Core training, helpful or just another useless fad?

Sit-ups, crunches, planks all seem to work muscles in a direction totally opposite to what climbing movement demands, i.e. facing down in the exercises while facing up while climbing.

Front levers work the shoulders at least as much as the abs and back.

OK, deadlifts and back extensions improve hip extension, but how much strength does one really need there?

Most core work strikes me as a waste of time, but I'd be happy to be wrong.

I'd really appreciate being persuaded that core work would be useful, and would be especially grateful for suggested exercises that wouldn't also target the shoulders/fingers, so that I could perform them on rest days.

How do you do sit ups facing down?

Mani the Monkey does a lot of core work (what he calls "body strength") and is really into being super analytical.  Worth checking out if you haven't.

https://youtu.be/fMLW44H5IxM

Having a strong core is useful for mantaining body tension which can be central to good movement technique, especially on steeper overhangs/compression problems.

I think the facing up/down point of view is a misleading way to look at it. The relevance of core strength is more to the extent of "can you keep your body mass stable through a variety of positions?" This can help prevent barndooring, feet cutting, and other inefficienies. At least to my experience. Do what seems to have an impact on your climbing.

Workouts that hit core but not shoulders/fingers- Russian twists, bicycles. I can picture a few more but can't think of names for them.

I think most climbers probably have adequate core strength, but don't know how to properly apply tension when climbing. I'm not fully against core work, but I think more focus should be on the application of core strength.

Bryce Adamson wrote:

How do you do sit ups facing down?

You mean I've been doing it wrong? :-)

@ Ted- re: the video. There's no doubt that some body strength is needed. 

You also need strength in pushing down with your toes. 

But nobody suggests calf raises as a vital training ingredient.

Instead of front lever, you can always try dragon flag, human flag or side lever (hands close on the bar, twist torso sideways). These are less shoulder/back intensive (but not necessarily easy). And instead of deadlift, how about barbell glute bridge (play w/ feet raised or placed further away).

Sit-ups & crunches are almost useless in climbing unless you are doing inverted OW. Side planks are fairly useful, especially one legged (on the opposite leg, raised).

These jokers must have done some core work:

Or maybe those abs just come from climbing hard shit all the time. Either way, I'd say strong core is probably good.

or maybe they're  just really skinny from spending all their money on climbing gear& drugs instead of food

"I'd really appreciate being persuaded that core work would be useful, and would be especially grateful for suggested exercises that wouldn't also target the shoulders/fingers, so that I could perform them on rest days."

Hahahaha! It's true. You have to have something to do while the important stuff (i.e. fingers) recovers from the training that matters!  :)

Go read a book or take a walk...

I agree Mark. I also think that situps, planks, front levers are all working the opposite muscle we need for climbing roofs and overhangs. Front levers and leg raises have some applicability in climbing when you need to bring your feet up to a high foothold or stabbing a foothold that’s far away on an overhang, but in general to maintain body tension on an overhang, we are applying force isometrically in the opposite direction of a plank. In that regard, in a deadlift we’re applying force in the correct direction, but I’m not sure it’s valuable to train in that range of motion, or to deadlift a huge amount of weights.

I put up a pair of gymnastic rings in the garage earlier this year, and I’ve been working on back levers for a few months. Imagine doing a front lever while facing the ground with arms behind your back, that’s a back lever. I feel that the isometric strength needed in a back lever is more applicable to climbing than a front lever (which I can do already), but I could be wrong.

aikibujin wrote:

I feel that the isometric strength needed in a back lever is more applicable to climbing than a front lever (which I can do already), but I could be wrong.

IMO, no. I can do a good back lever (I can flip myself between front & back levers on the rings), but I've spoken w/ non-climbers who've said back lever is typically easier. The fact that climbers seem to be able to do front levers easier should tell you it's actually more applicable, even if it seems counter-intuitive from cursory analysis of climbing motion.

At the end of gym climbing sessions, I started doing a core workout where I would hang from steep jugs and practice bringing my feet up to various holds. I noticed an increase in my ability to recover after cutting feet and an increase in my ability to hit higher feet. 

