Tension Training Block

Anyone have a protocol or summary of how they use this thing? I received one as a gift and it seems pretty rad, but am lacking the creativity to find a proper protocol or routine for it.

Their website has pictures that might help.
https://www.tensionclimbing.com/product/the-block

As far as rep/rest protocols, there is tons of stuff out there to choose from. Just find a hangboard protocol you like and apply it one armed to the block. I have a flash board that I have used a good deal and I prefer "max" hangs with it. Again google will give you many options.

Eric K wrote: As far as rep/rest protocols, there is tons of stuff out there to choose from. Just find a hangboard protocol you like and apply it one armed to the block. I have a flash board that I have used a good deal and I prefer "max" hangs with it. Again google will give you many options.

I guess my issue, is that on a traditional hangboard you are training both hands at once. With the training block, my hope is that I can identify and exploit weaknesses on a certain side, and thus even them out. So, a better question that I should have asked is, how do you use these one arm training tools to bring my weaker side up to par with my stronger side? Just doing the same protocol but adding/removing weight per side, or keeping both sides the same weight and hope the weaker side catches up? Does that make sense?

Not getting what the big benefit of symmetry is.
I'd have thought it was better to be able to some kind of V6 move to my left side even if I could only do a similar move at a V5 level to my right side.
Better than able to do that move at only a V5 level to both sides?

Why not just work on getting as strong as I can with each kind of desired move (without injury) to whichever side?

Ken

I'm with Kenr, I would not worry about asymmetry too much. It seems really common and does not hold people back too much. I have not tested this theory, but I would guess that as we train and approach our genetic potential these discrepancies come much closer together. So maybe your right is stronger then your left now, but eventually that side will slow down the rate at which it makes gains and the left will catch up. The only thing I do to work arms equally is switch which arm you start your workout with each time so your not always working the left after getting a little tired working the right.

Unilateral training is useful *IF* you have/had an injury that results in a substantial imbalance. For most of the population that's not the case.

Nick Drake wrote: Unilateral training is useful *IF* you have/had an injury that results in a substantial imbalance. For most of the population that's not the case.

I'm not necessarily referring to unilateral training. If my protocol calls for a 7 second hold and I can do 100lbs with my strong hand, but can only hold 100 lbs with my weak hand for 3-4 seconds (rather than 7) do people recommend training with that amount of weight and hope it "catches up"....or do people recommend dropping down in weight to match the protocol and efficiency of the dominant hand.

Would you get the same effect if you replaced the weights with resistance bands? This would be a great tool to warm up fingers at the crag.

MisterSir wrote:

If my protocol calls for a 7 second hold and I can do 100lbs with my strong hand, but can only hold 100 lbs with my weak hand for 3-4 seconds (rather than 7) do people recommend training with that amount of weight and hope it "catches up"

Don't do this! Basically what you are doing is using too high a weight and reducing the time under tension for your weaker hand, potentially giving it a less effective stimulus than what your stronger hand is getting. This could actually increase strength discrepancy over time. Also, by using too much weight for that hand, greater injury potential.

My preferred option is to keep it simple and just use the same weight for each hand, but have the weight be tailored to the weaker hand. So in your example, if the strong hand can do 100 lbs and the weak hand can do 90 lbs, use 90 lbs for both hands. The stronger hand will coast along with a weight that is easy for it for a few sessions, but the weaker hand should catch up pretty quickly and then both hands can progress together at the same weight.

This is based on the general principles, for long term steady progress, that 5% too easy is better than 5% too hard, and that consistency and simplicity win out in the long run over complicated schemes that try to optimize and maximize every single workout.

You could use different weight for each hand, based on what each hand can do. This will maybe squeeze out slightly greater short-term gains in the stronger hand than the simpler approach, but I'm skeptical of how much real progress in your climbing it buys you in the long run. Again, consistency and simplicity for the long run.

JCM wrote:

Don't do this! Basically what you are doing is using too high a weight and reducing the time under tension for your weaker hand, potentially giving it a less effective stimulus than what your stronger hand is getting. This could actually increase strength discrepancy over time. Also, by using too much weight for that hand, greater injury potential.

My preferred option is to keep it simple and just use the same weight for each hand, but have the weight be tailored to the weaker hand. So in your example, if the strong hand can do 100 lbs and the weak hand can do 90 lbs, use 90 lbs for both hands. The stronger hand will coast along with a weight that is easy for it for a few sessions, but the weaker hand should catch up pretty quickly and then both hands can progress together at the same weight.

This is based on the general principles, for long term steady progress, that 5% too easy is better than 5% too hard, and that consistency and simplicity win out in the long run over complicated schemes that try to optimize and maximize every single workout.

You could use different weight for each hand, based on what each hand can do. This will maybe squeeze out slightly greater short-term gains in the stronger hand than the simpler approach, but I'm skeptical of how much real progress in your climbing it buys you in the long run. Again, consistency and simplicity for the long run.

Makes sense. Thanks for the clarification and reasoning!