Power Endurance which training protocol is your favorite?

Hi!

This week I am starting my power endurance phase, and after a lot of research I am going to experiment with to different intervals; 4x4's (1 set = 4 boulder problems in a row x 4 sets with 4 min rest between sets) and 18x2's (1 set = 1':1', 2':2', 3':3', 2':2',1':1' x 2 sets with rest as needed).

I have noticed that there are a lot of different training protocols for power endurance out there, and I am curious what other people prefer and and what experiences they have made.

So, how do YOU train power endurance and why?

I think your drill is actually a 19*2. Anyway, my favorites are
1) campus PE: start matched on the first rung of medium campus rungs with your feet either on foot jibs or something else (I use an exercise ball which throws a small core stability element into the enterprise). Right hand to rung three, match, left to rung two, right two one, match one. Do ten reps alternating leading arms, 10 sets total. I like this for "dumb" PE, as it provides a high intensity pump and allows you to push all the way to failure, rather than foot slips or bad beta bringing you off.

2) Route intervals - for some reason, I can get onboard with these mentally better than with 4x4s or other forms of boulder repping. Downside is that you have to have a partner and need a high enough wall with the right sort of routes on it (continuous pump and in the style of your goal routes)

I train power endurance several different ways:

climb a series of boulder problems within a specified time frame (eg, 20 boulder problems 2 grades below redpoint),

climb several boulder problems and then do arc sessions immediately after (eg, 3 boulder problems with 10 min arc on 3 grades below onsight),

intervals. intervals need to become shorter each session and you should use the boulder problem only 2-3 times d/t gained economy of movement. (eg. do problem just below redpoint, rest 30 sec, do again x5, rest 5 min, repeat x4).

it may also be of more help to think of it in terms of aerobic and anaerobic endurance....
just a hint.

It depends heavily on the venue. Outdoors vs. indoors, and indoors it really depends on the setting, crowding, and whether I have a training partner to run interference on BPs or belay on a rope.

Some gyms have great density of holds, others are too sparsely set to allow downclimbing to link problems. Some have good groupings of things roughly the same difficulty in close proximity, others may have the problems you want to use spread all over the gym. Some have enough style differences that I can put things with dynamic or low percentage/highly technical moves early in the set, and some have idiotic setting where every crux is a dyno or precision stab/slap.

Add the crowding factor...it's harder to get 4x4s on boulders done in a crowded environment than doing up-down-up type routines on a rope. Some gyms have a clientele that is heavy with people who train and will respect your heads up that "I'm doing a 4x4, and will be hitting that blue problem as soon as I finish the red", others are packed with n00bs or people who's idea of training is to session problems with their bros and have never heard of a 4x4 and will jump in front of you as you attempt to downclimb and link into the next problem.

So I have a general idea of the number of moves, and difficulty I need for my session, then take inventory of what's available, who's around, and how crowded it is. Then make my plan. Best protocol in the world is useless if you can't actually execute it.

I favor 4x4s of about 25-40 total hand moves (downclimbing to link them), and up-down-up, or up-down-up-down-up on a rope which tends to be 30-60 moves. I reduce the rest from about 2:1 or 3:1 early in the phase down to 1:1 late in the phase and train PE 3 weeks, no more.

IMO, the best thing is probably to tailor it to what you're actually trying to send outside. How long is your target route in moves? Replicate the angle, hold size, and length, and reduce the rest over the phase.

One thing I would warn against, is doing 30+ move PE sets as traverses in the gym. IME, you end are likely to be throwing slightly out of control wide gastons and other shouldery moves as you tire, which is a recipe for injury.

I love the feeling of being absolutely destroyed after a PE workout, but they do seem to have a higher chance of injury unless you really chose your problems/routes wisely and are very disciplined.

This is my favorite. Let's see what you guys think of it. I did NOT design it.

You need an uncrowded gym, Heart Rate Monitor, clock/stop-watch, and auto-belay or patient belayer.

Get fully warmed-up. Top-rope a route that's 25-40 moves, without sharp cruxes or roofs, and about three letter grades (or more) below your usual grade in that gym; something you can still move on when pumped.

