Does Your Strength Affect How Good Your Technique Is? (Not What We Expected) 

Sooo, are you team Strength Matters or Technique Matters? P.S. use code ‘HOOPER15’ for 15% Off All Craft Chalk Buckets and Bags from Rúngne! rungne.info/hoopersbeta

It takes concentration to squeeze as hard as you can. For example, try and measure your grip strength while focusing on it and try again while counting up the Fibonacci sequence. You will 100% grip harder when you are paying attention to that action alone. If you have to squeeze close to your limit to keep a grip, you'll just have less attention to spare on getting the technique just right. Similar thing with pump... your decision making on the wall degrades when you are pumped because you have to focus on squeezing more as your grip weakens.

Small shoutout to Aleena, she was hilarious during this entire video! great job

For us, strength and technique feed off of each other. Gains of technique make us feel "stronger" on the wall and gains in strength (especially in regards to body tension... posterior chain and core) make technique easier to perform. And being stronger lets us climb more and be more durable. Strength training for us is very worth sacrificing a little climbing time for. Love your videos!

It would be fun to see a comparison when strength is “controlled” between different climbers with different skill levels or styles. For example, it can be done by adding weight until climbers in comparison can do the same number of pull ups or hangboard durations, and now asking them to climb with that respective weight to see their technique differences in climbing. Of course because of weight distribution and the variety of strength applied in climbing, strength can never be actually controlled. Still it will be fun to see what happened after pulling/finger strengths are controlled.

I think it is very dependent on the terrain. Slab to slightly overhanging is definitely technique over strength. But as it gets steeper, a base level of strength is going to start becoming more important than just technique. I think strength gains do diminish faster which is why the stronger climber says technique over strength and the weaker climber says strength over technique.

New experiment/ video idea to try to answer the strength technique question: Have a strong and a weak climber. Add weight to the strong climber to have him max out at the same max hang time or max number of pull ups. Thus, they should now be similar in relative strength. Next have them try some boulder problems: Scenario a) The strong climber still performs better -> technique matters more Scenario b) The strong climber performs equal or worse -> strength matters more Next do this for multiple pairs to get some data -> have fun -> have a beverage -> look at the data -> snort some mag dust -> put on sunglasses -> present results -> conclude -> agree that this was a reasonable suggestion (please do the video exactly like this).

As already covered its pretty nuanced, but overall I think there is a Baseline of strength and technique needed. Technique and strength are something that augments and facilitates its counterpart. The more strength you have, the less strength you need, the more technique you have the less strength you need. To make it more concrete, you can see any climb/route as 'topable' within a range of strength and technique profiles, each with a minimum of each needed. Any additional strength or technique will lessen the burden on the counterpart. This was showcased really well with Jason and Aleena, Jason was pretty unable to do anything on the comp styled purple, since he didnt meet the minimum required technique to be able to top it. Even with abundant strength its 'impossible' in his current form. The opposite for Aleena, she lacked the minimum requirement to start the white climb where regardless of the technique, she wouldnt be able to get up. I do think that early on in your climbing, you hit a strength wall much quicker than you do a technique one. As it is such a specialized sport, the minimum required strength goes up waayy quicker as you go up grades than for technique. So it makes sense that people tend to pinpoint that as the mayor reason for failure more quickly, as its pretty much learned behavior. On the flipside its also as Ross mentioned, a reason why people just go all out for strength instead of trying to search for more technique gains instead.

I love the format of this video! The side by side comparisons are really well edited

I remember Adam Ondra saying in his video that “Technique is just a hidden power” 😄

Also worth pointing out the difference between technique practice and technique discovery. If you’re just training by yourself it can be hard to come with a new technique to practice. Very easy climbs don’t tend to include new techniques to learn. This is where limit climbing can be very valuable. Once you’ve realized “I need to get better at back flags” on a hard climb then you can go to the easy stuff and practice it there.

