## 1 Introduction  
Over the last few decades, a significant increase in interest in sports climbing has been observed [1]. It is a relatively young sport discipline included in the Tokyo 2020 Olympic Games program [2]. The subdisciplines of sports climbing presented in Tokyo were lead climbing, bouldering, and speed climbing. The first two subdisciplines are the most frequently trained sport climbing styles [2, 3, 4]. There are many differences between bouldering and lead climbing regarding the length of the climbing route, delaying methods, and the nature of physical effort. In bouldering, the climber ascends short technical boulder routes up to 4-5 on low walls using crash mats instead of ropes [4, 5]. The climbing routes in lead climbing are much longer (10 to 40 m) and, thus, contain more movements than in bouldering. In lead climbing, the climber is attached to a rope clipped into permanent bolts using \"quickdraws\", spaced intermittently from the bottom up [3, 4, 5]. Different forms of sport climbing require different sets of skills and physiological conditions [2]. Nevertheless, only a few previous research studies have compared the physical characteristics of sport climbers between lead climbing and bouldering subdisciplines. Lead climbing is characterized by more static, slow, and controlled movements than bouldering [6]. Moreover, lead climbers are more capable of longer routes than boulderers, with a shorter climbing duration (30 s for bouldering vs. 2-7 min for lead climbing). On the other hand, bouldering routes are shorter, but the movements are performed with maximum effort [4; 5]. This suggests that bouldering can be classified as a strength subdiscipline, while lead climbing is characterized by endurance effort [5]. Several studies showed that boulderers are characterized by higher explosive strength of the forearm muscles compared to lead climbers [6; 7; 8]. The differences between lead climbers and boulderers were also observed at the genetic level and concern the functional polymorphism of the ACTN3 gene, which, depending on the genotype, is associated with the strength or endurance of skeletal muscles [9].  
According to the systematic review by [PERSON] et al. [10], the anthropometric data connected with success in sports climbing are large bone-to-tip pulp associated with generating a higher lifting force, and great forearm volume is an indirect parameter of muscle mass. Moreover, in several research studies, body mass values differ significantly between sport climbers and controls [11; 12]. However, differences in body mass and height can vary within the groups because the researchers tried to recruit subjects of similar age and body size to compare physiological parameters like strength and endurance. Therefore, this generates difficulty in interpreting this data type in studies analyzing other main motor and physiological parameters. Several studies showed differences in anthropometrical, physiological, and strength-endurance parameters between elite sport climbers, less advanced athletes, and controls [13]. However, so far, there are no studies comparing body composition, anthropometric parameters, or the age of peak performance between lead climbers and boulderers.  
Thus, the present study investigated the relationship between age, climbing experience, and anthropometric data (body mass, body height) and the best result achieved by male sport climbers in bouldering and lead climbing in natural rock formations.