Mountain Project Logo

Are you a strength/power person or an endurance person?

Original Post
reboot · · . · Joined Jul 2006 · Points: 125

My question is, are you naturally inclined toward strength/power sports/training or endurance based sports/training?

Coming from a strength/power background, I always felt endurance sports/training was boring (because you are not giving maximum effort at any given time). But apparently (living close to Boulder and all), people naturally inclined to endurance sports/training (which seem like 99% of the population) think strength/power sport is boring, because you don't typically exhaust yourself after a workout (although I think giving maximum effort is quite mentally exhausting, albeit in a complete different way than endurance sports).

Just curious what the climbing population is like in that regard (although I already have pretty strong suspicions). And hopefully for people like me who are too far on one end of the spectrum or the other, we can learn a bit from each other.

slim · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Dec 2004 · Points: 1,103

i find this to be a really interesting question. i am naturally much more built towards endurance. when i was younger i had more success at endurance type events. however, i trained very hard to improve my strength for a long time, and got better in that area. my power is quite poor though. i am pretty much a poster child demonstrating the difference between strength and power. i think a lot of it has to do with not fully developing my coordination like i should have. lots of work to do in this area....

in terms of climbing, i do very well on pure long endurance routes where you just have to grind it out. i also do well in long, tedious onsight situations where you have to be able to hang in there for an hour to fiddle in marginal piece after marginal piece.

i also do well if there is a hard fingery crux in the first 30 feet or so. at this point in the route i am pretty fresh (mentally and physically).

where i completely get my ass kicked are power-endurance routes - particularly if there is a cruxy situation up high. even more so if this upper crux is awkward and/or not really well protected. these types of routes start giving me trouble around 3 letter grades below my optimal routes.

Tony B · · Around Boulder, CO · Joined Jan 2001 · Points: 24,665

90+ % of us don't train at all. We do what is "fun" and as a result get natural conditioning. This results, at least in my case, in the opposite of what the desirable effects should be. Rather than working on my weakness (endurance) I tend to select routes that suit me, and work my strengths (strength) instead...
So overall, I've come to the conclusion that I'm backwards. Yet when given the choice between having fun and "working out..." I go have fun every last time.
I guess what I'm trying to say here is that I know I should be doing something the opposite of what I should be to maximize my ability/performance, but it doesn't materialize in the appropriate behavior to do so.
Endurance training would certainly suit me. Strength training might suit others... but as for what we actually do?!?!? That's a different question.

reboot · · . · Joined Jul 2006 · Points: 125

Tony, I did post this in the training forum. I know you don't take climbing as seriously as you do with some other things, but for many of us, a lot of the "fun" is getting better at what you do for "fun".

Knowing you, I wouldn't necessarily characterize you as a strength person, in the climbing sense. You may lack steep climbing endurance, but I think that's mostly because of the terrain we have here. Otherwise, on a typical climbing day, you climb (vertical feet wise), far more than me: I'm far more likely to sit idle waiting to recover than to do 1 more pitch.

Anyways, as far as the rest of the thread goes, I find that I'm naturally much more drawn to conjuring maximum effort (the try hard mentality) than I'm at doing more until exhaustion. I think both require a very different set of discipline and people on either end of the spectrum can learn something from the other.

Tony B · · Around Boulder, CO · Joined Jan 2001 · Points: 24,665

Not trying to poo-poo the training thing. I'm all for training. I acknowledge that I don't have the 'work ethic' for it.
My point was not the bullshit "why are you training?" answer that some might give, it was trying to prompt the thought that many people may not train in the way that most benefits them.
To that effect, I'm saying that people who are training might want to factor that in, and that people surveying answers might want to consider it as well.
PS- it's not endurence training when I'm not putting any effort into it. Yeah, I climb lots of pitches, but most of them are "green runs" (5.10 and below).

erik wellborn · · manitou springs · Joined Apr 2008 · Points: 355

I'm more or less just a pathetic weakling.

Will S · · Joshua Tree · Joined Nov 2006 · Points: 1,061

Strength/Power. Both by nature and by preference. It's more fun to me, whether climbing routes or training.

That said, right now I am a PE person, because I'm about 1/4 into the PE phase and can already notice a boost in PE and slight drop in power/strength...my onsight level is going up as a result, just at the cost of absolute upper limit.

ze dirtbag · · Tahoe · Joined Jun 2012 · Points: 50

i'd have to say strength/power....i used to only climb during offseason from rugby. Now I climb just about year round, mostly steep sport and cracks. Luckily for my 6'3" 210 lb frame, 3 or 4 pitches is about as high as the climbing gets around here.

