Climbing-Specific Tests: What They Measure and How to Use Them
Not all finger tests measure the same thing. Research examining energy system contributions during different climbing-specific protocols reveals which tests assess which capacities - essential knowledge for designing effective training.
The Four Test Types Examined
Researchers had climbers perform four distinct finger flexor tests while measuring physiological responses:
1. Maximal Finger Strength (MVC) A single maximum effort grip, held briefly.
2. 30-Second All-Out Test Maximum effort grip maintained for 30 seconds.
3. Continuous Endurance Test Sustained grip at 60% of maximum until failure.
4. Intermittent Endurance Test Repeated contractions (8 seconds on, 2 seconds off) at 60% of maximum until failure.
Energy System Breakdown
Here's what powers each test type:
Maximal Strength Test This reflects pure neuromuscular capacity - your ability to recruit and coordinate finger flexor muscles for peak force output. No significant energy system contribution; it's a snapshot of maximal force.
30-Second All-Out Test
Energy contribution breakdown:
- Phosphocreatine (immediate energy): About 35%
- Glycolytic (anaerobic): About 45%
- Aerobic: About 20%
This test primarily measures anaerobic capacity - your ability to sustain high-intensity efforts.
Continuous Endurance Test
Energy contribution breakdown:
- Phosphocreatine: About 15%
- Glycolytic: About 35%
- Aerobic: About 50%
The aerobic system becomes increasingly important as duration extends. This test reflects your ability to maintain moderate-intensity climbing.
Intermittent Endurance Test
Energy contribution breakdown:
- Phosphocreatine: About 10%
- Glycolytic: About 25%
- Aerobic: About 65%
Despite feeling intense, the rest intervals allow phosphocreatine resynthesis, making this predominantly an aerobic test. This most closely mimics actual climbing patterns.
What This Means for Climbers
For Bouldering Maximum strength and the 30-second all-out test are most relevant. Bouldering demands high peak forces and short bursts of intense effort.
For Lead Climbing The intermittent endurance test best predicts lead climbing performance. Routes involve repeated contractions with brief recoveries on holds.
For Route Reading and Projecting Understanding that different tests measure different capacities helps you identify weaknesses. Poor performance on the all-out test versus the intermittent test suggests different training needs.
Correlation with Climbing Performance
The study found both maximum grip force and all-out average force were equally decisive indices of climbing performance. However, which matters more depends on your discipline.
For lead climbers, the intermittent endurance metrics showed the strongest correlations. For boulderers, peak force and 30-second capacity were more predictive.
How to Interpret Your Own Test Results
If you fatigue quickly on sustained efforts (continuous test) but perform well on brief maximal efforts, you likely need more aerobic conditioning for your forearms.
If you perform well on continuous efforts but struggle with high intensity, you may benefit from maximum strength training and peak force development.
If intermittent performance drops faster than continuous, you may have issues with phosphocreatine resynthesis - indicating potential blood flow or vascular limitations.
Practical Testing Recommendations
For Training Assessment, use the intermittent protocol (8 seconds on, 2 seconds off at 60% max) as it most closely mimics climbing demands.
For Competition Readiness, assess both maximum strength and 30-second capacity for bouldering, or intermittent endurance for lead.
For Progress Tracking, test consistently using the same protocol, grip position, and equipment.
The Role of Recovery
The research highlights that the rest periods in climbing are crucial. Even brief pauses allow significant phosphocreatine resynthesis, which is why the intermittent test is predominantly aerobic despite feeling anaerobic.
This has implications for route tactics. Strategic shake-outs and efficient clipping stances contribute more to success than raw strength alone.
Equipment Considerations
The study used a 23mm deep climbing hold with an open-finger grip position. Test results can vary significantly based on hold depth, grip position, and the specific testing equipment used.
For consistent training assessment, standardize your testing setup and compare results only within the same conditions.
Based on: Maciejczyk M, Michailov ML, Wiecek M, Szymura J, Rokowski R, Szygula Z and Beneke R (2022) Climbing-Specific Exercise Tests: Energy System Contributions and Relationships With Sport Performance. Frontiers in Physiology