Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Leroy
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Original Post - Jan 22, 2008 - 06:33am PT
|
How can you defend"Olde School Ethics" if you wont tell us what they are.I want a treatise on Olde school ethics.
|
|
deuce4
Big Wall climber
the Southwest
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2008 - 08:09am PT
|
Hi Richard-
Somehow, all this reminds me of the time you and I were climbing in Tucson. We were working on the Zschiesche problem, a 5.13 toprope up on Mt. Lemmon. Must have been around 1987 or so.
You and I had been working on the thing all morning. Belaying was pretty simple, because the climb required a fast sequence of moves to the crux, and every time we fell, we immediately lowered back to the ground, as honor demanded. Even a peek at the holds on the way down was out of the question.
Then, Dale Bard wandered by. He had fully embraced the "new" ethic of dogging, and in fact had just been working his vertical acrobatics on the arete nearby. He asked if he could get a belay on our project (how could we say 'no' to Dale?) and proceeded to have us belay him for about a half hour, while he hung on the rope and worked the moves. Somehow, I seem to remember it really blowing our buzz, and not just for the fact that we were obligated to offer an extended belay session. (Nobody actually got up the route that day).
Remember that? It occured to me that Steve might be coming from a similar angle on all this, albeit a different facet of the sport.
By the way, do you still climb with the impeccable style we were all so inspired by?
cheers
|
|
Mimi
climber
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2008 - 10:23am PT
|
Yeah, Cilley. From what I recall BITD, in JT, the Valley, or in Boulder, you were a stalwart of 'old school' ethics and style. You lived in Tucson long enough to know where SG is coming from. I know it's a struggle for you not to be sarcastic, but what's your point? Or do you sincerely believe that a treatise would be beneficial for many of the detractors here who haven't a clue?
All the best,
Mimi
|
|
TwistedCrank
climber
Ideeho
|
|
|
Jan 22, 2008 - 10:39am PT
|
Olde school ethics are like pornography or fascism. You can't define it but you know it when you see it.
|
|
Leroy
climber
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Jan 24, 2008 - 05:03am PT
|
Wow ,I dont remember that thing with Dale at all.But ya that would have ruined our day.Just like hang dogging has esentilly ruined climbing.I climb exactly like before,but now if I climb with a rope I spend almost all day holding someone.Dont understand why people cant believe Im just genuinly interested in Steves ethics.It beats talking about WOS.
|
|
snyd
Sport climber
Lexington, KY
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2008 - 07:30am PT
|
I believe Justice Potter Stewart's actual quote was: "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced... That which gives me wood..."
|
|
survival
Big Wall climber
arlington, va
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2008 - 07:52am PT
|
Hey Richard,
Is this really Dick Cilley?
This is Bruce Birchell, we spent some time hanging out in the valley in the late 70's.
I still remember the day that you and Rick Derrick,(was it?) came down from the Lost Arrow Chimney. I thought you guys were brave AND crazy.....That was about the time Lesher and I did the Nose, nuts only, (didn't even carry a hammer). It seemed brave and important at the time.
If there is a major formation that I REALLY want to get up, I am willing to stretch my ethics. For example, 2,000 ft. up the Captain, I would much rather do a few aid moves than spend a hot afternoon and too much energy trying to figure out someone's 5.12 sequence, thus not making the bivvy ledge. Generally speaking though, it still makes me feel better "inside" to try and do as many things ground up, onsight as possible. That, of course, takes many routes off the table for me. I'm ok with that though, it still leaves more than I have time for.
I understand sport climbing/rapping/pre-placed/dogging, but that doesn't mean I have to like it or embrace it. It's just not me. The way we were raised in the game I guess.....
Bruce
|
|
Steve Grossman
Trad climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2008 - 11:26am PT
|
My ethics with regard to first ascents....
Adventure first for everybody.
No previewing, no preprotecting, no rehearsing and no hangdogging.
Climb what is there.
Leave the route and surroundings in as pristine a state as possible.
No chipping, chiseling, gluing or creative cleaning on free climbs.
No chipping, chiseling or otherwise enhancing on aid.
Minimize chalk use and any other visual impact.
Leave no trace or residual impact from your use.
Climb with maximal boldness and the fewest possible drilled anchors to allow passage.
Carefully consider each and every drilled anchor decision.
Once the decision is made to drill, bolt appropriately with stainless anchors.
All free climbing anchors are 3/8" or larger and hangered.
On aid, the same applies to anchors and potential large load bolts.
A hole is a hole, if you can't make a placement using conventional hardware provide a lasting drilled one.
