Contact Strength

Research > Research Inventory > Biomechanics: Contact Strength

Upper body rate of force development and maximal strength discriminates performance levels in sport climbing.

Authors: Nicolay Stien, Vegard Albert Vereide, Atle Hole Saeterbakken, Espen Hermans, Matthew Peter Shaw, Vidar Andersen | Year: 2021
Summary/Results: Elite climbers showed higher rate of force development (how quickly force is produced) and peak force compared to advanced and intermediate climbers, especially when RFD was measured using longer, relative time periods (based on time to peak force). Differences were harder to detect using short, fixed time windows (e.g., 50–100 ms), which were less reliable due to individual variability. The test showed high variability in intermediate and advanced climbers, suggesting better usefulness for evaluating elite athletes.
Sample Size and Ability: 57 male lead climbers: 14 elite, 26 advanced, 17 intermediate, based on self-reported redpoint grades from 6b and above.
Training Implications: Coaches may use longer, individualized RFD time frames (e.g., 75–100% of time to peak force) for elite climbers. For sub-elite climbers, general strength development or simpler testing may be more appropriate until RFD becomes limiting.
Open Source: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7997018/
Reference: Stien N, Vereide VA, Saeterbakken AH, Hermans E, Shaw MP, Andersen V. Upper body rate of force development and maximal strength discriminates performance levels in sport climbing. PLoS One. 2021;16(3):e0249353. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0249353

Rate of Force Development and Maximal Force: Reliability and Differences Between Non-Climbers, Skilled, and International Climbers

Authors: Guillaume Levernier, Guillaume Laffaye | Year: 2019
Goal: This study examined differences in finger flexor maximal force (Fmax) and rate of force development (RFD) across climbing ability levels and assessed the reliability of these measurements.
Summary/Results: International climbers showed 22.11% higher Fmax than skilled climbers and 38.58% higher Fmax than non-climbers. RFD200ms and RFD95% were also higher in international climbers, with response ranges of 740–1400 N/s for RFD200ms and 240–423 N/s for RFD95%. These force characteristics reliably distinguished climbing ability levels.
Training Implications: Tracking RFD200ms and RFD95% may help monitor performance improvements. Fast, forceful contractions may be useful to improve grip efficiency, especially for dynamic climbing moves.
Sample Size and Ability: 31 participants total: 12 international climbers, 10 skilled climbers, and 9 non-climbers. International climbers = Higher Elite (≥8c+/5.14c), Skilled climbers = Advanced (7c–8a/5.12a–5.13b), Non-climbers = Below Intermediate (<6a/5.10a).
Reference: Levernier G, Laffaye G. Rate of force development and maximal force: reliability and differences between non-climbers, skilled, and international climbers. Sports Biomechanics. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1080/14763141.2019.1584236

Rate of force development and maximal force: reliability and difference between non-climbers, skilled and international climbers

Authors: Levernier; Laffaye | Year: 2019
Summary/Results: The researchers looked at (a) the reliability of measuring rate of force development (RFD – similar to how fast you can create force) and maximal strength and (b) the difference between two groups of climbers (Group A > 5.13; Group B = 5.12d-5.13b) and one group of non-climbers (<5.10a). The researchers found different sessions to be reliable, especially for the 200ms timeframe, and found RFD distinctions between Group A and Group B at 24.51%, Group B and non-climbers at 34.04%, and Group A and non-climbers at 50.21%. The authors conclude that their protocol is a good differentiator between groups and is also reliable. Beta-Angel note: this study is from the same authors as the experimental “Four weeks of finger grip training…” study also published this year.
Reference: Sports Biomech. 2019 Apr 30:1-12
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31038051

 

 

 

 

Four weeks of finger grip training increases the rate of force development and the maximal force in elite and world-top ranking climbers

Author: G. Levernier and G. Laffaye | Year: 2017
Summary/Results: The researchers measured “Rate of Force Development” (RFD – similar to how fast you can create force) in multiple finger grip positions on a group of French National Bouldering Team members undertaking an RFD training protocol and a national team group not under-taking the protocol.  Measurement occurred at two points: the initial change in force (100-200 milliseconds into the contraction) and a later change in force (95% of maximum).  The protocol approximates maximal sustained grip training on one hand for 6 seconds to failure, using individualized hold depths between 25 mm and 6 mm for both hands and for two grip positions: the sloper grip and the half-crimp.  Training had an impact on the initial change but not on the later change in force, suggesting that it increased the brain-muscle connection but not the underlying structure of the muscle.  On a practical note, the researchers suggest that changes in RFD may be transferable across grip positions, suggesting it may not be necessary to develop RFD in the full-crimp grip position to see gains.  Beta-Angel note: A new effect found from a protocol some climbers may already be familiar with.  Hangboarding for contact strength?!  Stay safe my friends.
Reference: J Strength Cond Res. 2017 Sep 19
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28945641