J. Albers · · Colorado · Joined Jul 2008 · Points: 1,926

Funny how "technique" never gets mentioned in these types of posts. I find the shear number of "campus training" and "how do I get stronger" posts to be way amusing. It seems that people rarely ascribe their failure at climbing to sh*tty technique (this is of course based upon anecdotal evidence, i.e. casually viewing the MP forums over the years). The solution is always "if only I was stronger or had better endurance." I mean, do people really think that the thing separating them from climbing 12a is a campus board? IMHO, campus boards are for people that already have extremely well-developed technique (sorry, if you can't climb at least 12+ in a few goes, then this probably isn't you).

The truth? I'm a skinny weakling and the only reason I get up the stuff I do is because I cheat (read: tech) my way up stuff. I always find it funny when someone tells me that if only they were as strong as me, then they could climb the route I just did. Folks always seem to poo-poo me when I politely inform them that if I meatheaded my way through a climb the way they did, then I wouldn't get up squat either. This isn't to say that I don't work endurance, just that I have spent an equal amount of time over the years working on figuring out ways to climb better. Perhaps if folks spent more energy working on technique (including during their warm-ups), then they would have to spend less time punishing and injuring themselves on a campus board.

Just a thought from a weak guy.

Jason N. · · Grand Junction · Joined Mar 2011 · Points: 10
J. Albers wrote:Funny how "technique" never gets mentioned in these types of posts. I find the shear number of "campus training" and "how do I get stronger" posts to be way amusing. It seems that people rarely ascribe their failure at climbing to sh*tty technique (this is of course based upon anecdotal evidence, i.e. casually viewing the MP forums over the years). The solution is always "if only I was stronger or had better endurance." The truth? I'm a skinny weakling and the only reason I get up the stuff I do is because I cheat (read: tech) my way up stuff. I always find it funny when someone tells me that if only they were as strong as me, then they could climb the route I just did. Folks always seem to poo-poo me when I politely inform them that if I meatheaded my way through a climb the way they did, then I wouldn't get up squat either. This isn't to say that I don't work endurance, just that I have spent an equal amount of time over the years working on figuring out ways to climb better. Just a thought from a weak guy.
You reminded me of this article which was on the MP homepage not too long ago: rockandice.com/lates-news/f…
Mark E Dixon · · Possunt, nec posse videntur · Joined Nov 2007 · Points: 974

Strength.
I want a bumper sticker that says
"Friends don't let friends get pumped"

As for J Albers' comments about technique, I think many of us get it. That's been my focus all winter. However, it's hard to discuss on line- "when I'm on the red route at the BRC and turn my left toe slightly down it brings my hips in. What about you?"
I mean, except in generalities, how would you learn anything about technique on MP?

frankstoneline · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Apr 2009 · Points: 30
J. Albers wrote:Funny how "technique" never gets mentioned in these types of posts. I find the shear number of "campus training" and "how do I get stronger" posts to be way amusing. It seems that people rarely ascribe their failure at climbing to sh*tty technique (this is of course based upon anecdotal evidence, i.e. casually viewing the MP forums over the years). The solution is always "if only I was stronger or had better endurance." I mean, do people really think that the thing separating them from climbing 12a is a campus board? IMHO, campus boards are for people that already have extremely well-developed technique (sorry, if you can't climb at least 12+ in a few goes, then this probably isn't you). The truth? I'm a skinny weakling and the only reason I get up the stuff I do is because I cheat (read: tech) my way up stuff. I always find it funny when someone tells me that if only they were as strong as me, then they could climb the route I just did. Folks always seem to poo-poo me when I politely inform them that if I meatheaded my way through a climb the way they did, then I wouldn't get up squat either. This isn't to say that I don't work endurance, just that I have spent an equal amount of time over the years working on figuring out ways to climb better. Perhaps if folks spent more energy working on technique (including during their warm-ups), then they would have to spend less time punishing and injuring themselves on a campus board. Just a thought from a weak guy.
I think people focus on things like power vs. endurance and the boards because they figure technique can be trained simultaneously. As you mentioned, focusing on technique through one's warmup/workout is beneficial to most (though I'm not sure I agree with the 12+ in a couple goes benchmark, though my technique certainly has room for improvement).

Also, I certainly notice a lot of bro-science type thinking in the gym. One guy, who people view as a "Good" climber, is seen doing pull-ups with a 40 lb weight on his harness, suddenly I notice more and more people greasing up the hangboard doing pull-up workouts at the end of their evening session. Similarly, lots of people see accomplished climbers hangboarding or campusing and so off they go.

I think what it boils down to is that technique comes with time, and technique practice can be worked on in the same workout (i.e. during warmup/cooldown) as strength or endurance.

Similarly, not a lot of folks discuss core work in depth, but the ones who are good at training do it because it's beneficial, and most of us could stand to do more.

Also, most people roughly abide by the idea of periodization, and none of the phases are explicitly "improve technique" because the focus of that sort of training scheme is to trick your body into continuing to develop.

I would be lying if I said I didnt envy your ability to climb 12+ second or third go off the couch, but fundamentally I think at some point you get little returns on a lot of invested time from technique training and one is better off focusing on strength/endurance training and letting technique develop as a function of warming up and cooling down.

