Update

FINGER STRENGTH TRAINING

FOR CLIMBING: A BASIC GUIDE
TO HANGBOARDING
Eva López-Rivera

If you want to improve your climbing, you must train your finger strength. There are various
ways to do this. Experienced climber Eva López-Rivera explains what you have to know when
training with the hangboard.

Heruntergeladen von: Martin Ophey. Urheberrechtlich geschützt.

When thinking about climbing the hands often come to FINGER STRENGTH AND INJURY
mind first. The need for finger strength is one of those ­PREVENTION
cases where common sense is backed by the evidence.
Leaving aside the expected bias that climbers may have Finger injuries are the most common rock-climbing related
on this matter, there is an abundance of scientific litera- injuries [18]. This statement, when put into context with
ture on this topic. Should we train this ability specifically? the findings above, makes us wonder whether we can pre-
Wouldn’t it be enough to just climb? If the answer to the vent them and how to do it. Up-to-date knowledge of this
former is affirmative then we face an additional question: type of injuries, including the identification of risk factors,
since grabbing small holds while climbing is risky enough, would be needed. Recent critical review research [7][14]
is it wise to submit them to further loads by using special- [16][17] has found that: a) chronic injuries due to overuse
ized means and methods? Let us try to answer these and are more prevalent among climbers than acute injuries, b)
other issues. risk factors include increasing age, years of climbing expe-
rience, and higher climbing intensity.
FINGER STRENGTH AND CLIMBING
On the other hand, it has been found that the injury rate
­PERFORMANCE can go down between 54–65 % depending on the sport
According to research, maximum grip force is greater in and type of intervention [15]. Among them, strength
climbers versus non-climbers [6], as well as in elite climb- training has proved to be the most accessible, effective
ers with respect to lower-level climbers [2]. A positive re- and efficient [11]. Habitual loading results in long-term
lationship has also been found between maximum grip adaptations [4], as found in experimented climbers’ bones
strength and climbing ability [13] also between increased [8] and connective tissue of the flexor tendons, pulleys and
resistance to fatigue in the finger flexor muscles and climb- joint capsules (collateral ligaments) [19]. In this line, it has
ing performance [5], which led the authors to consider it been suggested that chronically using lower loads is an in-
among the most important predictors of climbing per- jury risk factor [10].
formance.
All things considered, it seems reasonable to say that pro-
In a practical sense, a climbing route’s difficulty depends viding high-quality knowledge about finger training meth-
in part on the shape and depth of its handholds, being fre- odology and periodization could help in preventing fin-
quently one phalanx deep or less. In other instances, holds ger injuries.
that are not that small will still require a high percentage
of maximum finger force to be applied when found on very
HANGBOARDING: WHO IS IT
steep or overhanging routes. There are other circumstanc-
es, as the size of the footholds or the distance between ­RECOMMENDED FOR?
handholds that contribute to explaining the high prehen- Dead-hangs or finger hangs on small edges from a device
sile capabilities needed for climbing. popularly known as a fingerboard or hangboard (▶Fig. 1,
▶Fig. 2) is likely the most popular specific training exercise
used by climbers [20]. In this case it is with good reason,

López-Rivera E. FINGER STRENGTH TRAINING ... Sportphysio 2021; 9: 183–188 | © 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved. 183
 Update

▶Fig. 1 The Transgression training board was devel-

oped by Eva López. The edges have a width of 6–18 mm
and thus enable systematic training of finger strength.
­(Picture by: © E. López)

since a maximum hanging test on an edge from a finger-

board has shown to be a predictor of hand-arm strength
and endurance and therefore climbing performance [2]

Heruntergeladen von: Martin Ophey. Urheberrechtlich geschützt.

[12][13].

