb pack. I try to work in one 1-3 hour session of gym climbing per week. I'm a long way from the 3,000'/hr ascent rate (I can maintain 1,200'/hr for four hours with a 20-lb pack), but I've seen substantial improvements in my ability to take big steps without fatiguing, and in my climbing ability. I've also started trying to down climb every bouldering route at the gym instead of jumping off. Most accidents happen during descent, right?

I've got to say, the Basic Fitness Test was humbling for me. As someone who has done intensive cardio/light strength workouts 2x a week for several months, and many 5,000+' gain dayhikes, I scored the following

box step: poor/good
dips: good
situps: poor (!)
pull-ups: poor
box jumps: n/a
push-ups: good

but I now know where I need to improve.