The effects of two maximum grip strength training methods using the same effort duration and different edge depth on grip endurance in elite climbers

By /


Introduction


Research analyzing sport climbing consistently shows that training and physical abilities are the biggest factors influencing performance. (Baláš et al., 2012; Fryer et al., 2018; Laffaye et al., 2016; MacKenzie et al., 2020; Magiera et al., 2013; Mermier et al., 2000; Winkler et al., 2023). Higher performing climbers therefore tend to have stronger fingers, better endurance, more shoulder and upper body power, and higher anaerobic fitness (For reviews see Langer et al., 2023a; Saul et al., 2019; Stien et al., 2022).

Incorporating strength training within training for climbing has been shown to enhance climbing performance and climbing-specific strength outcomes (For reviews see Langer et al., 2023b; Stien et al., 2023).

The hangboard is a popular training tool used by climbers. Fingerboard training has been shown to improve finger strength and endurance (Devise et al., 2022; Hermans et al., 2022; Levernier & Laffaye, 2019; Medernach et al., 2015; Mundry et al., 2021). Currier et al. (2023) showed that load is the most important training metric to increase maximum strength. 

Load can be manipulated on the fingerboard either by reducing the edge depth, thus making the hold more challenging to hold, or by adding external weight to the climber. Therefore, the aim of the study was to compare the impact of these 2 protocols on finger strength and endurance.

Study details

Who participated in the study?

Size and demographics

  • 9 experienced elite climbers (8 men and 1 woman) with climbing abilities of at least 8a+.
  • Participants were recruited from climbing clubs in Spain and had over five years of climbing experience, and recent experience in finger strength training using deadhangs.

How was the study conducted?

  • The study compared 2 training protocols.
    • Hanging with body weight on small edges (minimum edge depth, MED) versus 
    • Using larger edges with added weight (maximum added weight, MAW)
  • The study followed a randomized crossover design, with participants split into two groups: one starting with the MED training method, and the other with the MAW method.
  • Each group underwent one training method for the first four weeks, then switched to the other for an additional four weeks.
  • Pre- and post-intervention finger strength and endurance tests were conducted to measure the effects of each training method.
    • Finger strength test
      • Participants performed a dead hang using a 15 mm edge
      • Participants hung with a half-crimp grip and progressively added weight in increments of 5–10 kg until they could no longer maintain the hold for 5 seconds.
      • The maximum weight each participant could hold for 5 seconds was recorded.
    • Finger endurance test
      • Participants hung on an 11 mm edge with both hands using a half-crimp grip for as long as possible without added weight.
      • The time was recorded from the start of the hang until the participant either lost contact with the edge or altered body position due to fatigue.

What did the training program look like?

  • Both groups trained twice a week using 10-second dead hangs with a perceived 3s margin to failure. The number of sets was progressively increased over the weeks, from 3 to 5 sets and 3 minutes rest between each set.
  • Minimum Edge Depth (MED) training
    • Participants in this group trained by hanging from the smallest edge depth they could hold without additional weight.
    • Progression was achieved by reducing the edge depth 
    • The edge depth was adjusted based on the perceived margin to failure: If it exceeded 3s, the edge depth was reduced in the following set, else, it was increased.
  • Maximum Added Weight (MAW) training
    • The MAW group trained using an 18 mm edge with added weight.
    • Progression was based on increasing the added weight incrementally, following each participant’s capacity to maintain a 10-second hang.
    • The added weight was adjusted based on the perceived margin to failure: If it exceeded 3s, the added weight was increased in the following set, if smaller, the added weight was decreased.

Conclusion and practical application

Central conclusion

  • Both groups improved finger strength and endurance at the end of the study. The differences between the two training programs weren’t significant, probably owing to the small sample size. The biggest improvements were made during the initial 4 weeks by the MAW group.
  • It therefore can be concluded that adding external weight is a more effective training protocol.
    • Mundry et al. (2021) also compared MED and MAW protocols, finding MAW training to be more effective.
  • Still, there is more to consider when selecting the appropriate edge depth and loading protocol:
    There are two finger flexor muscles, the flexor digitorum profundus (FDP) and superficialis (FDS), flexing mainly the DIP and PIP joint respectively. Research from Schweizer & Hudek (2011) showed, that for smaller edge sizes and in a half-crimp or full-crimp finger position, the FDP contributed more significantly to maximal finger strength, while for larger, rounded, or flat holds (slopers) with an open-hand position, the FDS had a greater contribution than the FDP. Therefore, edge size and shape, and finger grip position determine the amount by which each finger flexor muscle is used and should be chosen according to your training goals. Bourne et al (2011) found no correlation between the finger strength measured on very shallow edge sizes (2.8 & 4.3 mm) to that on a 12.5mm deep rung. Interestingly, finger strength as measured on shallow edges was strongly correlated with anatomical proportions (fingertip to bone distance).