Both matter. 13 years ago I got hit by a car and lost most of my upper body strength because of broken bones I could use my arms for months. When my bones have healed I could touch my thumb with my middle finger while wrapping that hand around my left upper arm. I was struggling with FB2. After a few weeks I was able to climb several FB5a but I still have not been able to do a single pull up. Before the accident I relied to much on my strength. My technique improved a lot. Last year I injured my hand and suffered several months from post covid. Now I fall of all the time. I do movements that are right and I used to do them but my hands open up if I don't have a big jug to hold on or I'm not able to pull my weight.

Well you guys talked about how practicing technique far below one's strength limit is important. So clearly having more strength will give you more options/chances to practice techniques. Being stronger opens up more techniques as options, and then you have to practice them if you want to apply them to progress.

The hip thing at 14:00 blew my mind.

@Ross-Fulkerson can't wait for online coaching to drop. I'm in the EU so clinics aren't an option, but this video was mad inspiring

Love this channel so much! As a shy relatively new gym climber who doesn't like to bother other climber groups I'm picking up a lot. Can finally climb 5.11 and the occasional v5 lol! The progress made is so addicting

This was some real high quality content! Really useful experiment, thanks for this👍🏼

Really interesting video Jason, and I think this would be demonstrated even more with climbing where body position and momentum generation is key. I spent a few months in Japan and climbed at Bpump Ogi a lot, and other than a few very tiny crimpy climbs where physical strength was the limit I mostly failed because I was not good enough at getting in the right body positions or coordinating movement. I was "strong" enough for most climbs, but not "skilled" enough. Like Ross said, it depends a bit on the setting style. I think when gyms set even difficult problems with some good holds on them, being very strong allows bad technique to creep in, whereas tricky problems without good holds/stable positions that demand specific body positioning require technique and might spit off a much stronger climber. Slopers, bad pinches, techy slab and coordination movements are so technical! I really changed my mind on strength vs technique in the last year.

I think this video really covers this nicely. Yes, at some point you need a certain level of strength in order to be able to, for example, hold a hard pinch or generate the power for a big reach or dyno. But at the same time, well applied technique is *always* about making climbing easier - i.e. reducing the strength needed to do a thing. So it's always a bit of both, and either can enable the other to be improved, but a lack of either can also make a thing impossible in certain situations. Which, I think, is why so many coaches swear to "climb as much as you can" as the baseline for training - 'cause climbing trains both strength and technique to some extent. But at the same time there's obvious utility to specifically addressing weaknesses or deficiencies where they crop up - whether that is doing some strength training or drilling a specific technique.

Madrock shoes taking over the climbing scene, those drones looking fresh and functional aF ! Came 4 the skits stayed 4 the science

I also think that what you saw is quite visible in the gym. Small crimps in overhangs is very bodyweight-dependant wheras slabs and vertical climbing, not as much (which is reasonable, as everyone can bear their own weight on their toes (we do it all the time) but not so much on our fingers)

Its such a complex topic, even if I do feel that the conclusions are right, there is a lot of think we have to keep in mind with that experiment. First, adding weight change the bodyweight distribution and affect how we feel when climbing (people who do kinda hard multipitch with a backpack know what I mean). So adding weight does affect more than just strenght level. Because they do climb the same climb multiple time, the learn each time, making it easier even with weight. The thing that make me a member of team strength matter its that you can't train technics if you can't hold the holds and your progression is directly linked to that. Most lighter climbers (who doesn't have a fear factor) will progress a lot quicker thru grades because they are stronger (mostly finger) than heavier climbers. Some of them will develop technics fast because they like it and other will rely on their strength until they hit a plateau. In the consideration you need a base level of strength to start learning, and being strong enough can make invisible the physical part of some boulder problem. Now that I'm strong enough I tend to forget how hard it is to crimp for the finger. When I crimp I just focus on the body positioning to help me get to the next hold. In the end that is that, we just can try our best to get better and stronger, because both are important. Aleena personality is the MVP of this video and as an heavier climber, team strong matter all the way.

As a 250 lb climber, technique is KING. If I i didnt use technique, I wouldn't be able to climb almost anything...

I noticed this recently, normally, i warm up on some easy climbs, which i can practically throw myself up, but i tired myself out throughout the session, and then went back to some I'd easily sent, and really had to work on positioning, technique, etc.