Nonetheless, some conditions need to be met before rec-

ommending someone to train their fingers using such an
intensive and specific method:
▪ Having been climbing and training in a system-
atized fashion for more than 2 years. Systematized
▶Fig. 2 Eva López training on the training board she
means training or climbing 2–3 days per week with
developed. (Picture by: © Javipec)
some consistency and order; especially for the last
year, given that the first couple of years it is normal to
have a less organized approach to the sport. This req- by assisted dead-hangs (with rubber bands or pulleys)
uisite also acknowledges the fact that while muscles on deep, rounded holds. In all cases the programs will
can adapt to the sport in a matter of months, other NOT be the ones recommended here.
structures like capsules, cartilages, tendons and lig- ▪ Finger strength level is low, but not ‘very low’. This
aments take years to develop the adaptations [4] can be checked performing a test on a 25 mm edge
needed to safely perform dead-hangs. Based on ex- (one phalanx and a half): someone who can hang for
perience and what the literature says a two to three 15 seconds could start doing dead-hangs as a method
years interval seems reasonable. to develop grip strength. Scoring less than 15 seconds
▪ Having an average technical-tactical repertoire. If would suggest that actual climbing provides enough
someone doesn’t have a lot of spare time for training stimulus at this stage and such analytic methods as
there is a risk that specific finger training will detract dead-hangs are not needed.
from the much-needed technical gains that could be
achieved by climbing in the gym instead, and that are
GUIDELINES FOR AN EFFICIENT
so important in the early years.
▪ Being 16 or older, beyond adolescent growth ­TECHNIQUE
spurts. There is a correlation between intensive fin- There is no such thing as “perfect technique” for every-
ger training, the use of the crimp grip before puber- one. It will depend on both environmental and individu-
ty, and the incidence of severe injuries like epiphyseal al factors such as anthropometry, body posture, training
fractures or early osteoarthritis [3][9]. The most dan- experience and others. There are, however, general sug-
gerous period is the growth spurt that takes place at gestions for a more efficient and safe hanging technique:
age 11–12 in girls and 13–14 in boys, but the risk re- ▪ Width of grip: shoulder width or slightly wider
mains until the growth plates are closed. ▪ Avoiding swinging: standing below the hold or a
▪ Being injury-free. Less severe lesions take at least short distance before it; contacting the hold and
2 months to heal, others can take 6 or more. In truth, moving forward until the body’s center of mass is
once the subacute phase is over and reconditioning right below the hold. Transferring weight from the
work starts, dead-hangs are not out of the question. feet to the hands, engaging the core – especially the
An experienced physical therapist can guide an ath- transverse – and flexing the knees at a comfortable
lete through a routine of analytic exercises followed angle (▶ Fig. 3).

184 López-Rivera E. FINGER STRENGTH TRAINING ... Sportphysio 2021; 9: 183–188 | © 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.
 Heruntergeladen von: Martin Ophey. Urheberrechtlich geschützt.
a b c

▶Fig. 3 To avoid swaying during the dead hang on the training board, first stand so that the body’s centre of gravity is exactly
below the handle. Then tense the core muscles and finally bend the knees as you feel comfortable. (Picture by: © E. López; graphic
implementation: Thieme)

▪ Keeping elbows extended and facing inward: Hang- their performance on just one grip type like the half crimp
ing with flexed elbows is inefficient. Unless your goal or the open hand; others will prefer to develop both abil-
is to work the elbow flexors, you would be needlessly ities in a more balanced way. The latter will need to train
stressing those muscles and joints. longer and will not achieve the same gains in either grip
▪ Not splitting the elbows: Losing external rotation type as the former.
and rising the elbows “chicken wing” style is a biome-
chanical trick to compensate fatigue or a load that is Training load in dead-hangs
too hard. Making a habit of it instead of occasional- It is determined by the combination of volume, intensi-
ly resorting to it can end in lateral tendinopathy, ulnar ty and rest periods between sets for a particular exercise.
compression or neck pain. In this context the volume is defined by the number of
▪ Active hanging: it means engaging specific scapular sets while hanging time and margin before muscular fail-
muscles, chiefly the lower trapezius, so that the pas- ure inform about intensity. Managing the interactions be-
sive structures like joint capsules and ligaments do tween these variables gives rise to several methods, like
not bear most of the weight. Core engagement and the following.
breathing control are important as well.
▪ Head alignment: Briefly looking up at the hands is Maximum hangs method (MaxHangs)
safe but extending the neck for too long might have For the development of maximum strength, mainly
some consequences. through neural adaptations induced by high mechanical
tension. In traditional weight training the overload must
be in accord to the number of repetitions per set. Every
BASIC TRAINING METHODOLOGY
dead-hangs method is subject to those same constraints,
Initial assessment and Goal setting but there are two ways of complying with them:
Before choosing a training methodology and periodization
for hangboarding some individual characteristics need to Maximum added weight (MAW). Intensity is adjusted by
be judged, like training experience, age, past injuries, ma- adding some amount of extra weight (usually attached
terial means or baseline finger strength. The second step to a belt), while the hold size or edge depth are fixed. The
is defining training goals. Someone may want to improve weight will depend on the prescribed hang duration and

López-Rivera E. FINGER STRENGTH TRAINING ... Sportphysio 2021; 9: 183–188 | © 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved. 185
 Update

▶Table 1 Description of methods.