Start the clock (15min interval) and climb. At the top of the route, note your HR and lower off. When your HR comes down 20bpm from what it was at the top of the route, go again. Repeat until the 15 minutes is up. If you fall off before hitting the top just note your HR, lower, wait -20bpm, and go again.

Take 15 min rest (your belayer's turn) and do a second set. Cool off and go home.

• *********************

Using your HR is a better measure of when to start the next lap than just a simple time interval because it's linked directly to your exertion/fitness and it doesn't allow you to ever plateau during the set, thus max training for every session.

In "standard" 4x4 PE workouts it's often difficult to choose a problem or route that's perfectly matched to your fitness that day. They are often too easy or too hard. Measuring your HR minimizes the significance of the difficulty of the route you've chosen. For example, if it's too easy, your HR doesn't increase as much on each lap but your rests are shorter, you do more laps and your peak HR should be the same. If it's too hard, you get more rest (the closer you get to your peak HR, the longer it takes for it to come down 20bpm) and fewer laps but at a higher intensity. Either way, over the 15min period your training gets maxed.

My HR does something like this (below) and I can usually do 8-10 laps. Well trained youngsters' HRs will (should) peak higher and they will be able to do more laps in 15min.

105, 115, 124, 133, 139, 147, 154, 160

The first time I tried this, I couldn't get my max HR over 147. The next time, low-150's, next upper-150's, etc. So there's kinesthetic learning, improved confidence at your max intensity levels as well as physical training.

QED! ;-)

John Byrnes wrote:Using your HR is a better measure of when to start the next lap than just a simple time interval because it's linked directly to your exertion/fitness and it doesn't allow you to ever plateau during the set, thus max training for every session.

John, have you been doing this training long enough to experiment with different HR ranges, say instead of waiting to decrease by 20 bpm, go with 10 bpm instead or some other level which is a percentage of your lactate threshold (LT)? Also for the maximum HR that you are currently hitting how do they compare to you LT?

Anyway, it is an interesting way to introduce heart rate monitoring to this type of training.

Rui Ferreira wrote: John, have you been doing this training long enough to experiment with different HR ranges, say instead of waiting to decrease by 20 bpm, go with 10 bpm instead or some other level which is a percentage of your lactate threshold (LT)? Also for the maximum HR that you are currently hitting how do they compare to you LT? Anyway, it is an interesting way to introduce heart rate monitoring to this type of training.

Hi Rui,

I haven't experimented, I just do what my coach assigns me and it's hard enough! I don't know much more of the theory than what I described, so I don't know if choosing a percentage of your LT is a good thing or not. But I can tell you that waiting for -20bpm when you're already close to max is hard!

I don't think anyone can get their HR to the same peak climbing as they would on a treadmill/stationary bike. Your coordination goes and you fall off. My LT is about 140bpm, and I fall off right about 160bpm. (Not bad for an old fart.)

I recommend trying it just the way I described before experimenting. It's the most intense climbing workout I've ever done. It takes me three days to recover.

During my last PE phase, I tried a couple sessions with repeats on a clock, starting a new boulder problem on the minute, every minute. If it took 40sec to climb, you got 20sec rest, etc. Rests were anywhere between 35sec and 3 sec.

Also ran a couple of our kids on this scheme one day instead of doing 4 sets of 3-4 linked problems (which is one of our common protocols). One claimed it was harder than sets of 4-problem links, and was toast by minute 15 or so and done at 20. The other was about the same, done at 18.

I'm not so sure though. Compared to a 4x4 interval, it's different, it's a density vs. ultimate intensity thing, with close to the same total volume. The sensation of pump is different, you don't seem to get quite as deeply pumped by the end, but probably end up pulling more moves when very pumped. Never having more than about 20 seconds off is a lot different than 2-3min off.

If you rate pump on a 1 (not pumped) to 10 (painful, destroyed) scale - during 4 sets of 4 linked problems, ending those sets I'm usually feeling around 4,6,8,10 pump.

