# Analysis of Lower Limb Performance Determinants in Sport Climbing
## 4 Discussion  
This study aimed to characterize lower limb strength and flexibility in recreational climbers, an aspect that has been scarcely explored in the current literature. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to specifically analyze these variables in this population. While previous research has addressed the lower limbs mainly from an injury perspective [13; 16; 17; 18; 38], more recent studies have begun to consider their role in performance [7; 22; 29], although often as a secondary focus. Our CMJ results are lower than those reported in disciplines where jumping is a key performance component, such as volleyball or track and field [39], but higher than those reported in recreational climbers with a higher level (\(\sim\)28 vs. -32 cm) [40], and clearly below the values observed in speed climbing specialists (49.6 cm) [41]. This supports the idea that the type of climbing influences the expression of lower limb power [41]. The inclusion of unilateral tests, such as the Hop Test, allowed for the assessment of not only lower limb power but also functional asymmetries, which are relevant both for performance and injury prevention [42; 43]. Although no significant associations were found in this study between performance on these tests and climbing level, it is worth noting that lower limb movements in climbing are often asymmetrical, suggesting that unilateral assessments may have greater applicability than traditional bilateral tests. While no between-group differences were found in our sample, future studies should more deeply explore the predictive value of these tests in relation to both performance and musculoskeletal injury prevention, especially considering clinical asymmetry thresholds above 10%, which have been linked to a higher risk of injury [43; 44]. Regarding the upper body, general strength tests such as pull-ups and handgrip strength were useful in differentiating between climbers of varying levels, and values were comparable to those reported in previous studies with recreational populations [40], although lower than those found in more advanced climbers [35; 45; 46]. While handgrip strength measured with a dynamometer is recognized as a valid indicator of overall health [47], its usefulness as a specific performance marker in climbing has been questioned. Several studies suggest that this type of test does not adequately capture the functional demands of climbing movements, and it may be preferable to use tools and protocols that assess finger flexor strength and endurance in more representative contexts [48; 49]. Limited ankle range of motion is a relevant risk factor for injury and a common consequence of previous injuries [50]. In our sample, dorsiflexion values were adequate (\(>\)30\({}^{\circ}\)) and showed minimal imbalance between ankles (\(<\)5\({}^{\circ}\)), suggesting a low functional risk, since greater imbalances have been associated with increased injury incidence in various sports [31; 51]. To assess lower limb flexibility, two complementary tests were used: a generic one, the Sit and Reach, widely used to estimate hamstring extensibility [52], and another specific to sport climbing, the modified Grant Test [22], designed to replicate technical climbing gestures. While the Sit and Reach allows for a general assessment of posterior chain flexibility, its application in climbing is limited as it does not reflect the joint and muscular patterns involved in real ascent situations. In this sense, the Grant Test offers greater ecological validity, as it involves movements characteristic of climbing technique, such as extreme hip opening and lower limb extension on high footholds, making it a more sensitive tool for discriminating between performance levels and detecting specific functional deficits.