Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
rnevius
Trad climber
San Luis Obispo, CA
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2013 - 02:46pm PT
|
I think what hedge and other are getting at is that is has less to do with courage and more to do with the fact that the strong guys were putting up easy routes that were well below their own limits (e.g. 5.10), but that were bolted in a way that would prevent someone who has a limit of 5.10 from climbing them in the same fashion. I don't think this was courageous (although, as pointed out, guys sacked up plenty).
But what I'm not understanding is what hedge and others expect. For example, if I was climbing a 5.6 slab, which is well below my limit, I probably wouldn't place many bolts because (a) I wouldn't think about it, (b) it would take a lot of time and energy, (c) why? when I could conserve the bolts for another climb, etc. Should I, as the first ascentionist, instead bolt the climb so that it would be safe for a 5.6 climber? How would I put myself into said climber's shoes to know how far is too far to run it out?
|
|
BASE104
Social climber
An Oil Field
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2013 - 02:46pm PT
|
One thing for sure is that if these run out slabs remain generations after the FAist are long gone, and pretty much every climber is no longer steeped in a long mentorship clanging around with hexes and learning the details of the heroic deeds by his / her predecessors, a better argument than "sac up" is probably going to be necessary.
Yes, this is true. It is a real drag that climbers who are ten times better don't like that type of climbing.
I suspect that eventually most of the old slabs get retro bolted. Fine by me. They are just gathering dust now.
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
Colorado
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2013 - 02:48pm PT
|
Most of the arguments presented here result from attempting to compare the achievements of one generation with those of another. In a loosely regulated (or unregulated) sport like climbing this is never really satisfactory. If you are still climbing, climb in the here and now. To the youngsters who are breaking ground these commentaries must seem antediluvian. But, if you wish to dwell in the past, that is your prerogative, keeping in mind what was done, was done in contexts that can never be adequately recreated.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2013 - 02:49pm PT
|
jgill nails it ......
|
|
looking sketchy there...
Social climber
Latitute 33
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2013 - 03:05pm PT
|
Joe's premise is still false. The fact remains that many non-exceptional climbers established run out climbs near their limit and many more repeated such climbs.
Joe, you carefully don't address this basic fact.
You imply that Largo (and the handful of elite climber of his generation) were responsible for establishing the majority of these so-called "museum" climbs. This is patently false.
And, as an extension of this fallacious premise, you state:I expect "you" not to require me to do what you yourself never did - run it out at your level.
Which begs the question: Who is forcing you to do anything?
But even more fundamentally:
Should all risk be eliminated from climbing?
What level of risk is acceptable?
Should this apply only to 5.10s and 5.11s, or should 5.1s and 5.2s that have 20 foot run-outs be retro bolted?
Who should set the standards?
Since any answers to these questions are on one level arbitrary, perhaps the idea that the FA party should make these decisions (for better or worse) seems a reasonable approach after all.
|
|
WyoRockMan
climber
Flank of the Big Horns
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2013 - 03:14pm PT
|
...the best BUZZ i ever had in climbing was setting at the top of some rock after having pulled off some hideous run out. Such acts tend to make your confidence level soar like nothing else.
Spot on Ron!
I can’t remember any of the names of the routes I've done in Rushmore.
I can remember every one I've done in Custer.
I’m very thankful for the routes that were put up in a “minimalist” style, it is a fine check to the ego and creates the impetus to improve my ability.
|
|
patrick compton
Trad climber
van
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2013 - 03:18pm PT
|
jgill nails it ......
+1... and Gill's problems are at least as relevant today as they were then.... aka visionary.
|
|
Gary
Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2013 - 03:19pm PT
|
The Chief: GARY
Convenience Anchors
I am assuming you have not ever climbed T-Bolt nor Starlight nor any routes in Lee Vining etc. Oh and how about that El Cap or Half Dome or... Done anything on them?
So, did you place convenience anchors on North Peak? Yes or no. It's a simple question. Please clear it up for the doubters.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2013 - 03:35pm PT
|
I think John Gill has his finger on the pulse here. When we ask for examples of climbs that should be retro-bolted, there is a big silence. That's because we aren't arguing over what we do now; we're arguing over what people did then. If others really care about adding fixed protection to existing routes, please tell me the route(s) you think deserve such treatment.
As for what we did in the past, I have a quibble with word usage. Boldness and courage differ. To me, courage has no place in an activity pursued for fun. Soldiers going into battle demonstrate courage. Honnold and Pratt climbed boldly (and jgill bouldered boldly, too!) The only time courage should enter the climbing lexicon is in the context of an accident or rescue.
If I may use my terminology, I understand Joe H's point to be that not all of the runout leads we have now represented boldness by the first ascenders. That almost certainly is true. This issue, obviously, deals with the past, not the present.