On the problem on the minute scheme, half the session ended up feeling about a 7, and I never quite got to 10, even when I was falling off things many grades below my flash level. But then again, I didn't really recover either, it was steadily building, whereas on a 4-link I'm usually starting the second and third set back down around a 3 after the rest.

It's probably worth experimenting with, even if you just experiment with altering the density as the variable instead of volume or intensity in general. For this specific application, it's hard to say if it's more or less beneficial than anything else. The change itself is probably valuable, just for variety sake. It was a nice break from our normal routine, gave us something new to experience and sometimes just a small change like trying something new is enough to re-energize the pysche.

Will S wrote:During my last PE phase, I tried a couple sessions with repeats on a clock, starting a new boulder problem on the minute, every minute. If it took 40sec to climb, you got 20sec rest, etc. Rests were anywhere between 35sec and 3 sec. Also ran a couple of our kids on this scheme one day instead of doing 4 sets of 3-4 linked problems (which is one of our common protocols). One claimed it was harder than sets of 4-problem links, and was toast by minute 15 or so and done at 20. The other was about the same, done at 18. I'm not so sure though. Compared to a 4x4 interval, it's different, it's a density vs. ultimate intensity thing, with close to the same total volume. The sensation of pump is different, you don't seem to get quite as deeply pumped by the end, but probably end up pulling more moves when very pumped. Never having more than about 20 seconds off is a lot different than 2-3min off. If you rate pump on a 1 (not pumped) to 10 (painful, destroyed) scale - during 4 sets of 4 linked problems, ending those sets I'm usually feeling around 4,6,8,10 pump. On the problem on the minute scheme, half the session ended up feeling about a 7, and I never quite got to 10, even when I was falling off things many grades below my flash level. But then again, I didn't really recover either, it was steadily building, whereas on a 4-link I'm usually starting the second and third set back down around a 3 after the rest. It's probably worth experimenting with, even if you just experiment with altering the density as the variable instead of volume or intensity in general. For this specific application, it's hard to say if it's more or less beneficial than anything else. The change itself is probably valuable, just for variety sake. It was a nice break from our normal routine, gave us something new to experience and sometimes just a small change like trying something new is enough to re-energize the pysche.

do you do some PE work after you finish the 20 minutes or is this all the training (besides warm up) for the day?

Jon,

For me it was warmup to a near-max, then the ~20mins of intervals, cooldown and done.

For the kids it was about the same, but they also followed it with an ARC session after about 10-15min rest.

I don't think there was enough left in the tank to get any more productive PE work during those days.

Well I hate doing 4x4s and this looks really cool. I've seen versions of what you're doing but I really like where your head's at in terms of intensity. I'll let you know how it goes (a couple months away from PE). I think another similar version where you do routes with short rests is fun as well. This would probably get that deeper pump that you think yours doesn't hit, so I think switching between the two would be an awesome way to get both sorts of pump.

These are my working assumptions with anaerobic training but I am no expert.

-I agree with the poster who said it might be better to think in terms of aerobic/anaerobic where the latter is what we call power endurance

-aerobic endurance is trained at a lower intensity than anaerobic, but increasing your aerobic endurance will also increase you anaerobic but not the other way around

-HR seems like it may be a little out of place in climbing. We are basically training out forearms which are relatively small muscles so it seems like the level of activity within our forearm muscles won't directly correlate (or at least corrate that well) with what's going on with out HR. In distance running, on the other hand, we are primarily training our legs which are relatively massive muscles and thus our overall HR should be very much linked to what's going on in our legs.

-for aerobic endurance I might do something like 20 Boulder problems, well below onsight, in 50 minutes. The basic goal of aerobic training (I think) is to get tired but not pumped. When you are pumped you've gone past your lactic threshold and are no longer (and have not been) using much of your aerobic sYstem

-for anaerobic endurance I've been trying to adapt this type of workout I used to do as a distance runner called a threshold workout. The basic idea was to run intervals (say a mile or 1.5 miles) that are fast enough to get you just below your lactic threshold but not exceed it. The rest is relatively short and it is a relatively high volume workout (say 1 mile, 1 min rest, 1 mile, 1 min rest, etc for five miles). Recently the way I've been trying to adapt this is by doing 5 minutes on a route with 1 minute rest for 5 reps. I adjust the intensity as I go as I try to feel out my exertion relative to my perceived lactic threshold. For me, this season, this has meant I am up/down climbing a 5.6-5.10 for five minutes, then resting and finding another route to do the same. This workout seems like a mix between Aerobic and anaerobic training because the goal is to flirt with your lactic threshold (like yhe point at which your muscles become overwhelmed with lactic acid and your potential output begins to quickly plummet ) in order to increase your ability to stay within your aerobic system.

