Literature DB >> 34267583

Effects of Two vs. Four Weekly Campus Board Training Sessions on Bouldering Performance and Climbing-Specific Tests in Advanced and Elite Climbers.

Nicolay Stien1, Helene Pedersen1, Vegard A Vereide1, Atle H Saeterbakken1, Espen Hermans1, Jarle Kalland1, Brad J Schoenfeld2, Vidar Andersen1.   

Abstract

This study examined the effects of two or four weekly campus board training sessions among highly accomplished lead climbers. Sixteen advanced-to-elite climbers were randomly allocated to two (TG2), or four weekly campus board training sessions (TG4), or a control group (CG). All groups continued their normal climbing routines. Pre- and post-intervention measures included bouldering performance, maximal isometric pull-up strength using a shallow rung and a large hold (jug), and maximal reach and moves to failure. Rate of force development (RFD; absolute and 100ms) was calculated in the rung condition. TG4 improved maximal force in the jug condition (effect size (ES) = 0.40, p = 0.043), and absolute RFD more than CG (ES = 2.92, p = 0.025), whereas TG2 improved bouldering performance (ES = 2.59, p = 0.016) and maximal moves to failure on the campus board more than CG (ES = 1.65, p = 0.008). No differences between the training groups were found (p = 0.107-1.000). When merging the training groups, the training improved strength in the rung condition (ES = 0.87, p = 0.002), bouldering performance (ES = 2.37, p = 0.006), maximal reach (ES = 1.66, p = 0.006) and moves to failure (ES = 1.43, p = 0.040) more than CG. In conclusion, a five-week campus board training-block is sufficient for improving climbing-specific attributes among advanced-to-elite climbers. Sessions should be divided over four days to improve RFD or divided over two days to improve bouldering performance, compared to regular climbing training. © Journal of Sports Science and Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Isometric; pull-up; rate of force development; strength

Year:  2021        PMID: 34267583      PMCID: PMC8256519          DOI: 10.52082/jssm.2021.438

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Sports Sci Med        ISSN: 1303-2968            Impact factor:   2.988


  34 in total

1.  Relative Importance of Four Muscle Groups for Indoor Rock Climbing Performance.

Authors:  Michael R Deyhle; Hung-Sheng Hsu; Timothy J Fairfield; Taryn L Cadez-Schmidt; Burke A Gurney; Christine M Mermier
Journal:  J Strength Cond Res       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 3.775

Review 2.  Velocity specificity of resistance training.

Authors:  D G Behm; D G Sale
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 11.136

3.  Effects of Resistance Training Movement Pattern and Velocity on Isometric Muscular Rate of Force Development: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis and Meta-regression.

Authors:  Anthony J Blazevich; Cody J Wilson; Pedro E Alcaraz; Jacobo A Rubio-Arias
Journal:  Sports Med       Date:  2020-05       Impact factor: 11.136

4.  Climbing-specific finger flexor performance and forearm muscle oxygenation in elite male and female sport climbers.

Authors:  Marc Philippe; Daniel Wegst; Tom Müller; Christian Raschner; Martin Burtscher
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2011-12-01       Impact factor: 3.078

5.  Comparison of the Effects of Three Hangboard Strength and Endurance Training Programs on Grip Endurance in Sport Climbers.

Authors:  Eva López-Rivera; Juan José González-Badillo
Journal:  J Hum Kinet       Date:  2019-03-27       Impact factor: 2.193

6.  Comparison of climbing-specific strength and endurance between lead and boulder climbers.

Authors:  Nicolay Stien; Atle Hole Saeterbakken; Espen Hermans; Vegard Albert Vereide; Elias Olsen; Vidar Andersen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2019-09-19       Impact factor: 3.240

7.  The relationship between climbing ability and physiological responses to rock climbing.

Authors:  Jiří Baláš; Michaela Panáčková; Barbora Strejcová; Andrew J Martin; Darryl J Cochrane; Miloš Kaláb; Jan Kodejška; Nick Draper
Journal:  ScientificWorldJournal       Date:  2014-01-27

Review 8.  Rate of force development: physiological and methodological considerations.

Authors:  Nicola A Maffiuletti; Per Aagaard; Anthony J Blazevich; Jonathan Folland; Neale Tillin; Jacques Duchateau
Journal:  Eur J Appl Physiol       Date:  2016-03-03       Impact factor: 3.078

9.  Self-reported chronic injuries in climbing: who gets injured when?

Authors:  Gudmund Grønhaug
Journal:  BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med       Date:  2018-07-17

10.  Effects of ten weeks dynamic or isometric core training on climbing performance among highly trained climbers.

Authors:  Atle Hole Saeterbakken; Einar Loken; Suzanne Scott; Espen Hermans; Vegard Albert Vereide; Vidar Andersen
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-10-10       Impact factor: 3.240

View more
  4 in total

1.  Optimization of an Intermittent Finger Endurance Test for Climbers Regarding Gender and Deviation in Force and Pulling Time.

Authors:  Claudia Augste; Marvin Winkler; Stefan Künzell
Journal:  Front Sports Act Living       Date:  2022-05-23

Review 2.  Tests and Procedures for Measuring Endurance, Strength, and Power in Climbing-A Mini-Review.

Authors:  Nicolay Stien; Atle Hole Saeterbakken; Vidar Andersen
Journal:  Front Sports Act Living       Date:  2022-03-04

3.  The Effects of 10 Weeks Hangboard Training on Climbing Specific Maximal Strength, Explosive Strength, and Finger Endurance.

Authors:  Espen Hermans; Atle H Saeterbakken; Vegard Vereide; Ivar S O Nord; Nicolay Stien; Vidar Andersen
Journal:  Front Sports Act Living       Date:  2022-04-27

4.  The Estimation of Critical Angle in Climbing as a Measure of Maximal Metabolic Steady State.

Authors:  Jiří Baláš; Jan Gajdošík; David Giles; Simon Fryer
Journal:  Front Physiol       Date:  2022-01-05       Impact factor: 4.566

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.