Mammut Bus
Vertical-Life
Climb to Paris
POWERED BY Mammut Logo
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0
meters to Paris
VERTICAL-LIFE STATS
0
Members
0
Total ascents
0
Ascents last 30 Days
0
Ascents last 24 hours
Open forum

Can tall climbers reach highest level?

I have looked through the first 30 on the ranking top down on 8a. The only pesron reaching 180 cm is Adam Ondra. The avarage hight is 170 cm. Is it possible for someone measuring 185 to reach the top?  
Interesting question. Other relatively tall climbers are Chris Sharma, Tomasz Marazek, Jorg Verhoeven, Dave Graham, Matilda Söderlund and Josune Bereziartu. It would of course be easy to push into 9a also for guys being 190 cm if they found a vertical reachy climb. When it comes to really steep climbs there is normally an advantage to be short. In this context, Adam Ondra is unique.
@Terje: if you start climbing very early and have your focus on flexibility, finger power, body tension and weight, I am sure it is possible. On very steep routes or roofs it is not always better to be short because the holds are better than on vertical routes and the finger power might not be the limiting factor there. For a tall climber it is much easier to build up body tension than finger power. You can always select for routes which are much harder for short ones and if the route is at your limit, it could deserve a higher grade than a route which is not possible for you because you are too tall. 
Adam is taller than 180, probably closer to 183 now. Also, he weighs about 62-64 at this point. I think it really depends on the build at that point. Matikda is very tall but super slim, with really loing (ehrm) legs and +10 ape index. Graham has a pretty light frame too.
A friend is around 190cm, weights 62kg and trains seldom to never but climbed since he was a kid. He now does 7c whenever he feels like it. Or he smokes weed instead. It's not the size that matters, it's the weight to size ratio.
I guess Jorg is as tall as Adam. All the other are shorter. But none of them reach 185. Statistically 25% should measure 185 or taller, but I am have not found one so far. It is like basketball. How many basketball players in NBA are under 185? Statistically 75% should be, but if you eat and train right I guess you could reach NBA if you measure 175. Like tall climbers could reach the top
isn't james pearson like 190?
@Terje: if we talk about competitions than it is becoming complex. Basketball is static regarding the borders of the system. The sport does not change the elements and it is clear that tall basketball players are advantaged because they are better adapted on the rules of the sport. In climbing competitions, we have dynamic elements which define the border of the sport. It is not clear if short climbers are better adapted for the sport, than tall climbers. My solution to set a fair route is, to calculate the mean value regarding body hight of the habitants from the participating nations. Every country has data from the mean body height of the country. If we take the mean body height from the participating nations, calculate this mean value before every competition and base the setting reflecting this information, it would be fair. Normally, climbers like ramon have on every single move an advantage, if the move is not near his limit from the extension, especially if the holds are very small. If not, the factor is neutralizing. The last competitions looked quite fair and most combinations seemed to fit equally (more or less) for a wider range of climbers with different heights but the setters should always pay attention to not favoring the short climbers too much, the risk is always high; if a tall and a short climber crimp the same small hold, both in the relative body position, the short climber is advantaged. 
Like one can play at the NBA being 160cm (Tyrone Bogues) someone over 185cm can reach the top in climbing (at least 9a and 8C+) as Toni Lamprecht is 187cm (on his 8a scorecard). But they might be exception in their sports, or at least the statistics implies it might be easier to reach the top being in the average (~200cm in NBA (see nba.com) and apparently 170-175cm in climbing?) ps: James Pearson has 177cm on his scorecard.
Jan Hojer is an example. In general, i think it is indeed a matter of statistical distribution and the focus/concentration on "small/average-climber"-boulder. With respect to 1: The average man is about 175-180 cm, i think. Thus it is more likely that a man of this height has fitting body-proportions, than a 190cm; simply because there are more of them. This, for example would also be my explanation, why usain bolt is the fastest man on the planet: There is obviously a correlation between height and 100m-time. Appropriate bodyproportions do the rest. Since there are less 195-guys out there than 180, it is less probable that the average 195-guy has "better" proportions. And the same principle, i think should work at other height-dependent disciplines, in particular climbing. 2: Here I mean, that roughly said, there is much more focus on crimpy-boulder-style than on reachy-power-style, and here for instance thin fingers are an advantage of smaller climbers. The advantages  of tall climbers are in some extent just neutralized,  for example, just considered "too reachy". best regards
As I said above, it is not clear if short climbers have an advantage, are better adapted for the sport because of the dynamic elements (for example holds). @crag D: the anatomy of the fingers do not correlate with body height! In contrast, the finger strength correlate with the body height because of the correlation with the body weight, and the non linear development of muscle fibre with additional height. If something is considered as "too reachy" could be fair nevertheless. The problem is the ignorance of parameters which favor short climbers directly and indirectly. The mean value for the best male climbers in competitions who reach the finals is below or around 170 cm and for females around 160 cm. This value is far away from the average body height of the overall population of the participating nations in climbing competitions! Now, the competitions are becoming better and are starting to reflect this parameters.  
@oO00Oo "the anatomy of the fingers do not correlate with body height" Hmm, i haven't found some study about that, but why do you think there is no correlation? I think the average fingerthickness/handlenght of a 165cm-man is less compared with a 185cm-man. Maybe it is not significant, because of the strong deviation of individual hands, but that there isn`t any correlation shoulb be false. But the significance remains questionable. Apart from that I agree with you with the ignorance(instead of ignorance i think `carelessness`fits better) of advantaging small climbers in competitions. The best example is the superabundance of big volumes to make a good show for the audience. On the whole it appears to me that there should be a more carefully and more systematic setting, involving a greater concern on the advantage/influence of certain "bodytypes".