I quibble with how Joe measures boldness, because to me, the "limit" of a leader necessarily includes the mental discipline needed to push a route into unknown territory. That differs from what a person can climb after intense rehearsal (e.g., a difficult boulder problem that the climber wired after innumerable tries).
It's like the difference between what I can play on the piano with lots of rehearsal, and what I can sight read. There's lots of difficult pieces I've performed in public, but I practiced a lot to get them up to performance standards. I could never have performed them publicly on sight.
Also, though, it's a matter of accepting the rock on its terms, not ours. Purists would argue that if we really cared about accepting the rock, we would place no bolts, so my standard is not "pure," but limiting placements to hand-drilled bolts on lead, I necessarily limit where I can place a bolt. If I allow myself to rap bolt, I only limit myself by my sloth (i.e. at some point my laziness prevents me from drilling more) and, in a few cases, accessibility via rappel (e.g. overhanging terrain).
From the comments on this thread, I think very few posters think we should eliminate all runouts. So again, my question for the present: which ones should be changed?
John
|
|
Gary
Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2013 - 03:46pm PT
|
Thanks for the clarification, Rick.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2013 - 03:57pm PT
|
B) are contrived run-outs that aren't worth the mental effort and tight shoes for the grade.
For starters, what is a "contrived run-out?" The rock is simply the rock. By standard logic, the more bolts you add to what wasn't there to being with, the more contrived (unnatural) it is. Simple as that.
The whole "museum climb" argument hinges on people who simply do not accept the ethic that ruled at the time: That risk management was just as much a factor to engage and respect and unhold as pure technical difficulty. "Not worth the mental effort" goes totally against Joe's contention that for the climber's putting up these routes at the time, there was no such "mental effort" because they were so much better than the route required. Now you come along, noting that the difficulty of the old slab routes is "museum" quality, meaning very low, but on the other hand, you balk that they "mental effort" is too high for a route so low down on the technical scale.
Sounds like you guys need to get your story together.
And Joe, you'll never sell your "hypocracy" angle to anyone because focusing on what someone else did had nothing to do with you. If you don't want to take the risk, don't take it. It's just that simple. End of story.
And this business of calling "sac it up" a sophmoric locker room ploy is simply silly. The idea that courage no longer has a place in rock climbing is an attitude that would astonish virtually every hard core legendary climber prior to about 1985. What's more, saying that making a stand for courage is childish and macho is to my mind the simple sour grapes yammering of a chickensh#t. Calling said courage "hypocracy," foolish, not worth it and so forth is a simple dodge away from the underlying and greater truth that the people making these statements are simply afraid of these routes, but lack the integrity to admit it. Or posing preposterous arguments such as: If that route was any harder, or was near a modern grade, then maybe the risk would be "worth it," when we know perfectly well that if the sad sac can't man up enough to get up a sketchy 5.10, he surely ain't gonna cut the mustard on a 5.11.
Lastly, if you think all of those run out museum climbs are Simple Simon technique wise, let me know and I'll come up and belay you on Black Primo or the first ten pitches of Mother Earth. Both were on-sighted at 5.12 A or B -- piss easy by modern standards - so you should make easy work of them both. Of course you can take 100 falls on easy 5.10 climbing on both routes, so you'll have to sac it up on those bits, Huckleberry.
JL
|
|
wstmrnclmr
Trad climber
Bolinas, CA
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2013 - 04:04pm PT
|
Climbs represent their place in time. For me, the climbs of the 70's represent what Largo spelled out: A time of adventure with an attitude towards environmentalism.. Aid climbing represents something different as does bouldering and sport climbing. all of them unique to a time and place in history. To alter any forms would be a shame as they represent their time and place.
Style wars have already been hashed out decades ago. You think Ron Kauk needs you to tell him about ethics. The man put up arguably the most iconic boulder problem in the world, some of the most iconic traditional climbs in the world and embraced and was on the cutting edge of sport climbing enduring fist fights and everything else that came along withi it. His sport climb "peace" sits near the Bachar/Yarian and both climbs have the respect of climbers of all styles.
And if he or anyone of the climbers who brought in the changing of the gaurd like Schneider or Smith who have great respect for tradition but also embraced new games give there consent to change their routes, then so be it. But I won't retro the original intent of what they did unless the community agrees to do so.
So far, there has not been one FA party that I've talked to that want's retro's installed on routes I've rebolted. Just the oppossit in fact. A bolt was just removed from "rawl drive " at the FA's wishes. It just got harder, not easier. And if I see that bolt go back in I'll chop it.
|
|
rnevius
Trad climber
San Luis Obispo, CA
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2013 - 04:20pm PT
|
*Yawn*
|
|
patrick compton
Trad climber
van
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2013 - 04:21pm PT
|
JL,
Fair enough on the contrived argument. I have my view, but it isn't definitively arguable. It is either preserving the rock by less bolts (I don't buy this), or opening the route for more people. To me, 10 bolts are the same impact as 1. The only pure pursuits are cracks (without anchor bolts) and bouldering.
