Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2008 - 11:51am PT
|
Regarding those machine head bolts. Jardine kinda started with that idea.
He used grade 8 machine bolts as anchors. On the Crimson Cringe at the start of the undercling there were 2 of those bolts that Bachar eventually chopped.
Jardine before using these bolts did some crude tests by throwing off a huge weight onto the bolts and shock loading them.
The idea caught on as a cheap alternative to the rawl 1/4 inch bolt.
As far as Coz and Shultz being poor back then is 100% spot on correct. We were all pretty damn poor as far as money goes.
|
|
couchmaster
climber
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2008 - 12:13pm PT
|
Joe Hedge said: the fact that Schultzie rapped down SB and replaced the bolts after the FFA, which seems to me is kind of a tacit admission that the level of quality of work that needs to be done to establish a route like that can't really be done as part of a ground-up ascent, and that you can either focus on the ethical side and put in less-than-optimal bolts, or focus on the quality-of-hardware side and rap bolt. The fact that SB eventually was rap-bolted undercuts the argument that ground-up is somehow the style that needs to be adhered to and respected..
So Joe, are you now saying they did NOT get the FFA per Bachar and Scott Cosgroves assertions that rapping down first invalidates the ascent?
|
|
bhilden
Trad climber
Mountain View, CA
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2008 - 01:21pm PT
|
I read Bisharat's piece and have to say that he certainly did not take the time to read and nor try to understand the posts on this topic. Too bad, he missed one of the best climbing threads he has never read.
I took particluar offense to the following statement, "all the gumbies who get to turn themselves into the climbers they've always wanted to be--fearless, hardcore, moralist, old school, new school, whatever."
One of the things I really like about SuperTopo is that people are pretty darn honest about their accomplishments and the opinions of those who have accomplished the most seem to be given more weight in discussions because of their credibility.
Bruce
|
|
bler
Boulder climber
Alamo, CA
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2008 - 01:28pm PT
|
Andrew Bisharat's article is retarded.. to write an article on a thread he admittantly never read and then to post his opinion on R&I..
|
|
caughtinside
Social climber
Davis, CA
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2008 - 01:35pm PT
|
I thought Bisharat's piece was a breath of fresh air!
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2008 - 01:56pm PT
|
I thought it was foolishness incarnate. Here's the comment I left
"You grow up Andrew. How dare you pose as a journalist when you first admit you didn't even pay attention to the thread. The community discussing those issues included the first ascent party of Growing Up and the many long time members of the Yosemite climb community, including key players on "Southern Belle"
We used to solve those disputes with chopping bolts and fist fights. Now you claim techology is a worse solution for engaging dialog?
50 years from now, if society hasn't collapsed, future generations of climbers will read that thread and have an idea about how and why the ethics of the time developed and evolved.
I support the Growing Up team and I support those offended by it offering their objections.
I also might add that the internet, where your own editorial is posted ironically, is the last bastion of free expression. Image how much more tainted our knowledge of the evils of the Iraq war would be if we had to rely on mainstream media for our information?
Peace
Baba"
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, Ca
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2008 - 02:04pm PT
|
I find it interesting that while blogging about a discussion he has not followed he rags on those who comment on a route they have not done. And then there is this gem:
"Of course, I have an opinion--that it frustrates me when old-school climbers lose their minds any time anyone climbs in a different style than they did a hundred years ago--but I don't think that my opinion is important enough to post anonymously in a forum."
Then don't post anonymously. Duh. And I don't see any "old schoolers" losing their minds over Alex Honnold's recent climbs although they are certainly in a style not done 100 years ago. It is not about the style being different.
And this one:
" ...bash sport climbers, glorify the 5.9s of 20 years ago, and so on."
Who's bashing sport climbers? How about the 5.12s of 20 years ago? (You know - the one's that would be 5.13 if they went up today..)
Obviously the guy has no clue who some of the posters on this thread are...
edit: Well said, Karl.
|
|
philo
Trad climber
boulder, co.
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2008 - 02:07pm PT
|
Posted by phil_broscovak - 12:04:02 pm | Delete post
Here is my post to Andrew B;
I whole heartedly agree with Karl Baba. Andrew you do a disservice by making generalized assumptions about a thread you have not fully read. On going dialogue (or in this case blogalogue) Is a very positive thing. Most posters to the Growing Up thread would agree it has been a lively, spirited and valuable exchange. Preferable in every way to the fisticuffs and bolt wars of the past. For you to represent this dialogue as an excercise of spew by newbie wanna bees and ancient has beens is sad and absurd. Go back and read it all before you opine again. Is it possible that you are worried that more people are turning to the interactive blogosphere for their information rather than paying for the canned opinions of the commercially driven mags? Are you afraid for your own position and thus compelled to spew too?
|
|
Mr_T
Trad climber
Somewhere, CA
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2008 - 02:11pm PT
|
Not a very well written piece of Op-Ed at that.