Method Load adjusting Number Number of Hold size Hang duration Margin to Rest between Rest between
variant of sets repetitions [mm] [s] failure (buffer repetitions [s] sets [min]
per set in seconds)

Maximal Mmaximal added 2–8 1 6–20 3–15 1–5 – 3–5

hangs weight (MAW)
(MaxHangs)
Minimum edge 2–8 1 – 3–15 1–5 – 3–5
(MED)
Submaxi- Maximal added 3–8 1 6–20 18–45 almost 0 – 0.5–2
mal hangs weight (MAW)
­(SubHangs) Minimum edge 3–8 1 – 18–45 almost 0 – 0.5–2
(MED)
­Intermittent Maximal added 3–8 4–5 10–20 5–15 almost 0, just at 3–30 1–3
Hangs weight (MAW) the last rep of
­(IntHangs) Minimum edge 3–8 4–5 – 5–15 the last set 3–30 1–3
(MED)

Heruntergeladen von: Martin Ophey. Urheberrechtlich geschützt.

margin before failure. In general, it is advisable to begin ond margin). The first two sets are performed without in-
with an edge depth comparable to one finger pad (18– cident but the 3 rd one ends almost with failure. The load
20 mm) and switch to smaller holds only when gains start for the last set must be thus reduced. By the contrary, if
to plateau or the amount of added weight gets uncom- the margin starts to feel longer than initially planned it is
fortably heavy. a hint to add some extra weight. The strategy for the MED
variant is analogue, tweaking the edge depth as necessary.
Minimum edge depth (MED). It is the size or difficulty of
the hold what is altered, choosing an edge depth (or angle
FINGER TRAINING PLANNING
in the case of a sloper) that allows to observe the chosen
hang duration and margin before failure. How to integrate hangboarding into the
­general training plan?
Intensities for this method are typically high (80 % and In complex sessions involving disparate qualities, dead-
more) and hang durations short, always leaving a buffer hangs are the first exercise after warming up. MaxHangs
before muscular failure. Pauses must allow full recovery will preferentially coincide with other strength contents
(▶Table 1). like bouldering or general conditioning, while IntHangs
and SubHangs will be on endurance days along with on-
Intermittent dead-hangs method (IntHangs) the-wall workouts like intervals, laps or continuous climb-
and Submaximal dead-hangs method ing.
­(SubHangs)
Apart from enhancing muscular endurance, they presum- Except for athletes with an already exceptional level of
ably aid with strength gains through hypertrophy due to finger strength, the order of the methods in a macrocy-
two concurrent factors: mechanical tension and metabol- cle starts with MaxHangs for strength development. Sub-
ic stress [12]. Intensities are around 70–80 % and margin Hangs and IntHangs would come after, to gain endurance
to failure or buffer for each set is negligible. Rest time be- and promote hypertrophy-induced strength gains. For ex-
tween repetitions and sets is incomplete, but enough to ample: 8 weeks of MaxHangs, 2 weeks without fingerboard
maintain the desired level of intensity (▶Table 1). training and then 8 weeks with SubHangs or IntHangs. The
rationale for this sequencing is that improving strength
How to determine optimal loading first allows using higher absolute intensities with the sub-
Load management or autoregulation is the most import- sequent methods (smaller holds or heavier weights), which
ant aspect of training. Loading needs to be estimated not is related to better climbing performance.
just for a training session as a whole but also for each set
and repetition. Achieving the desired effect and avoiding Mixing several methods in the same week might be an in-
injuries depends on this. teresting strategy for experienced and elite athletes.

For instance, during 2-3 warming up sets, someone real-

ized they should use 10 kg as the initial added weight for a
prescribed session of four 10-second sets (leaving a 2-sec-

186 López-Rivera E. FINGER STRENGTH TRAINING ... Sportphysio 2021; 9: 183–188 | © 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Basic guidelines for Hangboarding ▶Table 3 Sample Planning for *medium to high level of
training finger strength and adequate experience with dead-hangs.

