I Was Banned From Using My Own Invention at a Competition

I was not allowed to use this at the Danish Boulder Cup.

I invented a handheld electric climbing brush that blasts air while you brush — drying the holds and your hands between each attempt. I brought it to the competition. An official told me I couldn't use it. And it got me thinking: where do we actually draw the line on innovation in competition climbing?

This isn't a complaint. I respect the officials and I understand why they made the call. But the incident opened up a question that the climbing community hasn't really answered yet — and probably needs to.

This Debate Has Been Here Before

Every sport has faced it. The moment a new piece of technology gives one athlete an edge, the rulebook scrambles to catch up.

In swimming, Speedo's LZR Racer suit — developed with NASA — dominated the 2008 Beijing Olympics. 94% of all gold medals were won by swimmers wearing it. At the 2009 World Championships in Rome, 43 world records fell in a single meet. Within months, FINA banned all full-body polyurethane suits.

In marathon running, Nike's Vaporfly and its carbon fibre plate split the athletic community down the middle. World Athletics eventually permitted the technology but set rules around stack height.

In Climbing, We're Having the Same Argument

Kneepads are probably the most discussed example. Adam Ondra wrote about it directly: modern kneepads make certain kneebar rests possible where they were once impossible. The Spanish pro Edu Marin was explicit: climbing a route with a kneepad that was first ascended without one is, in his view, a different route.

In competition, kneepads are now banned at World Climbing events. But shoes with rubber compounds engineered to be borderline adhesive? Completely legal. The line isn't always logical — it's historical.

What the Rulebook Actually Says

After the competition, I went home and read the World Climbing competition rules — the January 2026 version. Here is the relevant section on personal equipment, verbatim:

That is the rule they pointed to. And on the surface, it sounds like an open-and-shut case. An electric brush that blasts air — surely it modifies the condition of a hold?

But here is the thing. A manual brush does exactly the same thing. That is literally what brushing is. Every single climber at the Danish Boulder Cup was brushing holds. Nobody was stopped.

Furthermore, the same rulebook includes this in the guidance notes:

The rules explicitly contemplate climbers bringing their own cleaning equipment. They don't ban it. The word "brush" does not appear once in the entire rulebook.

The Actual Question: Electric vs. Manual

So the real question — the one nobody has formally answered — is whether there is a meaningful difference between a manual brush and an electric one, in the context of competition fairness.

The ChalkBlaster does what a manual brush does, faster. It doesn't change the holds in any way a manual brush doesn't. It gives me cleaner holds in less time — which matters when you have four minutes on the clock.

Why Fairness Arguments Cut Both Ways

The most honest fairness argument against the ChalkBlaster in competition is access. If only some competitors have one, it creates an uneven playing field — the same argument made against the LZR Racer in swimming.

But that argument applies to climbing shoes too. The sport has never tried to equalize footwear. We accept that gear quality matters. We just draw the line somewhere, often inconsistently, often reactively.

What I Think Should Happen

I never built the ChalkBlaster with competition in mind. I built it for outdoor climbing — for the crag, for cleaning holds on your project, for those three-second windows between attempts when you need chalk off your hands and the hold as dry as possible.

My position: World Climbing should review the personal equipment rules and make an explicit decision about cleaning equipment. Either all brushing devices are treated equally, or they specify that only manual brushes are permitted. Either answer is fine. A grey area that creates inconsistent enforcement is not.

So Here's the Question

Should we encourage innovation in competition climbing? Or limit what climbers can use to keep the playing field level?

I don't think there's one right answer. But I do think we need to have the conversation openly. Leave a comment below. Should the ChalkBlaster be allowed in competition?