    What questions remain about the subject addressed by the study?

    • Future research is needed to test this approach with a larger sample size to confirm the effectiveness across broader populations.
    • Exploring the effects of these methods on different grip types and incorporating this training into practical climbing performance metrics, like route climbing, could yield more insights.

    Link to original study

    López-Rivera, E., & González-Badillo, J. J. (2012). The effects of two maximum grip strength training methods using the same effort duration and different edge depth on grip endurance in elite climbers. Sports Technology, 5(3-4), 100-110.

    References

    Baláš, J., Pecha, O., Martin, A. J., & Cochrane, D. (2012). Hand–arm strength and endurance as predictors of climbing performance. European Journal of Sport Science, 12, 16–25. https://doi.org/10.1080/17461391.2010.546431

    Bourne, R., Halaki, M., Vanwanseele, B., & Clarke, J. (2011). Measuring Lifting Forces in Rock Climbing: Effect of Hold Size and Fingertip Structure. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 27(1), 40–46. https://doi.org/10.1123/jab.27.1.40

    Currier, B. S., Mcleod, J. C., Banfield, L., Beyene, J., Welton, N. J., D’Souza, A. C., Keogh, J. A., Lin, L., Coletta, G., & Yang, A. (2023). Resistance training prescription for muscle strength and hypertrophy in healthy adults: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 57(18), 1211-1220.

    Devise, M., Lechaptois, C., Berton, E., & Vigouroux, L. (2022). Effects of different hangboard training intensities on finger grip strength, stamina, and endurance. Frontiers in sports and active living, 4, 862782.

    Fryer, S. M., Giles, D., Palomino, I. G., de la O Puerta, A., & España-Romero, V. (2018). Hemodynamic and cardiorespiratory predictors of sport rock climbing performance. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 32(12), 3534–3541.

    Hermans, E., Saeterbakken, A. H., Vereide, V., Nord, I. S., Stien, N., & Andersen, V. (2022). The effects of 10 weeks hangboard training on climbing specific maximal strength, explosive strength, and finger endurance. Frontiers in sports and active living, 4, 888158.

    Levernier, G., & Laffaye, G. (2019). Four Weeks of Finger Grip Training Increases the Rate of Force Development and the Maximal Force in Elite and Top World-Ranking Climbers. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 33(9), 2471–2480. https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0000000000002230

    Medernach, J. P. J., Kleinöder, H., & Lötzerich, H. H. H. (2015). Fingerboard in Competitive Bouldering. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 29(8), 2286–2295. https://doi.org/10.1519/jsc.0000000000000873

    Laffaye, G., Levernier, G., & Collin, J.-M. (2016). Determinant factors in climbing ability: Influence of strength, anthropometry, and neuromuscular fatigue. Scandinavian Journal of Medicine & Science in Sports, 26(10), 1151–1159. https://doi.org/10.1111/sms.12558

    Langer, K., Simon, C., & Wiemeyer, J. (2023a). Physical performance testing in climbing—A systematic review. Frontiers in sports and active living, 5, 1130812.

    Langer, K., Simon, C., & Wiemeyer, J. (2023b). Strength training in climbing: a systematic review. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research, 37(3), 751-767.

    MacKenzie, R., Monaghan, L., Masson, R. A., Werner, A. K., Caprez, T. S., Johnston, L., & Kemi, O. J. (2020). Physical and Physiological Determinants of Rock Climbing. International Journal of Sports Physiology and Performance, 15(2), 168–179. https://doi.org/10.1123/ijspp.2018-0901

    Magiera, A., Roczniok, R., Maszczyk, A., Czuba, M., Kantyka, J., & Kurek, P. (2013). The Structure of Performance of a Sport Rock Climber. Journal of Human Kinetics, 36(1). https://doi.org/10.2478/hukin-2013-0011

    Mermier, C. M., Janot, J. M., Parker, D. L., & Swan, J. G. (2000). Physiological and anthropometric determinants of sport climbing performance. British Journal of Sports Medicine, 34(5), 359-365.

    Mundry, S., Steinmetz, G., Atkinson, E. J., Schilling, A. F., Schöffl, V. R., & Saul, D. (2021). Hangboard training in advanced climbers: a randomized controlled trial. Scientific Reports, 11(1), 13530.

