As an increasingly popular adventure sport, there has been a growing research interest regarding the physiological demands of rock climbing. The period from 1990 to 2006 saw a 37,514 person increase in membership of the British Mountaineering Council (BMC - the National Governing Body for rock climbing in the UK). There are now over 63,000 UK members of the BMC and more than 150,000 active climbers in the UK alone (BMC, 2004; 2006). Rock climbing is a multi-discipline sport encompassing a wide variety of climbing styles. Traditional climbing involves ascents of single pitch (one run-out of rope to the top of the climb) and multi-pitch (ascents of longer routes over one rope length in height requiring the ability to construct multiple belays during ascent) routes placing protection into natural features in the rock. During sport climbing, single or multi-pitch ascent the climber clips the rope to bolts that have been pre-drilled in the rock surface. Traditional climbing places an emphasis on both the technical competence of the climber and their ability to protect their ascent using the gear they carry. In sport climbing the greater focus is upon the technical moves to make an ascent and the technically hardest routes tend to be climbed in this style. Traditional and sport multi-pitch routes require one climber to lead each pitch (climbing with a rope attached placing protection during the ascent) with a second climber following up the route and removing the leader's gear ready for the next pitch. Single pitch routes can be lead climbed (LC) or top roped (TRC). In TRC an anchor is placed at the top of the climb through which the rope runs between the belayer and climber to protect against a fall. In this style of climbing the climber is well protected and has a minimal risk of a ground fall. In the past research has placed a lesser emphasis on the style of climbing (Sheel, 2004; Watts, 2004). In addition, to date only two studies appear to have been completed on natural rock, with the remaining research being conducted on artificial climbing walls or motorised and non-motorised climbing treadwalls (Booth et al., 1999; Mermier et al., 1997; Watts and Drobish, 1998). The majority of research projects have utilised bouldering or TRC systems rather than LC perhaps due to the lower risk of a ground fall (Booth et al., 1999; Draper et al., 2006a; Draper et al., 2006b; Gerbert and Werner, 2000; Mermier et al., 1997; Mermier et al., 2000; Sheel et al., 2003; Watts et al., 2000). Researchers have speculated about the relative contribution of aerobic and anaerobic metabolism to the total energy requirements for rock climbing. Booth et al., 1999 suggested a higher relative aerobic contribution than researchers such as Billat et al., 1995 and Mermier et al., 2000. For climbing oxygen consumption (VO2) values of between 20 - 25 mL.kg-1.min-1 have been reported (Billat et al., 1995; Draper et al., 2008b; Mermier et al., 1997; Watts et al., 2000). The similar VO2 levels identified for a number of different studies led Watts et al. (2004) to speculate about the existence of a VO2 plateau for climbs lasting between 80 - 100 s. Above this plateau additional energy requirements during climbing appear to be supplied by anaerobic mechanisms. There appears, however, to be common agreement regarding the existence of disproportionate rise in heart rate (HR) relative to VO2 when comparing treadmill running with climbing (Billat et al., 1995; Booth et al., 1999; Draper et al., 2008b; Mermier et al., 1997; Sheel et al., 2003; Watts et al., 2000). The reported values for VO2 during climbing represented 43-45 % of each participant's VO2max (Billat et al., 1995; Draper et al., 2008b; Mermier et al., 1997; Watts et al., 2000). During climbing the mean HR for the reported VO2 values represented about 80 % of HRmax (Billat et al., 1995; Draper et al., 2008b; Mermier et al., 1997; Watts et al., 2000). The disproportionate rise in HR has been suggested to relate to factors such as the relatively high loading on the upper body muscles, the intermittent isometric contractions associated with gripping or elevated anxiety levels related to a fear of falling. Reviews regarding the physiology of rock climbing have indicated the need for researchers to take into account the style of climbing when making comparisons between studies. (Sheel, 2004; Watts, 2004). Research by Draper et al. (2008a; 2008b) revealed differences in the physiological and psychological responses to differing forms of climbing. The findings of these studies indicated that climb time, post-climb lactate concentrations, peak HR, average HR and self-reported anxiety (CSAI- 2R) were significantly higher for lead climbing (LC) than for top-roping (TRC). In agreement with these findings, Hardy and Hutchinson, 2007 identified significantly elevated anxiety levels for lead climbing when compared with top-rope climbing. Further to this, research by Janot et al., 2000 found pre climb HR and climbing HR were significantly elevated for beginner climbers when compared with more experienced climbers. The HR differences in this study being attributed to increased anxiety levels in the beginner climbers. It is now widely accepted that the threat of physical harm leads to higher levels of anxiety and these are manifest through physiological and psychological measures (Chapman et al., 1997; Hardy and Hutchinson, 2007; Morris et al., 1981; Terry and Slade, 1995). The inherent threat of physical harm in climbing means the stress associated with rock climbing is related to the interaction of physiological and psychological factors as dictated by the form of climbing undertaken and experience of the climber. The importance of anxiety management has been consistently identified by writers in the field and more recently researchers have investigated the dual stresses associated with climbing performance (Draper et al., 2008a; Goddard and Neumann, 1993; Hardy and Hutchinson, 2007; Hörst, 2003). For rock climbers the purest style of ascent is a lead climb with no prior practice, referred to as an on-sight lead climb (OSLC). Research suggests that the experience of climbers and the form of ascent have an effect on the anxiety levels of climbers. To date the influence of prior practice on the response to climbing has not been reported. The objective of this study was to examine the physiological and psychological responses to an OSLC in comparison to a subsequent LC. |