-I also do the classic 4*4 which I think are good, however I think these should be used very sparingly. The intensity is so high and you get so tired doing them that your techniciqe inevitably deteriorates. This is both dangerous and bad for your technique overall as you are learning bad movement patterns.

-the timing of anaerobic training in your cycle seems very important. I do mostly aerobic work in the beginning of my cycle, then transition into strength, then power, then a small amount of anaerobic work. The anaerobic phase is by far the shortest for me. I train for bouldering.

Would someone be able to explain John's 18x2's? I've never heard of this exercise before so I'm not sure what exactly 1:1, 2:2, etc is supposed to denote.

czd wrote: -HR seems like it may be a little out of place in climbing. We are basically training out forearms which are relatively small muscles so it seems like the level of activity within our forearm muscles won't directly correlate (or at least corrate that well) with what's going on with out HR.

I had never thought about using HR in climbing either until my coach put one on me last year. Now, I definitely think HR has a place in climbing training.

I disagree about "basically training out (sic) forearms which are relatively small muscles". This is true for hangboard workouts, where your HR stays low, but not PE training.

In PE workouts your legs, core and shoulders are (should be) very well engaged and your much-increased HR reflects that.

czd wrote:I also do the classic 4*4 which I think are good, however I think these should be used very sparingly. The intensity is so high and you get so tired doing them that your techniciqe inevitably deteriorates. This is both dangerous and bad for your technique overall as you are learning bad movement patterns.

Well, I suppose that's one way to look at it. Another perspective is to train yourself to maintain good technique when you're awash in lactic acid. PE training is multifaceted: muscular, physiological and mental.

Drew Megura wrote:Would someone be able to explain John's 18x2's? I've never heard of this exercise before so I'm not sure what exactly 1:1, 2:2, etc is supposed to denote.

generally, it means reps:sets. So 1:1 is one rep (or in this case, one problem), and only one set. A 4x4, the most common of these exercises, is 4 problems, followed by a rest, then 4 more, 4 more, 4 more, for a total of 4 reps for 4 sets or 16 total problems.

Jon Frisby wrote: generally, it means reps:sets. So 1:1 is one rep (or in this case, one problem), and only one set. A 4x4, the most common of these exercises, is 4 problems, followed by a rest, then 4 more, 4 more, 4 more, for a total of 4 reps for 4 sets or 16 total problems.

Not quite. I don't know about the specific guy he's asking about, but in weight training/conditioning in general, the vernacular is usually expressed as Sets x Reps, not Reps x Sets.

3 x 5 = 3 sets of 5 reps.
18x2 = 18 sets of 2 reps.

When you are seeing ratios, e.g. 1:1, 1:2, 2:1, it is usually expressing work to rest ratios. These are less standardized and you'll see people expressing them both ways, W:R and R:W. Work to rest is more commonly used IME. The most common PE intervals start with the rest part 2-5 times longer than the work part. E.h. 1:2, 1:4, etc. and typically peak around 1:1 or 1:0.5 (also expressed as 2:1). So you often see things like 1 minute on, 2 minutes off...that would be 1:2 Work to rest.

And on the topic of HR monitoring, I stick with the side that says it's not really useful. You are trying to target your forearms. Sure, you use a lot of other large muscles and they will blast your heart rate if the climbing requires enough of them, but it isn't gauging the effect on your forearms, and it is unlikely that it is demanding enough of those other muscles that they are getting a proper PE workout. I could get a greater PE training effect by doing a vertical route on tiny holds where my heart rate never gets very high, than by doing steep boulder problems on jugs where it doesn't tax my forearms, but blasts my core, shoulders, etc and spikes my heart rate.

