In the complex world of climbing, the ability to “hang on” to holds is only part of the equation. To progress, ascend, and send, we need to move efficiently between them. This is where pulling strength (and also pushing strength) comes into play—a fundamental quality for movement on rock or in the gym. Although often overshadowed by the obsession with finger strength, pulling strength is crucial and deserves careful attention in our training.
In this post, we’ll explore why pulling strength is so relevant, how it has been scientifically assessed, and what tools we can use to measure it, whether with sophisticated equipment or more accessible means.
Pulling strength: beyond the fingers
The ability to move between holds depends on multiple factors, including grip strength, climbing technique, scapular stability, and, very importantly, pulling and pushing forces and power. Unlike the ability to just hang on, which is more mediated by a single physical quality, progression is a more coordinated and multifactorial act.
However, pulling strength, with its various manifestations, has been shown to be relevant in training physical qualities for climbing and is therefore interesting to assess. Recently, studies such as Rokowski et al. (2024) have established that the endurance of the elbow flexors and scapular girdle (pulling strength) are as important for predicting performance as the endurance of the finger flexors in advanced climbers (7a+ to 8a IRCRA).
How has pulling strength been assessed in the literature?
The way pulling strength is measured has evolved. Initially, tests like the “Power Slap” (one-arm jump from a jug) were used, measuring maximum reach, which proved reliable and correlated with performance. Other studies have used:
- 1-RM pull-ups and maximum number of pull-ups: With acceptable reliability, though their specificity was questioned. More recently, Devise et al. (2023) and Rokowski et al. (2024) found that pull-ups to failure and the Edlinger test (isometric holds interspersed with pull-ups) strongly correlate with performance.
- Two-handed jump tests from jugs measuring maximum distance, showing high reliability and differentiating between levels.
- Force-Velocity Profile during dynamic pull-ups, which was reliable and able to differentiate between elite disciplines (boulder, lead, speed).
- Maximum strength (1RM) and endurance derived from the Force-Velocity curve correlate with performance, although execution speed does not.
From all this, we can conclude that pulling strength and endurance are subjects of ongoing study, and while their relative importance is still being investigated, it is clear that pulling endurance is a key factor, especially in advanced climbers.
Key manifestations and how to assess them
Pulling strength manifests in several ways important for climbing:
1. Explosive manifestation of pulling strength
This ability is crucial for fast and dynamic movements.
- With Complex Means (Sensorized Board): We can measure the Peak Maximum Force normalized by body weight (Maximum Peak Force N/Kg) generated in a normal explosive pull-up (allowing use and coordination of legs and torso). The average observed by Devise et al. is 15.1 ± 2.6 N/Kg. This parameter correlated best with performance (r=0.5).
- With Simple Means (Power Slap Test): The one-arm Power Slap test (measuring maximum reach) is reliable, though results may be overestimated in people with long arms or who train a lot on campus board.
- Reference ranges (Draper et al. 2011):
- Novice (<7a): <55 cm
- Intermediate (7a-8a): 55-70 cm
- Advanced and Elite (>8a): >70 cm
2. Maximum pulling strength: the force-velocity profile
The force-velocity profile illustrates the inverse relationship between force and contraction velocity. That is, the greater the force, the lower the velocity, and vice versa. Unlike other exercises, this profile is specific to each subject in pull-ups.
- How is it obtained? Several explosive pull-ups are performed with increasing loads (from body weight up to 1RM), simultaneously measuring vertical force and propulsive velocity. This requires a linear encoder and a sensorized multi-grip board.
- Key Parameters: F0 (theoretical maximum force at zero velocity), V0 (theoretical mean velocity at zero force), and the slope of the curve.
- 1RM (r=0.45), the slope (r=0.39), and F0 (r=0.43) correlate significantly with performance, while V0 does not.
- The slope of the curve is highly dependent on the climber and can indicate whether more work is needed on force or velocity. Elite boulderers have steeper slopes than lead climbers (-14.2 vs -10.5).
- Reference averages (Devise et al. 2023):
- Force-Velocity curve slope: 11.23 ± 3.25
- F0 (N/Kg): 17.95 ± 2.98
- V0 (m/s): 1.64 ± 0.23
- 1RM (% of body weight): 154% ± 20%
- With Simple Means: We can easily measure 1RM (the maximum weight for a single pull-up).
3. Pulling endurance
- With Simple Means (Maximum Number of Pull-Ups): A simple and reliable indicator of endurance is the maximum number of pull-ups with body weight. For validity, they should be performed without pauses between reps, chin over the bar, as quickly as possible, and allowing leg contraction (no kipping) for greater specificity. The average in the Devise et al. study was 22.8 ± 7.6 pull-ups.
Building your pulling strength profile
Just like with grip strength, we can create a profile of our different manifestations of pulling strength (maximal, explosive, endurance). This allows us to identify which are more developed and which need more attention in training, based on our goals and climber profile.
Test requirements and characteristics
- Relevance: The different manifestations of pulling strength are highly relevant in climbing and differentiate between subjects and disciplines.
- Validity: They have construct validity (measure what they intend). However, their criterion validity (correlation with performance) is weaker than that of finger flexors.
- Reliability: Pulling tests usually have very high reliability.
- Specificity: Although they reflect a basic climbing movement, they differ from real climbing (rarely without feet or with extra weight). The most climbing-specific tests often lack reliability and validity.
- Coherence-Prophylaxis (Safety): Most are simple and safe for all climber populations, except for those who cannot do a pull-up with their body weight, in which case it is clear that this needs to be developed.
Conclusion
Systematic assessment of pulling strength is an essential component of intelligent climbing training. By measuring explosive, maximal, and endurance pulling strength, whether with complex or simple means, we can get a clear picture of our capabilities. This information will allow us to personalize our training plan, focusing on the areas we most need to improve to keep progressing and mastering the vertical with greater efficiency and safety.