Definitely wouldn't say chase grades, but I think regularly trying things that you think are just outside your limit is great. With climbs at like my 70% mark, I feel like even when they are "not my style" I can sort of force my climbing style into it and then not actually work on what I wanted to work on. Whereas things at my limit or just past it, I really have to dial it in to be able to stick the move. I think this goes maybe doubly true for longer boulder problems where each move might be relatively doable, but having to do more of them in sequence then I'm used to forces me to be more efficient on each move.

I really loved this video! I think it really showed that the amount of strength and technique relative to each other really depends on many aspects of the climb/climber. Coordination run and jump boulders are on one end requiring more technique, whereas overhanging hard crimp lines are probably at the other end requiring more strength. It is also important to note what we mean specifically by strength and technique. Crimp strength and lock off strength, though they affect one another, are very different. Being able to coordinate jumpy dynos is very different from throwing a heel hook above your head. In general, I don't think it's possible to completely separate strength and technique. I would define technique as the ability to coordinate the timing and degree of activation of different muscles in concert with one another. And of course, as you raise the amount of force muscles can apply, the more you raise your ceiling of possible learned techniques. Having more strength doesn't automatically give you more technique, but gives you a larger pool of techniques to learn from. This doesn't even take into account body morphology, flexibility/mobility(ROM and strength at/near end ROM), neuromuscular connections, psychology, etc. And of course this is why I love climbing. There are so many vastly different areas to improve in and so many ways those areas interact with each other I can never get bored :D

Would have been interesting to see this same experiment with someone who is strong, but just not climbing specific kind of strong. Obviously grip and finger strength specifically play a huge role in climbing, and those are the adaptations you rarely get outside of climbing. Also lots of climbers out there who are strong in the climbing sense, but quite frail in terms of general athleticism. Comparing the role of strength stemming from general athleticism versus climbing specific strength would be an interesting iteration on this concept.

I've tried this test before myself, and it's quite interesting. The difficulty of making the test "perfect" is that the weight vest is not centered perfectly on your center of mass like it would be if you just gained the weight. I found this makes certain types of climbing much more difficult, like when you cut feet and go dyno for a hold, since holding the swing with added weight, but also non centered mass will feel much harder. I found when I did this that dynamic overhangs would be the hardest this way. There's some point where it becomes inefficient to cut your feet and go dynamically because you can't hold the hold anymore at that weight, but otherwise it would have been more efficient to cut. From my perspective, generally speaking, higher strength just gives you more options and margin for error.

Ross' style and technique is kind of jaw dropping. He has such amazing precision with those dynamic moves!!

Strength and technique are in a positive feedback loop. The Strength goes up, technique is learned till you dont have the strength to do the technique, strength goes up again, technique is learned, repeat. Theyre both important. Technique is important to know WHAT to do, strength is important to be ABLE to do the moves. The reason pros focus on technique and amateurs on strength is because climbing takes an ungodly amount of physical strength to actually do, therefore the less experienced of a climber you are the less strength you have built up, and need to work on strength first, while if you're somewhat of a good climber its BECAUSE you developed the strength necessary to do moves- and now you're focusing your effort on learning what to do.

I've been going to a climbign gym now for about 3 months or so a little more conssitently for a month or so; but with plenty of past active experience in being gym, crossfit, running, calisthenics and sports and currently weigh 103kg - definitely enjoyed this video for insights on the importance of technique. I wonder if open comps would ever have weight categories.

Very interesting video ! A slight caveat that I have is that the setup used, with the repetitions of a boulder with incrementally higher weight means that the technique on the specific moves will majorly improve between repetitions and thus makes it a bit harder to see in which aspects strength and technique matters. A potentially better way to show the importance of one or the other would be to discover new boulders at flash level with the weights on ; the number of attempts and the physical effort put through the climb could show if either strength/technique is limiting for the climber. Still though I think this experiment really shows how techniques allows you to climb efficiently but strength allows you better quality and amounts of attempts

I like that as an idea for training. Take a climb which requires 5 or so attempts to send, and then once sent progressively start adding more weight.