Bisharat does miss the key to this 1444 post thread - nobody has chopped Growing Up. Yos had its wave of grid bolting in the early 90's. That came and went. Years later this new route shows up. People talk it over on the web - no punch outs, not chopped bolts.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2008 - 02:21pm PT
|
"Yos had its wave of grid bolting in the early 90's."
It did?
One of the things I really like about SuperTopo is that people are pretty darn honest about their accomplishments and the opinions of those who have accomplished the most seem to be given more weight in discussions because of their credibility.
Nice one Bruce.
BTW, I also commented on the R&I editorial, pretty much the same as stated above: How can somebody comment on content they admit to never reading? Silly...
One other point--the one thing this here thread has caused me to do is to want to go and check out that face. I'm going crazy to get up there.
|
|
survival
Big Wall climber
A Token of My Extreme
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2008 - 02:31pm PT
|
Andrew, your opinion is squat compared to the vast well of experience that has posted on this thread. You're so connected to reality and so unwilling to participate in this "unreal" discussion that you post up on R&I where you get to have your soapbox all to yourself. Wow, so impressive.
You're not qualified to wash the jock straps of many who have posted on this thread. Amen.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2008 - 03:06pm PT
|
I've read here how some folks will not climb Growing Up because they don't
endorse the style in which it was set. Or perhaps they'll do the first
crack pitches, then rap off.
I'm wondering, how many of you have not done a route simply because of the
style in which it was created? I mean, flat-out not even stepped on the
stone. Have you done this once, or is it your personal ethic to never
do routes that weren't put up in an acceptable style?
The only time I might have considered the style when choosing a route is
if somebody rap-bolted an X route, which is just a darn silly thing to do.
|
|
bler
Boulder climber
Alamo, CA
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2008 - 03:12pm PT
|
discussions and arguments hopefully lead to resolution of an issue. witch is what posts like these are about, expressing your opinion and understanding others then reaching some middle ground.
i unfortunately have no real ground to make statements on this issue, but there are plenty of people here with many many years of experience with this that DO have grounds to discuss their position as well as the people who are immediately involved to state theirs.
it sure is fun reading this thread being interested in climbing ethics. :)
|
|
hemp22
climber
PDX
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2008 - 04:12pm PT
|
k-man wrote: " how many of you have not done a route simply because of the style in which it was created? "
I'll give one data point from the point-of-view of a relatively young/new climber: Personally, I never have, and probably never will, choose whether or not to climb a route based solely on the style that was used to establish it. I could write a much longer dissertation on why I feel that way....but not sure it'd be worth anyone taking the time to read it.
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, Ca
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2008 - 04:48pm PT
|
I don't decide whether or not to try a route based simply on how it was first done. But, I do get something extra out of doing routes which have a proud history. I love climbing up to some wicked thin stance and imagining what so and so went through to get a bolt drilled there, or doing a runout (which could have been bolted from above) and getting to re live the first person's experience to some degree because they chose to do it as a lead.
So in an area where the ethics have been traditional for a time, I'll probably choose routes which have that as a background for the most part because of the added depth of experience that comes from seeing that fa unfold as I do the climb.
|
|
csdude
Trad climber
colo springs CO
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2008 - 05:04pm PT
|
* bump *
|
|
Eddie
Trad climber
San Francisco
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2008 - 05:23pm PT
|
Another data point.
Even if I cared what style the route was done in (in terms of me choosing to climb it or not), that would be secondary in importance to me in terms of whether the route seemed
fun/exciting/adventurous (or whatever you are looking for).
I won't climb a crappy climb just because the first ascent team had an epic on it but continued in good style and managed to finish it. But I WILL climb a fun/adventurous climb that was put up in poor style. Or even poor ethics...
It seems like avoiding a fun climb to make a point about style is only punishing yourself. I don't think the FA people will be offended if you don't climb it.
I recognize that the importance and definition of popularity is another issue, I'm just responding the question laid forth a few posts ago.
cheers.
Pete
PS edit:
Ethics vs style question. If I avoid climbing a route because it was put up in bad style, is that choice made based on my style or ethics? As in, does it inherently transform a style issue into an ethics one (i.e. "I'm not climbing it because I need to uphold my ethics')? Or is that 'principle'...
|
|
Mr_T
Trad climber
Somewhere, CA
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2008 - 05:32pm PT
|
Yos grid bolting - all that "Energizer", "Killer Pillar", Chapel Wall clip-up stuff that went in - wasn't that all early 90's? I assume it was on rap, possibly power drill.
|
|
deuce4
climber
Hobart, Australia
|
|
|
Apr 16, 2008 - 05:52pm PT
|
I believe "Punch Line" on Arch was one of the first rap bolted lines in Yosemite (at least, one of the first under the guise of the "new, modern, 'improved' style/ethic" of climbing).
The name reflects an infamous event. I think the route went up in the late 80's actually.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!