You guys are crazy. Back levers?? Which of these two images looks like a position you might encounter while climbing:

reboot wrote:

IMO, no. I can do a good back lever (I can flip myself between front & back levers on the rings), but I've spoken w/ non-climbers who've said back lever is typically easier. The fact that climbers seem to be able to do front levers easier should tell you it's actually more applicable, even if it seems counter-intuitive from cursory analysis of climbing motion.

I'm not so sure. I've also heard that back lever is supposedly easier than the front lever, but I think it has a lot to do with the range of motion in the shoulders. In the front lever, besides the ability to hold your body rigid, it's also pretty hard to pull your body into the horizontal position with your shoulders and arms. Climbers probably have an easier time than non-climbers in this. In the back lever, the limited range of motion in the shoulders with the arms behind your body makes it much easier to get the body into a horizontal position.

Also, there's no doubt in my mind that being able to do front levers give me a much easier time when I cut my feet and bring them high. But I often have a hard time maintain body tension in a fully extended position, it's almost like my body prefers to curl up. It's entirely possible that I got strong enough to do a front lever precisely because I have bad body tension and keep cutting loose. In the end though, I think we need both the front and the back in climbing, but most climbers train the front too much and neglect the back. That's probably why deadlift became so popular all of a sudden because we're just really weak in that area.

Mark E Dixon wrote:

Sit-ups, crunches, planks all seem to work muscles in a direction totally opposite to what climbing movement demands, i.e. facing down in the exercises while facing up while climbing.

Front levers work the shoulders at least as much as the abs and back.

OK, deadlifts and back extensions improve hip extension, but how much strength does one really need there?

Most core work strikes me as a waste of time, but I'd be happy to be wrong.

I'd really appreciate being persuaded that core work would be useful, and would be especially grateful for suggested exercises that wouldn't also target the shoulders/fingers, so that I could perform them on rest days.

I'd agree that sit-ups and crunches aren't what climbers generally need.

Here are 5 exercises that are supposedly more climbing-specific (yes, that does include the front lever, but the rest of them are not shoulder intensive at all)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CAtQeFbwic
I don't think they are necessarily exercises you would do on a full rest day. But if you are doing some kind of training routine that includes hangboard, whether Rock prodigy, or Steve Bechtel's plan, or anything else, you could do these exercises on the same day you do your hangboard. I also do not see why you couldn't do them at the end of your regular gym climbing session.

For me personally, one exercise that made a difference was none of the above, but rather a little drill a friend showed me a long time ago. Goes like this: Get on an overhanging wall with lots of foot jibs, and some good hand jugs. Get on the wall with your feet on some jibs to the left of your hand positions, and your body extended. Pick two jibs on the right side, cut feet, and re-position them to these new jibs, stick it for couple seconds, cut feet, and re-position them on the starting two jibs. Hold for couple seconds, then repeat. Vary the move -- pick the farthest jibs you can swing to and still stick, the lowest ones, etc. You can do this as part of your warmup.

I 100% think that core exercises are useful to climbing. I've done so many moves, especially in bouldering, that depended a lot on my ability to keep body tension during and after a move. Also, the ability to get your feet back on after they cut is very useful. You can maintain the body position and get your feet on much more quickly which in turn keeps the pump down and endurance up. 

Mark E Dixon wrote:

Sit-ups, crunches, planks all seem to work muscles in a direction totally opposite to what climbing movement demands, i.e. facing down in the exercises while facing up while climbing.

What about laying on one's belly on the floor, legs together and straight, and then arching the legs back and up?  

Some of the muscles used for that exercise seem like they'd overlap with the muscles used to keep the feet on the rock on an overhang. 

Another reason core is important: preventing injury.

More specifically, a weak core will cause peripheral muscles to pick up slack, which creates all kinds of shitty imbalances. Tight hips, tight back, poor flexibility, etc. I've learned the hard way - target your core or else you'll be making friends with a physio.

I dunno, I have a 8 pack and climbed a 5.13d yesterday, so what do you think? Probably just a coincidence. 

Jack Quarless wrote:

I dunno, I have a 8 pack and climbed a 5.13d yesterday, so what do you think? Probably just a coincidence. 

Pretty sure no amount of core training is going to get me up a 13d.  

Anyway, my understanding is that 6 packs result from low body fat more than ab strength. 

Mistaken?