Dear Sir, I think 4 components impact one's climbing ability: strength, technique, flexibility, and meta (lifestyle, mindset, fatigue management etc). They are all connected, and how good you can climb is eventually limited by these components. Also, depending on the problem and climb environment itself, these different components are more or less important for that specific climb. And so, rather than trying to compare raw strength, or awkwardly define what technique really is, one should instead review their own climbing limiters and focus on the best cost-performance areas to improve. This being said, as always it is great for this channel to have a scientific approach to answer any questions, even if the answer is simple common sense.

Jason's answer just proves he is a physical therapist

Ross kept saying that you should train technique on easy climbs, but then saying that added weight forced him to use better technique. My (limited) experience has been that, on easy climbs, I can get away with poor technique without even realizing it, potentially creating bad habits. It's when projecting at a very challenging (but still achievable) level, that I feel I learn better technique.

50/50! with a different spectrum depending on the climbs. What an interesting sport.

This says more about the importance of losing excess weight than it does about technique. It would be neat to see each climbers finger strength to bodyweight ratio be adjusted by adding weight and then climb the same route. If technique is most important factor Ross should almost always win.

I generally hate content-creator ads in videos but the mag dust commercial was actually really funny. i hope magnus gives you extra revenue for the quality of your ad.

Given that climbing performance is not strength or technique but strength times technique, the question what is more important depends on where there is the most variance. If everyone is strong in your hypothetical gym, everyone would say: obviously, it is all about technique! If everyone has the same level of technique in your hypothetical gym, everyone would say: obviously, it is all about strength! This may differ a whole lot between groups of climbers, so I don't think there is a definitive answer. I think the more interesting question is which aspect gives you the easiest mid-term improvement or the most amount of joy. (I think the level of enjoyment is more important than the assigned grade of the boulder).

Be strong enough to apply the proper technique and apply the proper technique to become stronger 😊

@15:50 I think that shows how important strength is. He had so much strength left in reserve that even when missing both his hand and foot he could still hold on, manage to adjust and finish the boulder. Someone with less strength can finish the boulder. But it leaves room for mistakes

I think you got @emilabrahamsson-level on that ad! (failed tag, I know!) (Emil, we miss your ads!) I think one thing that stuck out was that how adding weight enforced better (but sometimes different, not better) technique. In the last case it even kind of changed the style of how Ross climbed. So how do you grade this method of climbing as a technique-training tool?

Good technique will allow you to use less of your endurance capacity and improve overall training. This doesn't change the fact that an overhanging crimp still needs a fair amount of strength to be held. Also, there are always sequences at both ends of the spectrum. In those situations it is either all technique or all strength. This is what makes climbing so much fun. A ton of nuances.

Strength affects technique but it can be either positively or negatively. Sometimes you need a baseline level of strength to be able to pull off a technique. An obvious example of this is hanging off a hang board, there is next to no technique involved but if you don't have the finger strength you won't be able to do it. Sometimes being stronger allows you to power through a move with poor technique whereas if you are weaker you will try to make up for that with better technique (as you noted when adding weight).

I am getting the feeling that absolute weight matters the most; not relative strength. When the holds are getting so small that you only have some single square cm to hold onto, then it seems you get are running into skin or connective tissue limitations, which seem orthogonal from muscle strength.

Very interesting test I have been climbing for a while but i'm very weak compared to my bodyweight (can do one strict pullup on a good day). I have noticed that i have to rely much more on hip positioning that most of my peers.

I do use 10 lbs of weights, but I use them for practicing technique on v0, so I can apply technique/strength to higher grades without the weights. The weights don't really teach you anything until your body is more horizontal than vertical, though. I also do laps on the auto-belay ranked 5.6 and although my body is vertical most of the time, doing 10 to 15 laps does exagerate the additional weight after about lap 5.