Damn, that was long winded.
William Sonoma · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Dec 2012 · Points: 3,550

Definitly endurance for me. My genetics come from a long line of endurance athletes. I'm blessed with the ability to apply little effort to long distances.

Some mention technique. My way is: technique is always on my mind, that is through much, much, effort (for me) I am always mindful of technique and how much effort it took to climb route x or z. I also think of 5.7, 5.6, 5.10, etc as percieved effort not the hold sizes (that's just me though). So I've climbed concensus 5.6s but would have rated it 5.3/5.4 (think candy corner, seneca, wv) because it didn't take much effort. I've also climbed concensus 5.7s that were 5.10s to me.

When in a technique, power/strength or anaerobic period in my climbing/training (they blend one with the other) I ALWAYS stop when Ican no longer climb with good style (to me which = good technique).

None of the masters (horst, neumann, goddard, leubben, etc) I've ever read would ever encourage someone to continue to climb once they've lost good technique. Regardless if its fatigue, bad attitude, or whatever.

My way only. Not right or wrong.

JCM · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Jun 2008 · Points: 115

As to the original question: I am more of an endurance athlete. I came into climbing with a solid aerobic/endurance background from road biking, which I did a lot of at one point in time. The endurance aptitude carried over into climbing.

To be even more specific, my best style of climbing has always been routes with a stop-and-go nature to them, where strenuous sections are separated by marginal rests. I think that the biking background helped with this. Strong calves generally allowed me to make the most of stems, stances, and kneebars, and a high baseline aerobic level allows me to get my heart rate down quickly.

That said, I've stopped biking, and I've also spent the winter bouldering in the gym, so we'll see how my power-to-endurance ratio adapts.

koreo · · Denver, CO · Joined Aug 2009 · Points: 85

Strength and power hands down. My father was a gymnast in his younger years, and oldest brother was a power lifter and a wrestler. I was a wrestler and a kickboxer which leans my inclination more towards strength and power. In both sports I always tried to get my matches over with as quickly as possible, versus controlling tempo and wearing down my opponent. Same thing with climbing.

This training cycle has been dedicated towards endurance and better technique. Train the weaknesses and all that. If endurance doesn't help I know the small improvements in technique will.

I absolutely agree with all everyone with strengthening the core. But I think that is also linked in with technique. Maybe a guy can hold a 5 second lever but if he doesn't know how to properly apply that core strength he is just gonna wear himself out.

Ben Brotelho · · Albany, NY · Joined May 2011 · Points: 520

Not enough of either!!

Aerili · · Los Alamos, NM · Joined Mar 2007 · Points: 1,875

From a purely genetic standpoint, I tend to do best at power endurance. For instance, I played halfback in soccer, ran 400 and 800 m in track, as a kid I could run faster and jump higher than all the boys, and as an adult ballet dancer I could jump higher than all the other women during adagio (big, powerful jumps which come consecutively slowly and usually repeatedly during technique class). When I tested on the Wingate cycle (a measure of power output), I had more endurance than any other female in my group (all athletically-inclined and fit).

For me, true maximal anaerobic outputs (climbing or otherwise) have always been more exhausting than any endurance activity I've engaged in (but of course my endurance activities have been relatively limited).

I think it is easier to come away from a strength/power workout exhausted simply because it is easier to redline in a short period of time if you so choose and know what you're doing.

I personally find power and strength training more interesting than endurance training, and I specialized in training power athletes in my professional past.

When I go to the gym alone, I try to ARC and find it...unpleasant after a while. Haa.

Woodchuck ATC · · Unknown Hometown · Joined Nov 2007 · Points: 3,280

these days, I endure my lack of strength as best I can.

Brandt Allen · · Joshua Tree, Cal · Joined Jan 2004 · Points: 210

I have a very low level of endurance, but make up for it with a complete lack of power.

Charles Kinbote · · Brooklyn, NY · Joined Jan 2012 · Points: 5
J. Albers wrote:The truth? I'm a skinny weakling and the only reason I get up the stuff I do is because I cheat (read: tech) my way up stuff. I always find it funny when someone tells me that if only they were as strong as me, then they could climb the route I just did.
I always find it funny when light climbers profess to be "skinny weaklings" and, therefore, technical masters by necessity, when they know damn well finger strength/weight ratio is far more important than total body strength.
Jay Knower · · Plymouth, NH; Lander, WY · Joined Jul 2001 · Points: 6,036
Charles Kinbote wrote: I always find it funny when light climbers profess to be "skinny weaklings" and, therefore, technical masters by necessity, when they know damn well finger strength/weight ratio is far more important than total body strength.
I completely agree with Albers. Being another "skinny weakling", I know that I've gotten up some stuff because of technique instead of power.
Guideline #1: Don't be a jerk.

Training Forum
Post a Reply to "Are you a strength/power person or an endurance…"

Log In to Reply

Join the Community

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

Get Started.