Fill all holes with a machinehead type rivet or bolt.
Because they occasionally fail, if you are forced to drill a ladder of rivets, provide solid bolts at every fourth or fifth placement and at the last one.
Leave behind the most technically challenging result.
Choose the type of bolt that will allow the next climber to obtain maximum technical challenge over fall length. Do not deliberately engineer long fall situations for their own sake.
Clean out all placements with an eye to sustainability, including heads, to leave the pitch as intact as possible.
Climb clean above all and honor the stone with your efforts.
Use hammered and drilled protection as a last resort and be honest about your mindset on a given climbing day. It is better to back off than proceed in a regrettable fashion. The climbs will wait until you are ready and be generous enough to allow others to complete a route if it is beyond your capabilities to do it in good style.
Satisfied maestro Cilley?!?
|
|
'Pass the Pitons' Pete
Big Wall climber
like Oakville, Ontario, Canada, eh?
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2008 - 12:08pm PT
|
Great post, concur with all above.
"Fill all holes with a machinehead type rivet or bolt."
These days, the ASCA is recommending machine bolts not be used because they are difficult to replace, but rather to use longer, stronger and removeable split shaft buttonheads. I'm not sure I like the fact that they are so strong in granite [around 2000 lb according to Greg Barnes] but that seems to be the prevailing ethic.
Thoughts?
http://www.powers.com/product_03601.html
|
|
TradIsGood
Chalkless climber
the Gunks end of the country
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2008 - 12:12pm PT
|
Minimize chalk...
Unless you are cleaning chalk that is already there, minimizing would mean zero chalk, right?
|
|
Ghost
climber
A long way from where I started
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2008 - 12:15pm PT
|
Ground up, onsight, maximum boldness, and leave it pristine...
Hard to disagree with any of that, but it does lead to a conundrum for first ascensionists in the Northwest (of your country) and the Southwest (of mine). Most of the beautiful cracklines at Squamish and Index were beautiful tree/moss/dirt/looseflake lines before we went at them with saws, crowbars, screwdrivers, ice-axe picks, and wire brushes...
The general consensus is that it requires about 100 person-hours per pitch to clean crack lines up here. During that time, everyone involved will have spent many, many hours hanging, jugging, aiding, poking fingers into, and be thoroughly familiar with every inch of the route.
Which not only eliminates the ground-up, onsight possibilities, but also ensures that we'll all burn in hell for massively altering the rock.
This is not, in any way, to disagree with your ethics with regard to first ascents, but just to point out that that approach can only work in certain geographic/climatic conditions.
In much of the Southwestern US, and all over the world at high altitudes or high latitudes, muscles, ability, and a stout heart may be all that are required to walk up to the base of a new crack and climb to the top. Elsewhere, well, there is an additional requirement for some flexibility regarding ethical purity.
Cheers
David
|
|
the Fet
Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2008 - 01:03pm PT
|
The ethics of the FA is an interesting topic, because it's where the line between style and ethics gets blurry.
In another thread PTPP said:
If anyone does not like the style in which they climbed WoS, then they can kiss my middle-aged over-the-hill life-insurance-agent lard ass, for who are you to say what style is good or bad?
I disagree with that. You can say one style is better than another. However you can't say that if people can't do an FA in the best style possible than they shouldn't climb it. Because someday somebody could come along and free solo FA it with no bolts. That would mean effectively no one could do any FAs (unless you can do it free solo, no holes) because there will always be someone who could climb it in better style. You should climb in the best style you are capable of, but unless the route is overbolted or chipped (ethical issues) who is to say who has the right to the FA?
I appreciate Steve laying out his ethics for us, but I see lot's of this as style issues not ethics.
My ethics with regard to first ascents....
Adventure first for everybody. STYLE
MY OPINION IS THE SAME AS AN ISSUE OF STYLE. BUT SOME PEOPLE ARE MORE INTERESTED IN DIFFICULTY THAN ADVENTURE, OUR OPINION IS NOT MORE VALID THAN THERE'S.
No previewing, no preprotecting, no rehearsing and no hangdogging. STYLE.
YOU COULD SAY PEOPLE DOING A ROUTE WITH THOSE TACTICS ROBS THE CHANCE FOR SOMEONE TO DO IT WITHOUT THOSE TACTICS, BUT THEN DOING IT WITH A ROPE ROBS THE CHANCE FOR SOMEONE TO DO IT FREE SOLO.
Climb what is there.
Leave the route and surroundings in as pristine a state as possible.
No chipping, chiseling, gluing or creative cleaning on free climbs.