I think the main impact of our differences in strength is the subtle change to training habits. Just look around on a busy day in your gym who sits in front of the roof and who sits in front of the slab. - If you are very strong, you don't train properly at times because you bulldoze through lower grades. You learn to skip past tricky moves with dynamic movement or sheer force of will, so you skip a learning experience and make it more of a conditioning exercise. On the other hand, your strength may help you to go face first into any challenge. You have all the opportunities to become even stronger because you can in theory execute all movement patterns cleanly. Thereby, as soon as you start to actually focus on technique, you can make lots of progress quickly. So all in all I think being strong is a huge advantage, if you learn how to use it. - If you are very weak, you never learn certain movements because you are unable to do them cleanly. I see some climbers to avoid the roof entirely, so they never become much stronger. I think one reason is that they cannot even get into the positions that are most comfortable. You may then overly rely on mobility and skip a lot of burly boulders. On the other hand, you may be miles ahead at more technical task such as route reading or footwork. Thereby, you should be able to unlock really hard stuff as soon as you explicitly do physical training, because you only have to multiply what you are already doing. Sometimes, weaker climbers do need a confidence boost as well, though, to go for more physical stuff. Being weak seems to correlate with avoidant behavior and fear of falling (e.g. on dynos). In the end, my take-away is: focus on your weaknesses a lot. I think I already heard it from every coach: do more work on your weakness than your strength. Some call it 60:40 rule, some 70:30 rule. I for myself have a golden rule: if I do not like a boulder because it seems frustrating, I force myself to work on it for at least a few tries. In the end, it makes me appreciate almost any style if it is set well. I am always exceeding my expectations on the climbs I dislike at first sight.

Same answer as always: it depends on the climber and on the climb. Differente routes/problems will reward different aspects of skill, whether that be strength or technique. Both are important if you want to progress to harder stuff. So don't just do strength training or technique drills but do both, in my experience in climbing versatility is king.

Seems like a great way to test this question would be to have a pro climber such as Ross add enough weight to make them climb at the same strength/weight ratio as an intermediate climber, and have them try the same climbs. To see if the difference in technical ability with equivalent strength

I think especially for beginner climbers lack of hand strength can really impact technique.. leaning out more for smearing for example.

Probably important thing to note and difficult thing to account for, but when trying with a lot of heavy weight it's the Nth time that Ross has tried the climb, he's nailed the execution multiple times, he knows what the body positions feel like. If you've got less of a strength "surplus", this isn't going to be at all possible unless you have some amazing power spotters

I've been doing an excercise for a few years now that touches on this, and also gives you a cardio workout. challenge your friends to do the same easy boulder, over and over for 2 or 3 minutes and set a timer. Most reps wins. As you get more tired, but have more repeats, you dial in your beta, and then as you get progressivly weaker, you have to get progressivly more efficient at the climb.

I think the thing missing from this discussion is actually defining what “technique” means. Ross seams to think that technique is mostly about efficiency and fluidity which makes sense for him as a comp climber. However for me as an outdoor boulder technique is more about figuring out how to make it limit move possible. Practicing easy moves doesn’t translate very well to limit moves just like limit moves won’t necessarily make you more efficient.

Great video , at the same time , we learn a lot of technique from hard climb because when you are at your physical limit , you are force to use almost perfect technique to do the climb. Would you agree?

4:30 @Ross-Fulkerson would be interesting to hear more about that

@HoopersBeta. Does anyone know what weight belt that was used in this episode? Would love to get one for home training. Thanks in advance! 🙏🏼