I've graduated from 4x4 to 6x8, and find the heart rate monitor helpful to get the most from the cardio aspect -- during a set, I can speed up, or slow down, to tweak my HR. I peak out on a given set around 85% of my max rate, and the average for a set is around 75% of max.

My current problem set is mostly vertical, with a short steep crux at problem 3, then a longer steep crux at problems 7 and 8. I get about as much vertical gain in one session as I do in a full day outside.

4x4s are a real drag for you and those around you if the gym is busy. So, definitely need to do this on off-peak hours. If there are people in front of you, either (a) switch the order of your sequence, or (b) have a backup plan for substitution -- sometimes its easier to do a second lap or a completely different problem.

Will S wrote: Not quite. I don't know about the specific guy he's asking about, but in weight training/conditioning in general, the vernacular is usually expressed as Sets x Reps, not Reps x Sets. 3 x 5 = 3 sets of 5 reps. 18x2 = 18 sets of 2 reps. When you are seeing ratios, e.g. 1:1, 1:2, 2:1, it is usually expressing work to rest ratios. These are less standardized and you'll see people expressing them both ways, W:R and R:W. Work to rest is more commonly used IME. The most common PE intervals start with the rest part 2-5 times longer than the work part. E.h. 1:2, 1:4, etc. and typically peak around 1:1 or 1:0.5 (also expressed as 2:1). So you often see things like 1 minute on, 2 minutes off...that would be 1:2 Work to rest. And on the topic of HR monitoring, I stick with the side that says it's not really useful. You are trying to target your forearms. Sure, you use a lot of other large muscles and they will blast your heart rate if the climbing requires enough of them, but it isn't gauging the effect on your forearms, and it is unlikely that it is demanding enough of those other muscles that they are getting a proper PE workout. I could get a greater PE training effect by doing a vertical route on tiny holds where my heart rate never gets very high, than by doing steep boulder problems on jugs where it doesn't tax my forearms, but blasts my core, shoulders, etc and spikes my heart rate.

yeah you're correct I don't know what I was thinking

Will S wrote: And on the topic of HR monitoring, I stick with the side that says it's not really useful. You are trying to target your forearms.

Hey, be careful where you point that pronoun.

You are targeting only your forearms. I'm targeting all of my climbing muscles, my physiology and mental control, and recommending that approach to others.

Will S wrote:Sure, you use a lot of other large muscles and they will blast your heart rate if the climbing requires enough of them, but it isn't gauging the effect on your forearms, and it is unlikely that it is demanding enough of those other muscles that they are getting a proper PE workout.

Doh! I suggest you start thinking about your body as a complete SYSTEM and not as a collection of parts flying in close formation.

Doing what you're doing neglects the physiological training of your body (extended CV system) and mental aspects (staying relaxed and confident under stress, regulating your breath, knowing where your limit really is) of PE training.

Will S wrote:I could get a greater PE training effect by doing a vertical route on tiny holds where my heart rate never gets very high, than by doing steep boulder problems on jugs where it doesn't tax my forearms, but blasts my core, shoulders, etc and spikes my heart rate.

Yes, you will get PE training in your forearms, so if that's all you want...

John Byrnes wrote: ... and not as a collection of parts flying in close formation. ....

priceless

There is a concept colloquially known as "junk mileage". In other words, training at an intensity that serves neither as recovery (too high for that), nor improvement (too low for that). It might be enjoyable, but it serves no particular training purpose other than burning a few calories. Similarly, it serves no particular technique training purpose either...too hard to focus on subtle feedback and experimentation, too easy to require perfect technique to stay on.

What I am contending, is that unless you are really weak and out of shape, your using heart rate as a way to target PE (in a climbing context) is putting you in a "junk mileage" situation for those other muscles.

I'd suggest that if you desire to train anaerobic endurance in the other muscles (those aside from the forearms) you pick exercises which will target them intensely. Random movements dictated by routes or problems is unlikely to do so.