    Saul, D., Steinmetz, G., Lehmann, W., & Schilling, A. F. (2019). Determinants for Success in Climbing: A Systematic Review. Journal of exercise science and fitness, 17(3), 91–100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesf.2019.04.002

    Schweizer, A., & Hudek, R. (2011). Kinetics of Crimp and Slope Grip in Rock Climbing. Journal of Applied Biomechanics, 27(2), 116–121. https://doi.org/10.1123/jab.27.2.116

    Stien, N., Riiser, A., Shaw, M. P., Saeterbakken, A. H., & Andersen, V. (2023). Effects of climbing-and resistance-training on climbing-specific performance: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Biology of Sport, 40(1), 179-191.

    Stien, N., Saeterbakken, A. H., & Andersen, V. (2022). Tests and Procedures for Measuring Endurance, Strength, and Power in Climbing-A Mini-Review. Frontiers in sports and active living, 4, 847447. https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2022.847447

    Winkler, M., Künzell, S., & Augste, C. (2023). Competitive performance predictors in speed climbing, bouldering, and lead climbing. Journal of Sports Sciences, 41(8), 736-746.

    Social share

    WHAT PEOPLE ARE SAYING

    Johannes S.
    Finally there is a professional service that enables me to structure my training purposefully and individually and plan it in a targeted way. I particularly liked the fact that Marvin's offer is based on the latest sports science findings and evidence-based knowledge, there is a lot of work behind it! I do now not only have the opportunity to train performance-oriented, but also in a variety of ways, which is motivating! An absolute recommendation, definitely do it!
    Samuel S.
    I was lucky enough to take part in Marvin's workshop. The principle of the workshop consists of a constant alternation between theoretical content and it´s practical application. In terms of content, the workshop focuses in particular on different training methods, which are explained from the ground up. The content is scientifically based and up to date (more up-to-date and well-founded than the lecture on training science from my sports studies). The workshop was very enriching for me. It started with performance diagnostics, followed by theory and practice on training design and ended with a self-designed training plan. All questions were answered in detail and I can now train according to a scientifically based training plan. Thank you Marvin!
    Annette S.
    The workshop is recommended for anyone with a few years of climbing experience who wants to learn about healthy and effective strength training in theory and practice. The theoretical part provides an initial insight into the basics of strength training and training plan design. The performance diagnostics show strengths and weaknesses in black and white and provide concrete starting points for your own training. Working out an individual training plan together not only makes things clearer, it also gives you something to try out what you've learned in practice. It was very pleasant that Marvin works with each participant individually. He responds to each participant and their specific needs and wishes, so that everyone can benefit from the workshop, regardless of their climbing level, previous experience, wishes and goals.
    Silvia L.
    Marvin's workshop was varied, informative and a complete success for me. After a long period of stagnation regarding my performance and a simultaneous motivation problem, the workshop was the first time I had looked at my strengths and weaknesses, as well as a sensible training plan, and I had a few “aha” moments. Marvin has so much knowledge and experience that no questions were left unanswered, he manages to pick up participants with the most diverse prerequisites where they stand. The group size was ideal and I think the price was reasonable. All in all, a great experience, I'm motivated again and ready for the next level :)
    Katharina G.
    An absolute must for every training enthusiast and all data nerds. Marvin has created an excellent scientifically based course format with this course. If you want to design your own training and understand what is behind each phase and its individual exercises, you will find the answers you need in this course. In addition to the practice-oriented approach of your own performance diagnostics, Marvin teaches the key points of climbing-specific strength training in a clear and easy-to-understand way in pleasant small groups. Practice-related exercises are underpinned with study data and the whole thing is broken down into simple take-home messages. Thanks to Marvin, I now not only know what makes me strong, but also why
    Maria N.
    The workshop helped me to better understand the topic of strength training and to be able to organize it in a more structured way. Marvin managed to explain the physiology of the muscle cell and muscle work in a clear way so that I could develop a better understanding of different training methods. The course days were characterized by a friendly atmosphere and a constant willingness to provide further explanations and discussions. The course catered individually to the different levels of ability of the individual participants. Thank you for two instructive days!

    Join our community!

    Stay in the loop with our latest updates! Subscribe to our newsletter to receive exclusive news, updates, and special content straight to your inbox.

    NEW BASELINE

    Evidence-based climbing training.

    MY ACCOUNT

    © New Baseline All rights reserved

    Developed by Digisite.es

    NEWSLETTER
    Scroll to Top

    Enjoying our content?

    As we’re committed to keeping our resources free, any contribution you make will help us continue delivering quality content, research, and training materials. Would you consider making a small donation?

    Yes, I’d like to donate