If you try other sports that have a higher skill reliance (in relation to strength), ie skateboarding, golf, basketball, just a few off the top of my head, it becomes so much more apparent how that feeling of something being physically impossible can be overcome with skill gains. In those sports, gaining strength definitely helps just like in climbing, especially at the higher levels, but at the beginning - intermediate levels you are building the movement basics and habits that will always play a role in your general movement patterns. The notion of gaining strength to master leveling out your ollie, or consistent ball striking (golf), or just shooting consistently (basketball) is kind of silly, and obviously so. It takes years just to get those 'basic' skills down in those sports. I have rarely if ever heard someone blaming poor fundamentals on a lack of strength in those sports, but hear it often in climbing and in situations where, if they just understood that their fundamental skillset is lacking, they could change the feeling completely. For example, when you use momentum like Ross does it looks easy and it often can feel somewhat easy if your applying that skill correctly. For Jason, no offense, but some of the climbs he did looked pretty effortful in contrast...I like what Ross said about repeating climbs many times. I think the physicality of climbing often distracts us from what can be accomplished through skill gains and repetition of moves with the intention of maximizing efficiency. I had a 7 in the gym the other day that I intended to use for 4 x 4s but was pretty triggered when it felt kind of limit on my initial send. I spent some time learning the moves, addressed a few skill shortcomings, and a few days later when I returned to do 4x4s, the 4th rep felt easier than the initially send despite being super pumped. I think this is a great way to realize how much easier you could make the feel. You wouldn't hit a single solid golf shot or make a single 3 pointer and move on, claiming competence in the skill. Why do we do this in climbing? Of course climbing has an enormous strength component and style of climb matters a lot, but there can be a world of difference in climbing ability between two people of somewhat equal strengths. Personally, at the beginning, I think strength training is best applied towards unique physical shortcomings. In my case I had very weak hips, shoulders and scapula. Constantly had shoulders popping out, constantly had hip flexor strains and couldn't move my hips to access the ROM needed to execute moves. In my first few years of climbing I shifted strength training to target those specific weakness instead of being a powerhouse crimper, front lever machine, 1 arm pull up god, and saw a much greater application to climbing. Mainly because a lot of pretty basic skills were out of my reach.

It depends on the climb. For some climbs it doesn't matter how good your technique is, if you're just not strong enough you still won't be able to do it. For others, good technique can overcome lack of strength

Why is this content so high quality??

Techniques matters more, it takes much longer to learn to proper techniques then strenght. Plus the nature of climbing is moving between holds not pulling up on holds 😁 i have to mention i’m 45 and my climbing teacher was a old grey haired german who climbed lots in the verdon in the 80’s he used to say, it should look nice for the people watching too and, just look for the footholds the handholds are pretty obvious and he refused to pull up always found a feet and a way to stand up. Only from 6c bouldergrade in bleau he started giving more force thats v 6? Dunno for sure

Both matter. No technique, you don´t get up. No strength, you don´t get up. I´d make a point for putting effort into strength because the stronger you are, the more movement variety there is below your strength cap and the more opportunities to learn present themselves.

As a shorter, "thiccer" climber, I find that the strength and technique feed into each other. If you know how to do something well, then having the extra strength gives you a better margin for error. However, more of the advance techniques definitely require much more strength. And being genetically "blursed", I put effort into both so that I can enjoy challenging myself, pushing my limits, to become a better climber overall. This is good for bouldering! However, I also prefer to throw in rope climbing (lead, top-rope) to improve my endurance and efficiency, which also feed into strength and technique as well.

It would be interesting to see Ross climb an easy climb loaded to a similar percentage of max strength as Aleena's strength/weight (e.g. scale Ross's max hang weight by aleena's body weight / max hang weight)

i like both!

Everyone in the comments saying you can't get good at technique without strength, the takeaway that I got from this was the opposite, every one of them made their technique better the more weight they had. They weren't able to climb as well, obviously, but their technique itself got better. And it makes sense. The whole thing Ross is saying is how the technique means you don't have to pull as hard. So why would you need to be stronger to pull less hard? Maybe people are thinking that like, you need a certain amount of strength to do like, a pinch move, for example, so you can't practice that "technique" until you're strong enough. But a type of move is not technique. Being able to do a pinch is not technique. Technique is how you do things not what you do. You do need a certain amount of (relative) strength to do an overhang pinch, sure, and you can't practice it without that minimum strength, but you don't need any more strength to do the move that you are already able to do... with better technique. In fact, from this video, it looks like you're better off getting weaker (wearing weight) if you want to work on your technique.

I'm not the first person to suggest so, but I think there is a lot to be considered here in terms of confounding factors. Ideally, in science, we want to control all variables except for one. In this idea, can we can control strength, or control technique? Probably not. But I think we could find people that have similar strength abilities (pull-ups, deadlifts, etc) but different time-experiences with climbing, or climbers at similar competitive levels but different strength metrics (I think Lattice has done this to an extent already?).

🗽Both, technique and strength,...and mobility. I focus more on technique, because strength is coming automatically. .

