Two of the world’s best competition climbers recently went head-to-head in a unique format that’s changing how we think about gender differences in climbing.
Orion Betto and Mej Shallik, both multiple World Cup winners, competed in identical boulder problems to settle a debate that’s been brewing in the climbing community.
The results might surprise those who think men always dominate in strength sports.
And the format they used—simultaneous climbing on matching problems—revealed something fascinating about athletic performance across genders.
Jump to:
- World-Class Credentials Meet Real-World Testing
- The Style Factor Changes Everything
- Competition Format: Climbing Pro League Rules
- Round One: Technical Precision Under Pressure
- Round Two: Physical Demands Intensify
- Round Three: Everything on the Line
- What the Results Actually Mean
- Training Implications for All Climbers
- Why This Competition Format Matters
- Broader Lessons About Athletic Performance
World-Class Credentials Meet Real-World Testing
The setup was simple but revealing. Orion Betto, who climbed V14 at just 12 years old, faced off against Mej Shallik, who’s sent multiple V15s in the past year alone.
Both athletes brought impressive physical stats to the competition. Orion measured in with a 185cm wingspan at 84-85kg, while Mej recorded 178cm wingspan at similar weight.
When asked if long arms were necessary for World Cup bouldering success, both climbers quickly dismissed the notion.
No, I don’t think so.
Their training regimens mirror each other closely—sessions lasting two to four hours, supplemented with physical preparation twice weekly.
The Style Factor Changes Everything
Before the competition began, the climbers addressed the elephant in the gym: how close are men and women in climbing ability?
Mej’s answer cut through common assumptions about athletic gender gaps.
I think in lead it’s really really close. In bouldering it depends on the style. Like in tricky stuff for sure it’s not that far and some women can beat us on some tricky boulders for sure.
Orion confirmed she regularly attempts men’s problems during training sessions, a practice that speaks to the relatively narrow performance gap in competitive climbing.
Body proportions play a crucial role in climbing performance, often negating traditional strength advantages. Technical problems can favor shorter climbers, while dynamic moves might suit taller athletes.
Competition Format: Climbing Pro League Rules
The competition followed the new Climbing Pro League format, which differs significantly from traditional bouldering comps.
Key rules included:
- Both climbers competing simultaneously on identical boulder problems
- One minute observation period before each attempt
- Four minutes to reach the top
- Three rounds total with three different boulders
- Highest hold reached in shortest time wins if neither tops out
This format creates a genuine race atmosphere while maintaining the problem-solving essence of bouldering.
Round One: Technical Precision Under Pressure
When the timer started, both athletes attacked the first boulder with methodical precision.
The observation period proved critical—both climbers had worked out beta before touching the wall. They climbed nearly in sync, reaching identical holds at almost identical times.
Neither managed to complete the boulder on the first attempt, but the performance gap was virtually nonexistent.
What stood out was the efficiency both climbers displayed. Movement quality, not raw power, determined success on this technical problem.
Round Two: Physical Demands Intensify
The second boulder ramped up physical requirements significantly. This problem demanded more shoulder strength and body tension.
Again, both climbers reached the same high point. However, Orion achieved it in less time, earning her the round.
It was very complicated beta wise, but very like my shoulders almost exploded.
The observation revealed something fascinating about elite climbing: even on more physical problems, technique and problem-solving can offset strength differences.
Both athletes struggled with the same sections, suggesting the challenge transcended gender-based physical differences.
Round Three: Everything on the Line
Heading into the final boulder, the competition was tied. This technical problem featured a deceptive final hold positioned behind the second-to-last grip.
The climbers approached this boulder collaboratively, reading moves together despite competing against each other. This cooperation exemplifies climbing culture—problem-solving remains communal even in competition.
When the clock started, both athletes executed nearly flawless attempts.
The final score: 2-1, with an incredibly narrow margin between performances.
What the Results Actually Mean
This head-to-head competition demonstrated something remarkable: in climbing, the performance gap between elite men and women is exceptionally small compared to most sports.
Several factors contribute to this phenomenon:
- Technique trumps raw strength on many problems
- Body proportions matter more than muscle mass in certain situations
- Problem-solving ability is gender-neutral
- Flexibility and body awareness can compensate for power differences
Different boulder styles produce different outcomes. Explosive, powerful problems may favor male climbers, while technical, balance-oriented routes can favor female athletes.
Training Implications for All Climbers
Both athletes confirmed they train with weights twice weekly, focusing on functional movements like deadlifts and pull-ups rather than traditional bodybuilding exercises.
We do two times a week like a physical preparation session. Like hangs, pull-up, and even weights like deadlift, but we don’t do gym bro stuff.
Their approach emphasizes climbing-specific strength over general muscle development. Finger strength, shoulder stability, and core tension take priority.
For shorter climbers, explosivity becomes essential. Orion noted that height disadvantages require developing powerful leg drive to reach distant holds.
Why This Competition Format Matters
The Climbing Pro League format creates something traditional competitions lack: real-time, direct comparison between athletes.
Watching both climbers tackle identical problems simultaneously reveals performance differences (or similarities) that isolation formats obscure.
This transparency benefits the sport by making competitions more spectator-friendly and demonstrating that climbing success depends on multiple factors beyond brute strength.
The format also maintains climbing’s collaborative spirit. Athletes still share beta and encourage each other despite competing for points.
Broader Lessons About Athletic Performance
This competition challenges assumptions about gender and athletic capability. In sports where technique, problem-solving, and body awareness play significant roles, traditional male strength advantages diminish considerably.
Climbing isn’t unique in this regard. Sports emphasizing skill, precision, and technique over pure power—archery, shooting sports, equestrian events—show similar patterns.
The takeaway for recreational climbers: focus on movement quality before chasing strength gains. Both world-class athletes succeeded through efficiency, not overwhelming power.
Understanding your body’s strengths and limitations matters more than comparing yourself to others. Orion and Mej both acknowledged that different styles suit different body types.
The 2-1 result, achieved through minuscule time differences, proves that at the highest levels of climbing, gender becomes just one variable among many determining success.
