You can do better.

Should you explore a new style of climbing, to become more adaptable, or exploit the style you are already well-versed in?

Returning to the common sense of how and why we do this thing should be common practice – but it rarely is.

Why failure might not be our best teaching tool.

Somehow, I didn’t fail. On my 50th birthday, I managed to scrape my way up my one-hundredth 5.13.

There's a time and place for using beta videos, but in the gym?

I don’t set goals so that I can achieve them. I set goals so that I can chase them.

If we’re always compensating for some weakness or skill we don’t yet have, how will we ever improve?

How should we separate training and performance when they both occur in the same environment?

Training principles are important, but when they creep into performance, your climbing will suffer. Nearly every time.

Climber performance metrics only tell a small part of a much more complex human story.

The difficulties of a task should be such that they help the learner translate the skill to performance.

You’re watching your client, student, partner, or bestie struggle. And you want to help. But how? It entirely depends on the goal.

Practice is adaptation. Performance is owning.

How to use data to inform training decisions had been a topic of debate amongst the Power Company coaches for years, until Data Analyst, Dale Wilson, stepped in to settle the score once and for all.

We talk about the ways the gym doesn’t prepare you for climbing outside, and provide some tips on how you can address this gap.

Objective metrics might not be the best way.

Examining a study that collected measurements from 55 women, what does the data say about today’s female climbers?

Can the measurement of contributing energy systems act as climbing performance indicators?

Just how valid is isometric finger testing? And can it predict your climbing ability?