I feel like repetition played a role in affecting technique here as well.

great video! have always thought that strength is a foundation for technique, it's hard to do some things without the required strength in general. on a side note, does anyone know what pants ross is wearing?? they look sick

So we can train with a weight belt and vest, and then take them off for maximal gains?

Whoa did I see a _scorpion_ by Jason at 11:18!!! :)

I would have loved a few words on finger strength, as I feel that there it matters a lot more. If i cannot hold on to the hold even with as much weight taken off by my feet as possible, it just won't work. Of course no climb works exactly like that, but if i cant hold the smallest edge on a hangboard no one is going to tell me "oh but with better technique you could totally hang it".

I climbed through my pregnancy and my technique has improved a lot. I'm trusting my feet and balance so much more now. You guys all should try getting pregnant 😂 Gain lots of weight in inconvenient places and lose abs at the same time. It's wonderful, I promise!

Can't believe you got that Birkenstock sponsorhip, great ad!

I guess for pro climbers it shows that extra bodyweight doesn't impact performance that much. Also, this was straight dead mass added. If it were muscle mass added, then it'll improve performance somewhat. Hopefully this is an example to strive for more healthier bodyweight.

hi there, what kind of vest is that? I've gotten the 40, but it seems too bulkier than yours. thanks

Both things matter but on the lower grades V0-V4 basic technique for beginners more important than strength. On the grades V5-V7 technique and strength are equivalent, and on the highest grades strength on the first place because you can’t learn advanced technique if you are struggling keep your hands on the holds.

Depends on the strength or the technique but as someone who came from a very strong background (minus fingers) I'm finding I've hit a stop in my ability because of technique LONG before my strength is an issue

I've never seen a highly proficient climber that wasn't strong. An individual's power to weight ratio is extremely important to even begin to learn and implement efficient climbing technique.

Calisthenics is the best work-out for any climber Lifting weights won't help that much until you reach a really high level

From what I've seen as a beginner climber watching my friends and myself progress, it seems that it's possible to advance with either one, acquiring just the little something you gain just from climbing. You'll hit a plateau eventually which is hard to pass without training your weakness, be it technique or strength. After a certain grade you can't get away with only one aspect of climbing anymore. As beginners, we often fall into a trap when we think we're not strong enough, but better technique would require less strength. It's an entertaining video, but I'm not quite sure what I'll take away. Seems obvious that weight would matter less on a slab than on an overhang or small crimps? What did I miss?

That explosive guy moves on 7A like i do on 6A when I'm trying to annoy my girlfriend. It's great.

Of course strength changes technique. Just compare how you climb at the start of a long session vs how you climb at the end. You will be doing very different movements.

It's crazy how big a difference 6-7% body weight made

“Technique is no substitute for power.”

their prices make it easy to keep coming back.

You can't learn techniques if you don't have enough strength. If you struggle to hold good luck leaning the good technique

Hey Jason, you are talking about strength and technique but seems like you are leaving power completely out of your equation. Ross doing very dynamic moves that are easier strength wise require a great deal of power and speed. Would love if you do a video considering this as a third factor as well.

Just a sidenote: I saw the chalk block and thought "wait, how's he gonna advertise for any brand other than rugne, isn't it like completely forbidden nowadays??" and then... a-ha there you go

To the important question, what pants are you wearing, @Ross-Fulkerson? Even though the ending was anticlimactic, I enjoyed the journey to that conclusion.

Eyy, Ross is one my favorite dudes

@12:34 I am sorry? what the hell is that beta? That body control is crazy to me

Send = f(Skill, Strength, Setting, Skin)

On climb 4 Aleena was doing the first move always static and Jason and Ross ended up doing it dynamic this is not a good comparison unless Aleena would try it dynamic so the way it was done in the video the results are a bit skewed.

The problem is: you add dead weight. You should try this in a gravity chamber.

I'm at 102kg. Obviously heavy to force myself towards good technique. Obviously...

I feel that strength ALLOWS technique to come into play. Not sure if the problems you selected were a good fit. Dynamic, “new school” problems which involve acceleration and deceleration are going to be highly sensitive to *weight*, not strength.

Aleena looks eerily like Dan. Are they siblings lol