It is generally advisable to follow the Minimum Effective week Day 1 Day 2 (48–72 h after
Dose rule [1]. It means picking the easiest method and Day 1)
lightest load that still has a positive effect. Eventually, ex-
perience and level grow through the use and sequencing of 1 3 Sets × MaxHangs 3 Sets × MaxHangs
the different methods and intensities, to the point where MAW × 18 mm × 10 s (3): MAW × 18 mm × 10 s (3):
3 min 3 min
the progression curve starts to flatten and a different ap-
proach is needed, including the higher volumes and inten- 2 4 Sets × MaxHangs 4 Sets × MaxHangs
MAW × 18 mm × 10 s (3): MAW × 18 mm × 10 s (3):
sities shown in ▶Table 1.
3 min 3 min
3 5 Sets × MaxHangs 5 Sets × MaxHangs
For example, a starter in hangboarding will see benefits
MAW × 18 mm × 10 s (3): MAW × 18 mm × 10 s (3):
with the MaxHangs method using just 2 sets of 12 seconds 3 min 3 min
with a margin of 3 or 5 to failure for the MED variant. By 4 5 Sets × MaxHangs 5 Sets × MaxHangs
contrast, an elite climber will likely opt for the MAW Max- MAW × 18 mm × 10 s (3): MAW × 18 mm × 10 s (3):
Hangs method, needing to perform up to 8 sets, hanging 3 min 3 min
just 3 to 5 seconds on an edge between 6–10 mm instead 5 Rest from dead-hangs
the 18– 20 suggested to beginners in this method. 6 3 Sets × MaxHangs 3 Sets × MaxHangs

Heruntergeladen von: Martin Ophey. Urheberrechtlich geschützt.

MED × 10 s (3): 3 min MED × 10 s (3): 3 min
A volume and intensity weekly periodization, based on re- 7 4 Sets × MaxHangs 4 Sets × MaxHangs
search [12][13] is suggested in ▶Table 2 and ▶Table 3. MED × 10 s (3): 3 min MED × 10 s (3): 3 min
8 5 Sets × MaxHangs 5 Sets × MaxHangs
Example of hangboarding training plans for MED × 10 s (3): 3 min MED × 10 s (3): 3 min
climbers with lower through high-level in 9 5 Sets × MaxHangs 5 Sets × MaxHangs
finger strength. MED × 10 s (3): 3 min MED × 10 s (3): 3 min

▶Table 2 Sample Planning for *lower level of finger * Able to hang for more than 40 seconds off an 18-mm
strength and beginners with dead-hangs. edge
MaxHangs = Maximal hangs; MAW = maximum added
week Day 1 Day 2 (48–72 h after weight load adjusting variant; MED = minimal edge load
Day 1) adjusting variant; (3) = 3 seconds margin before failure,
which means the climber should choose an edge depth
that would allow them to hang for 13 seconds to failure,
1 2 Sets × MaxHangs 2 Sets × MaxHangs and actually hang for just 10 seconds.
MED × 12 s (5): 3 min MED × 12 s (5): 3 min

2 3 Sets × MaxHangs 3 Sets × MaxHangs

MED × 12 s (5): 3 min MED × 12 s (5): 3 min
3 4 sets × MaxHangs 4 Sets × MaxHangs
MED × 12 s (5): 3 min MED × 12 s (5): 3 min
Conflict of interest
4 4 Sets × MaxHangs 4 Sets × MaxHangs
MED × 12 s (5): 3 min MED × 12 s (5): 3 min
The author was involved in the development of the climbing
5–6 Rest from dead-hangs
boards mentioned in the article.
7 3 Sets × MaxHangs 3 Sets × MaxHangs
MED × 12 s (3): 3 min MED × 12 s (3): 3 min
8 4 Sets × MaxHangs 4 Sets × MaxHangs
AUTHORS
MED × 12 s (3): 3 min MED × 12 s (3): 3 min
9 4 Sets × MaxHangs 4 Sets × MaxHangs
MED × 12 s (3): 3 min MED × 12 s (3): 3 min Eva López-Rivera

10 5 Sets × MaxHangs 5 Sets × MaxHangs Eva López-Rivera, PhD (“Sports Perfor-

MED × 12 s (3): 3 min MED × 12 s (3): 3 min mance”), has a Bachelor’s degree in Sports
Science. She is a member of the international
rock climbing research group CHIPPER, a
* being able to hang for less than 10 seconds off a 10 mm climbing coach and a consultant for “Sports
edge Performance”. As a climber she achieved a
MaxHangs = Maximal hangs; MED = minimal edge load ad- maximum redpoint grade of 8c + and 8a onsight (= without
justing variant; (5) = leaving 5 seconds in reserve to failure, prior information about the climbing route). She is the
which means the climber should choose an edge depth developer of the Progression and Transgression training
that would allow them to hang for 17 seconds to failure, boards.
and actually hang for just 12 seconds.