Museum climbs aren't decided by me, or 'you' as you refereed to, but by lack of ascents. Does it say 'museum climb' in the guide? No, but by the lack of chalk and cobwebs you know when you see it or hear about it.
...and still it all comes down to sac-ing up? Ok, I have.... similar to Ron I soloed a few hard 11s in my late 20s, but when I got to the top on the last one, instead of the buzz of elation he describes, I decided I was more interested in sleeping with my girlfriend that night and climbing tomorrow than risking death today.
But that is me. I am not a hardman, I 'sac up' for the occasional runout 11 or 12 quality line, but in my middle age I'd rather throw myself at permadrawed caves, and that is exactly what I am going to do now that it has stopped raining.
In any case, I have a lot of respect for your contributions to sport. I apologize for some of my language and tone. But, I figure it is like the construction sites I worked on: if you take AND give sh#t you get more respect in the end.
peace out.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2013 - 04:29pm PT
|
DMT,
Do our views really differ all that much? I asked for the list of what should change because that question relates to what we do today. No one is worked up over making that list because, in my opinion, this thread has become centered on what others did in the past, not what we should be doing now.
I find the comments of wstmrnclmr very well thought out and very well presented. Most climbers have great respect both for Peace and Bachar-Yarian. I think any attempt by anyone to alter either of those routes now would produce a strong, maybe even violent, negative reaction. (Yes, I know, even B/Y's FA used tactics that weren't generally accepted by the guardians of purism in the day).
Maybe it gets down to the First Ascent Principle being like the "Pirate's Code" in "Pirates of the Caribbean," -- more of a guideline than a law. I personally think it's served us very well, by preserving all kinds of climbs in all kinds of styles. What's not to like?
John
Edit: Upon re-reading recent posts, I think this thread would have had much less traction if the references to runout leads didn't imply testosterone poisoning as the cause.
|
|
JEleazarian
Trad climber
Fresno CA
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2013 - 04:40pm PT
|
Where are the run-out slabs that were at the top of the best climber's abilities?
On the SE face of Lower Cathedral Rock, among other places.
John
|
|
Don Paul
Big Wall climber
Colombia, South America
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2013 - 04:45pm PT
|
What I got out of climbing in the long run was being able to deal with extreme situations and believing I was the master of that world. I am in my element and anyone who's never been there can BS me all they want, we'll see who's a poser and who bails. At some point you have to make a hard decision, and once made, there is no turning back. That's total focus and once there, I'm at my very best. At this age, I'm just glad I lived through all those times, but I'm definitely the better for it.
I dont know how other people got into this, but for me, I was amazed that people could just climb up the side of a cliff, and I wanted to be like them. The idea was incredible at first. And very scary for the first few years. I'm not sure it's like that for the people learning in gyms. For them, maybe if they get onto dangerous terrain, it feels like something is wrong. I have mixed feelings about it, because I wouldn't want to encourage anyone to do anything to get themselves killed, but I know what the experience did for me.
|
|
Loomis
climber
Svět
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2013 - 04:58pm PT
|
I think too many people are taking this shít way too serious, come on, it's only scrubbing ones mitts up a fučking stone wall. The rock does not care if one is there, we place the value and a story behind it. We see if we can start a tribe of followers. Facebook is an excellent way to monetize this following.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2013 - 05:27pm PT
|
Does the same claim apply to mountains?
Yes .... if I do the mountain first I own it.
I'll determine what you can do there or not.
If you go against my wishes I will release 100 tomahawks for 48 hours and you'll be toast.
It's the American way .... Jose .....
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
|
Sep 12, 2013 - 05:34pm PT
|
This is the last I'll say to this.
Back when I was about 18, I remember complaining to Bridwell and Klemens that it looked like Twilight Zone was basically unprotectable with Hexes and they asked why that was their problem. If I lacked the sac to do the route, where did I get off complaining about it?
Now how about if I'd said to them their attitude was childish locker room macho posturing and that I expected more from such luminaries. For starters, macho was part of the game back then. Big Time. But it was never something someone postured - rather it was all part of the old "Rodeo Code."
"There's no explaining and no complaining. You either get out there and do it, or you don't. And nobody cars about nothing else."
This "something else" is all this bitter talk about "fraud," and hypocrits, and macho posers, just the rattling on of those not cut out for this rodeo. The problem some of us have is that they still want to rodeo, but by their own rules, rules that were not around at the time the bulls were actually ridden, so to speak.
So why are there cobwebs on those precious few routes? What keeps people off them? Fear, or lack of technical ability?
It is fear, and we all know it. But we have not once heard anyone say as much. Instead we get disparaging comments about how the old broncs are hypocrates, frauds, and macho posers. But in fact they were people rodeoing by the old rules. Trying to yank these old routes out of context and judging them by today's controlled risk mindset is like what Dingus said about the 1918 marathon. You've missed the point entirely.
JL
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!