No chipping, chiseling or otherwise enhancing on aid.
ETHICS, DON'T MODIFY WHAT IS THERE OR YOU RUIN THE CHANCE FOR SOMEONE ELSE TO DO THE CHALLENGE NATURE PRESENTED.
I'M STILL UNDECIDED ON GLUING IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES (WHERE IT'S LEGALLY ALLOWED), BECAUSE SOME HOLDS MAY BE GOOD FOR A HANDFUL OF ASCENTS BUT BREAK OFF AFTER LOT'S OF TRAFFIC. WHAT'S BETTER REINFORCING A NATURAL FEATURE THAT ONLY LOTS OF HUMAN IMPACT WILL REMOVE, OR LETTING THAT FEATURE BE BROKEN OFF AND POSSIBLY DRILLING A HOLE INSTEAD?
Minimize chalk use and any other visual impact.
Leave no trace or residual impact from your use. ETHICS
Climb with maximal boldness and the fewest possible drilled anchors to allow passage.
INTESTING TOPIC, WHO DECIDES WHAT THE FEWEST POSSIBLE DRILLED ANCHORS ARE? MAXIMAL BOLDNESS FOR SOME MAY BE TOO EASY OR SUICIDAL FOR OTHERS. IMO IT'S PRETTY MUCH UP TO THE FAist TO DECIDE, UNLESS IT'S WAY OUT OF LINE WITH THE REST OF THE ROUTES IN THE AREA.
Style evolves. When the first ascent of Higher Cathedral Spire was done they had to make a decision to break with earlier style guidelines and use aid. People later free climbed what the FAists needed aid for. When the first ascent of Lost Arrow Spire was done Salathe broke with earlier style guidelines and used a bolt for aid, later climbers free climbed it, has anyone free soloed it? Does this mean they should have left those routes alone for future climbers?
|
|
the Fet
Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2008 - 01:10pm PT
|
"removeable split shaft buttonheads"
My vote is for the buttonheads. Trying to clean a machine head can result in a sheared off head, leaving a useless shaft of metal in the rock. Better to minimize the possibility of needing new holes, than worry about the artificial difficulty of the strength of your rivets.
|
|
the Fet
Knackered climber
A bivy sack in the secret campground
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2008 - 01:18pm PT
|
Speaking of free soloing Lost Arrow, someone call Dean P and tell him to get on that sh#t, and bring a video camera.
|
|
Steve Grossman
Trad climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Jan 25, 2008 - 11:31am PT
|
Not a black and white situation if you think about it. When you are putting up a route, style and ethics combine in the creation. The qualities of the route left for others lands in the ethics area, how you treat other climbers.
What you are or are not willing to employ by way of tactics and technology in the process of creating the route defines style, the way that you frame or contexture your own experience while in the thick of it.
Both are in play almost always when we go climbing. Personal style informs your ethical decisions and the actions that arise from those decisions.
|
|
survival
Big Wall climber
arlington, va
|
|
|
Jan 25, 2008 - 11:47am PT
|
Yo Leroy,
Where did you go, now that Steve has pitched in?
Bruce
|
|
Darryl Cramer
Social climber
|
|
|
Jan 25, 2008 - 12:24pm PT
|
Ghost –
I’ve put up somewhere in the neighborhood of 100 routes at Index. Most via the crack tool and scrub brush method. I would run into Steve around Seattle and I can remember my friends and I discussing how Steve never was inspired to clean a route and we speculated he thought us to be total goofballs. Despite having no affinity whatsoever with the NW style of route cleaning I never heard him utter a dismissive word. I’ve seen Leroy covered in moss and mud many times.
|
|
JuanDeFuca
Big Wall climber
Stoney Point
|
|
|
Jan 25, 2008 - 12:51pm PT
|
How is a button head bolt a rivet. We used to take 30 foot slab falls on the things.
Juan?
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
|
|
|
Jan 25, 2008 - 01:00pm PT
|
SG says, "Personal style informs your ethical decisions and the actions that arise from those decisions."
I think I see the nature of the problem now. SG's ethical decisions arise out of questions of style. Seems backwards to me. I would cast the sentence as: My ethics informs my personal style and the actions that arise from my ethical perspectives. When style informs ethics, Houston, we have a problem.
Regarding rivets, I think it is clear now that the "ethics" some are touting here leads to one place only: "artificial difficulty" (whatever that is, since it's all "artificial") can be avoided ONLY by ALL drilled holes being filled with AT LEAST 1/2" x 6" (or stouter) bolts... uh, I mean "rivets."
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!