Correlation between relative peak-, isometric force and RFD and climbing performance

AUTHORS: V. Vereide , J. Kalland , A.K. Solbraa , V. Andersen , A.H. Saeterbakken  |  Year: 2016
SUMMARY/RESULTS: Study authors tested climbing performance against multiple different approaches to measuring the force applied through fingers in twenty male sport climbers divided into four ability groups. The authors found that peak finger force as measured by a force cell, rate of force development over a short period of time, and maximum isometric force over a longer period of time were all significantly correlated with climbing performance.
REFERENCE: 3^rd Rock Climbing Research Congress, Proceedings 2016
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/441095_76117ef587b34539bc29d428a39b366b.pdf

Internal responsiveness of two methods for assessing maximal strength and peak rate of force development in lead rock climbers

AUTHORS: M. Fanchini, L. Bortolan, B. Pellegrini, R. Modena, F. Schena  |  Year: 2014
SUMMARY/RESULTS: The authors explored the use of two different measurement tools (a climbing-specific dynamometer and a handgrip) using two different approaches to measuring the effect of fatigue from a climb (MVC or squeezing really hard, and pRFD or squeezing as hard as possible as fast as possible) on 23 amateur climbers. The authors of the study suggest that pRFD is more appropriate to MVC in investigating fatigue in climbing activity, and recommend using pRFD with a climbing specific dynamometer as opposed to a handgrip.
REFERENCE: 2^nd International Rock Climbing Research Conference, Sep 2014
https://docs.wixstatic.com/ugd/441095_f52f11ccc489434bb70b78ee10563b95.pdf 

Differences in climbing-specific strength between boulder and lead rock climbers

AUTHORS: M Fanchini, F. Violette, FM Impellizzeri, NA Maffiuletti  |  Year: 2013
SUMMARY/RESULTS: Researchers tested finger strength and “rate of force development” (RFD), potentially an indicator of contact strength, in 10 boulderers and 10 lead climbers (Beta-Angel note: while the trad climbers stood by and laughed, drinking beer in their “The Devil is a hangdog”, “Sport Climbing is Neither”, and “Bouldering is Dumb” t-shirts). While both measurements were greater in boulderers than lead climbers, the researchers suggest RFD may be more appropriate than finger strength for investigating muscle function due to the extent of the difference.
REFERENCE: J Strength Cond Res. 2013 Feb;27(2):310-4
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22505133

Muscle fatigue induced by rock climbing lead competition and simulation

AUTHORS: M. Fanchini, FM Impellizzeri, L. Bortolan, F. Schena  |  Year: 2010
SUMMARY/RESULTS: The authors assessed two different approaches to measuring the effect of fatigue from a climb (MVC or squeezing really hard, and pRFD or squeezing as hard as possible as fast as possible) in both 12 competition climbers and 14 non-competition climbers. The authors found that pRFD declined significantly more than MVC and as a result, they suggest that pRFD (peak rate of force development) is an over-looked parameter for the assessment of muscle fatigue in climbers.
REFERENCE: 15^th annual ECSS Congress. 2010, At Antalya/Turkey
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264157004_Muscle_fatigue_induced_by_rock_climbing_lead_competition_and_simulation

Vertical hand force and forearm EMG during a high-step rock-on climbing move with and without added mass

AUTHORS: RL Jensen, PB Watts, JE Lawrence, DM Moss, JM Wagonsomer  |  Year: 2005
SUMMARY/RESULTS: Researchers tested the difference between the amount of force applied to a hold (using a force plate) and the activation of the muscle as measured by electromyography which measures muscle electricity. Researchers found a discrepancy between the force on the hold and the exertion by the measured muscle, suggesting that maximal strength may be more important for the initial contact of the rock rather than for sustaining contact with the rock.
REFERENCE: Jensen, RL, Watts, PB. Vertical hand force and forearm EMG during a High-step Rock-on climbing move with and without added mass. In Proceedings of the XXIII International Symposium of Biomechanics in Sports (Qing Wang, editor) 2005; 466-469
http://commons.nmu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1016&context=facwork_conferencepapers