The tallest high-end climber i can remember was Stefan Fürst from Austria, he was at least close to 200cm, and has climbed routes up to 9a (one of his routes Qi at Geisterschmiedwand in Austria is still not repeated, by my knowledge). If you are tall you have advantages with high reaches and often with some bouldery passages, but even you may have problems if you have to get twisted body positions to get the right holding angle of some holds. Best regards from Germany Hartwig
@HPudzich: Stefan Fürst is around 180 cm tall ;-). @crag D: sure, there is a correlation which affects the development of the whole body, like growth hormones, thyroid hormone, cortisol and sex hormones which have beside nutrition and genetic imprinting the most influence on forming body structures. Beside that, the hands and feet enlarge BEFORE the long body bones (femur, tiba and fibula). When the growth plates close, the body height is completed. Based on the different time depending processes and the impact of the individual genetically dependent concentrations of hormones in different body regions, which have the highest impact on the development of hands and feet, it is hard to imply a significant correlation. A weak connection might be there but we should not overestimate the real influence of this correlation on the climbing performance. It is hard enough to bring transparence in the parameters which affect body height significantly and based on this informations, set routes which are as fair as possible.
All competition routs today are really pumpy. As long as endurance is the counting factor small and climbers will win. But an interesting idea could be to put up competition routs in some of the world cups with easy climbing on jugs between hard bouldery sections, and maybe reduce max time to six minutes. The bouldery sections could also differ in style.  In bouldering it is easy to make it more even between small an tall climbers. long reaches on big pinches for example will favor the tall. Small crimps will favor the small. I am sure we will se more hard bouldering ascent from tall climbers than we will see hard sport routs. And we will see a lot of short climbers cheating with multiple pads to reach the start holds on a sit down boulder. For tall climbers it is more difficult to cheat since it is hard work to dig to find a lower place to put your feet
Pirmin Bertle is 184cm tall, and operating at the higher end of the scale...
 @oO00Oo: for sure Stefan Fürst is taller than 180 cm, i can remember i've read somewhere in the tirol guide or in a portrait he is larger than me ( i'am 192 cm), so if i can get the information i will post it. For example: http://www.thomasbucher.net/journalist/pdf/8_special_firmenportrait_art_rock.pdf Here is a post of the company Stefan is / was working for - there he is described as a Zweimeter-Mann ( a Person who is around 200cm tall). Best regards Hartwig
@Terje: the core of lead climbing is the endurance and should not be changed by too many hard boulder sections. I would split the whole route into two parts and on the first part I would add time since you reach a hold in the middle of the route which is considered as the zone. After reaching this hold you have all time you need for the rest of the route. The first part of the route until the zone should be around 8b for males and force the pumping of the forearms. You have three minutes for the first part for example but the time factor has to be calculated based on the length of the route. The second part should be way harder but the time should be removed and the pressure coming from the time reduced. So we have a average climbing time of around 6 minutes each athlete, which is perfect for the media and very dynamic as a format, so the best climbers have enough time if the endurance is sufficient for the progress in the second part of the route.   @HPudzich: thank you for the reference; nevertheless I am very sceptic about the accuracy of the statement but probably you are right.  There are quite some very strong tall climbers, but this does not change the matter of fact that short climbers are advantaged, especially short climbers grade the difficulty of a climb because if they are not able to do a route due to a reachy move, they don't try it further and for a tall climber the intensity of the move might not be very hard. The consequence is, that the route is given a lower grade which should be false. Possible that exist some routes which deserve 9a, are given only 8b/c by tall climbers but not possible for short ones. The same problem with sit starts; when a short climber is not able to do a sit start he has to do a stand start, pointing out the difference in the starting position especially if he adds some pads, if he wants to be fair and respectful toward the sport itself and the climber which are participating this sport. 
@oO00Oo: no problem i will sent the reference if i can find it. For me personal (with a size of 192 cm) it is as you described, i have advantages at reachy moves and disadvantages on several sitstart or twisted positions to prepare a tricky move. But the question was - are there any really tall high-end climbers - i remember one who was taller than 190 cm, that was Stefan Fürst and one other Toni Lamprecht who is close to this size. Best regards, have a nice week Hartwig
Lol! Nice discussion :). Just a little point ... before using the word "short" climber, lets be specific in that we are actually talking more about "average" height climbers, not truly short people ... (maybe those bleow 165cm?) ... it maybe true that the "best" climbers may tend towards the "short" end of the average human height, but be clear ... they are still of average height :). p.s. average height for a human male is around the mid 170's cm mark (around the 5'9" mark). p.s. yes I am truly a short climber ;).
@Derek: The average height in europe for male is around 177 cm and for female around 167 cm; the average population of male and female in total is, let us say, around 170 cm, probably even a little bit more. In climbing the higher grades are done by around 171 cm tall male and around 163 cm tall female and 140 cm tall kids, on average grades in the higher end of the scale are graded mostly by climbers which are on average around 167 cm tall if male and female are distributed equally (without the data of the kids). I have the statistics enlarged and did it for female, kids, male from the 8a.nu database up to 1000. position in the ranking where the average height in the population is settling down. I will do further analysis and will show the community the data after. I see your point to be careful with terms but I think it is quite clear that higher grades are determined by relatively short climbers reflecting the average population in europe, which does not mean that they are better adapted for climbing, but that most routes are graded by the standard of a relatively short climber. Kids are forcing this process and around 160 cm will become average when they become more and take part in the grading of the harder rated problems.