Research Roundup: Hangboard Training Intensities
Effects of Different Hangboard Training Intensities on Finger Grip Strength, Stamina, and Endurance
Marine Devise, Clément Lechaptois, Eric Berton and Laurent Vigouroux*
Today we will be reviewing a paper: Effects of Different Hangboard Training Intensities on Finger Grip Strength, Stamina, and Endurance (https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35498522/)
Before we dive in, it's important to note that research on finger training is in its infant phases. If you look at the papers out there, there is little consistency in edge size, hang time, and assessment methods.
Hopefully as the research continues to develop, the methods can become a bit more standardized so that different studies can be compared. So, keep in mind that this is just one paper.
Alright, let's get to it!
Purpose
The purpose of the study was to test the effects of three different intensity hangboard training protocols on three different physiological adaptations. The intensities assigned were maximal, high-submaximal, and low-submaximal and the adaptations tested were maximal finger strength, stamina, and endurance.
They hypothesized different adaptation outcomes based on the intensity protocol used.
Methods
54 climbers were split into four different groups - control (no specific training) and the three different training protocols.
The climbers were assessed before and after the training protocols using a specialized hangboard called the SmartBoard. This board has strain gauges so that force can be measured in real-time. The climbers used this same hangboard for their training.
Three assessments were performed corresponding with each of the three physiological adaptations.
The maximal strength test consisted of a maximum force exertion, one hand at a time, on a 12mm edge for 6 seconds. This results of this test are noted as MFSi - the initial maximal finger strength.
The stamina (a.k.a. power endurance) and endurance tests consisted of a 10 seconds on, 6 seconds off intermittent protocol at an intensity of 80% MFSi for a total of 24 repetitions (note that this is over 6 minutes of effort!), also on a 12mm edge.
These 24 reps were broken down into stamina and endurance.
Stamina was determined as how many reps they were able to maintain the 80% intensity for. Endurance was determined as how much force they could continue to exert when fatigued.
Devise et al., 2022
After the initial assessment, the groups performed their assigned intensity protocols twice per week for four weeks.
The protocols were named F100 (maximal), F80 (high sub-maximal), F60 (low sub-maximal).
The F60 protocol used an intensity of 60% MFSi for 10 seconds on, 6 seconds on for 24 reps (two handed). They did this for 2 total sets with a 6 minute rest between sets.
The F80 protocol used an intensity of 80% MFSi for 10 seconds on, 6 seconds on for 12 reps max or until their force dropped below 70% MFSi (two handed). They did this for 3 total sets with an 8 minute rest between sets.
The F100 protocol asked climbers to exert maximum force one hand at a time for 6 seconds. They performed 6 hangs total with each hand with 3 minute rests between hangs. Two total sets were performed with a 5 minute rest between sets.
Results
Maximal finger strength significantly improved in the F100 and F80 groups and not in the F60 group.
Both stamina and endurance significantly improved in the F80 and F60 groups and not in the F100 group.
Takeaways
Though the short protocol time can be considered a limitation, it also shows that it's possible to get significant adaptations in only 4 weeks of fingerboard training.
The adaptations achieved are specific to the protocol used, with the F80 protocol improving adjacent adaptations.
Devise M, Lechaptois C, Berton E, Vigouroux L. Effects of Different Hangboard Training Intensities on Finger Grip Strength, Stamina, and Endurance. Front Sports Act Living. 2022 Apr 12;4:862782. doi: 10.3389/fspor.2022.862782. PMID: 35498522; PMCID: PMC9039162.
My Two Cents
I think this was a good preliminary study to show that: you get what you train for and that finger training follows the proven principles of strength and conditioning. If you want max finger strength, train max finger strength. If you want endurance, train endurance.
I do think a longer study period would be interesting to see the longer-term effects of these protocols. Since power endurance and endurance training are energetically "expensive" and can cause significant accumulation of fatigue, it would be interesting to see if they could show sweet spot of protocol length for peak adaptations without risk of overtraining symptoms.
This protocol was also interesting with the force gauge methodology rather than hanging with weight as many other studies have done. I would be interested to see a study that compares the two methodologies, keeping all other variables the same.
Lastly, multiple variables in this study were manipulated. Number of reps, rest times, and sets were changed from protocol to protocol, so the variable they wanted to test (intensity) was not a truly independent variable. I would be interested to see a study that keeps all protocol variables the same except for intensity and see the results (and the potential for finding a minimum effective dose for the different adaptations!).
Have thoughts of your own? Reply to this email and let me know!