López-Rivera E. FINGER STRENGTH TRAINING ... Sportphysio 2021; 9: 183–188 | © 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved. 187
 Update

CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS [10] Hulin BT, Gabbett TJ, Caputi P et al. Low chronic workload
and the acute:chronic workload ratio are more predictive
of injury than between-match recovery time: a two-season
Eva López-Rivera
prospective cohort study in elite rugby league players.
E-Mail: evalopezblog@gmail.com
Br J Sports Med 2016; 50: 1008–1012. doi:10.1136/
bjsports-2015-095364
[11] Lauersen JB, Andersen TE, Andersen LB et al. Strength
References training as superior, dose-dependent and safe prevention
of acute and overuse sports injuries: A systematic review,
qualitative analysis and meta-analysis. Br J Sport Med 2018;
[1] Androulakis-Korakakis P, Fisher JP, Steele J. The minimum
52: 1557–1563. doi:10.1136/bjsports-2018-099078
effective training dose required to increase 1RM strength in
resistance-trained men: A systematic review and meta-­ [12] López-Rivera E, González-Badillo JJ. Comparison of the
analysis. Sport Med 2020; 50: 751–765. doi:10.1007/ effects of three hangboard strength and endurance training
s40279-019-01236-0 programs on grip endurance in sport climbers. J Hum Kinet
2019; 66: 183–193. doi:10.2478/hukin-2018-0057
[2] Baláš J, Pecha O, J. Martin A et al. Hand-arm strength and
­endurance as predictors of climbing performance. Eur J [13] López-Rivera E, González-Badillo JJ. The effects of two max-
Sport Sci 2012; 12: 16–25 imum grip strength training methods using the same effort
duration and different edge depth on grip endurance in elite
[3] Bärtschi N, Scheibler A, Schweizer A. Symptomatic epi­
climbers. Sport Technol 2012; 5: 1–11
physeal sprains and stress fractures of the finger phalanges
in adolescent sport climbers. Hand Surg Rehabil 2019; 38: [14] Lum ZC, Park L. Rock climbing injuries and time to return
251–256. doi:10.1016/j.hansur.2019.05.003 to sport in the recreational climber. J Orthop 2019; 16:
361–363. doi:10.1016/j.jor.2019.04.001

Heruntergeladen von: Martin Ophey. Urheberrechtlich geschützt.

[4] Couppé C, Kongsgaard M, Aagaard P et al. Habitual loading
results in tendon hypertrophy and increased stiffness of [15] Parkkari J, Kujala UM, Kannus P. Is it possible to prevent
the human patellar tendon. J Appl Physiol 2008; 105(3): sports injuries? Review of controlled clinical trials and recom-
805–810 mendations for future work. Sport Med 2001; 31: 985–995.
doi:311403 [pii]
[5] Fryer S, Stoner L, Stone K et al. Forearm muscle oxidative
capacity index predicts sport rock-climbing performance. [16] Pozzi A, Pivato G, Pegoli L. Hand injury in rock climbing:
Eur J Appl Physiol 2016; 116: 1479–1484. doi:10.1007/ Literature review. J Hand Surg Asian-Pacific Vol 2016; 21:
s00421-016-3403-1 13–17. doi:10.1142/S2424835516400038

[6] Grant S, Shields C, Fitzpatrick V et al. Climbing-specific finger [17] Schöffl V, Popp D, Küpper T et al. Injury trends in rock
endurance: A comparative study of intermediate rock climb- climbers: Evaluation of a case series of 911 injuries between
ers, rowers and aerobically trained individuals. J Sports Sci 2009 and 2012. Wilderness Environ Med 2015; 26: 62–67.
2003; 21: 621–630. doi:10.1080/0264041031000101953 doi:10.1016/j.wem.2014.08.013

[7] Grønhaug G, Norberg M. First overview on chronic injuries in [18] Schweizer A. Sport climbing from a medical point of
sport climbing: Proposal for a change in reporting of injuries view. Swiss Med Wkly 2012; 142: 1–9. doi:10.4414/
in climbing. BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med 2016; 2: e000083. smw.2012.13688
doi:10.1136/bmjsem-2015-000083 [19] Schreiber T, Philippe A, Burkhardt S et al. Connective tissue
[8] Hahn F, Erschbaumer M, Allenspach P et al. Physiological adaptations in the fingers of performance sport climbers.
bone responses in the fingers after more than 10 years of Eur J Sport Sci 2015; 1391: 1–7. doi:10.1080/17461391.20
high-level sport climbing: Analysis of cortical parameters. 15.1048747
Wilderness Environ Med 2012; 23: 31–36. doi:10.1016/j. [20] Watts PB. Physiology of difficult rock climbing. Eur J Appl
wem.2011.12.006 Physiol 2004; 91: 361–372. doi:10.1007/s00421-003-1036-7
[9] Hochholzer T, Schöffl VR. Epiphyseal fractures of the finger
middle joints in young sport climbers. Wilderness Environ
Med 2005; 16: 139–142

188 López-Rivera E. FINGER STRENGTH TRAINING ... Sportphysio 2021; 9: 183–188 | © 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.