Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Russ Walling
Social climber
Out on the sand, Man.....
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 10, 2006 - 02:05pm PT
|
hahaha! I would have to go with "midget" to help out my fellow "Valley Boy".
Not sure what the fuk is going on there.... but it kinda looks like an un-convicted but accused shiiter with a cheat stick...... THE SHAME!
Good work Neff.
|
|
Nefarius
Big Wall climber
Fresno, CA
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2006 - 02:22pm PT
|
I really like your response about cheat stick use, Russ. Seems pretty reasonable. Even on the easy aid I've done (in comaprison to the topic), I've never taken one with me and don't intend to start. I've seen them plenty, while watching people through a long lens on the end of my camera though. It has just always occurred to me that there *is* a way through it, if you suck it up and figure it out.
I wonder if a lot of things out there for reading might lead people new to aid to believe it's actually somewhat acceptable. You certainly can read, even here, on the route pages where people use them and no one really gives them any grief about it.
|
|
Russ Walling
Social climber
Out on the sand, Man.....
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Aug 10, 2006 - 02:33pm PT
|
Neff writes: I wonder if a lot of things out there for reading might lead people new to aid to believe it's actually somewhat acceptable. You certainly can read, even here, on the route pages where people use them and no one really gives them any grief about it.
Like most things, it boils down to personal style or what you have been taught. I was taught that they were puss, and have never used one or taken one on a route.... that I can recall...
But.... people use them all the time. Here is the problem/no problem with that:
This falls under the heading of "I don't care what you do (except for damaging the rock) as long as I don't have to hear about it". So if a sprayer used a cheat stick and starts spraying about some hard asss route and how he floated it etc... that is bullshiit without disclosing the use of a stick. If Joe Anyone goes and does the Column and says, "yeah, I used a cheat stick on the Kor roof and the rest of the route was easy"..... then big deal. What do I care if he used a ladder.
I guess I only care when there is not full diclosure on harder stuff. Ratings are our yardstick for ego, pecking order, and all the rest. Cheating with a stick makes routes easier. The playing field is no longer level.
|
|
Nefarius
Big Wall climber
Fresno, CA
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2006 - 03:00pm PT
|
Good stuff, Russ, for sure.
I was also taught the same about cheat sticks and things, in general. And, I agree, it *does* all come down to personal style. Any of those guys saw me use a stick and I'd "have sand in my vagina" for sure. I'd never hear the end of it.
I think, luckily for me, that I started out climbing with guys that were from a previous generation. They instilled a good ethic in me.
When looking around at the newer climbers in my local area, I'm kind of pissed off about what I see. Ethics in general seem to have gone out the window. I often wonder if they simply don't know any better, as so many people start climbing in gyms now. They've even gone as far as to upload a topo to a site with re-named and re-graded routes, all on a re-named wall. The real wall, route and grades have existed for years and years.
While I'm not going to sh#t on anyone's gear, it really pisses me and others off. So I can understand when people feel like a local ethic has been violated and get heated, and I take interest in what others think about their local ethics. While I don't live in Yos, I consider it to be my home crag away from home, as it's only an hour and half away and I spend great amounts of time there. In light of that, what all of you guys think is important to me.
Anyway, I really appreciate your thoughts on this stuff, Russ. Thanks.
|
|
Matt
Trad climber
places you shouldn't talk about in polite company
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2006 - 03:33pm PT
|
re: "Matt - only a moron [like you] would suggest that Mark and Richard chiselled and drilled their way up a slab. All you have to do is look at the first two pitches, which you can see from the ground, to know that this is not true."
actually, that really is my opinion.
i have been persuaded that, just as i said umpteen times upthread, these guys need to be judged in the context of the era of their climb. therefore, how there tactics (or anyone else's tactics) sit w/ me is of little consequence.
truth be told, they never said the didn't chisel and drill their way up the slab, they have only argued that they did it in a style that was bold and committing, and not entirely divergent from this example or that, and they seem to have some valid arguments to that end.
it's an open question (and always will be) whether they would have looked at "ethics" or "tactics" differently, had they "paid their dues", if you take that phrase to mean submerging themselves in the culture and the community (i suppose in their defense, there is another open question as to whether or not the "community" would have ever really let them in). would they have encountered anyone with the same ideas that JM spoke of, in terms of a new idealistic approach, specific to the early 80's, rather than measuring their approach by the yardsticks of what they had read about? we will never know. if they had been more of the hero-worshiping type, would they have been more interested in seeking out the tutalidge(sp?) of established valley climbers? would they have found people who had these ideas that JM describes? would those ideas have changed the values that M&R brought w/ them from their past experiences? who knows. it doesn't really matter.
as for my comment, that you quoted above, i have since retracted it, in the contect of this thread. and therefore in the context of the intent to criticize these guys.
that doesn't mean that i don't still have that opinion, in the context of my own value system, and in terms of what i would or could ever do myself. as i see it, these guys hooked their way up when and where they could. when they couldn't hook, they pulled out a tool to manipulate the rock enough to provide them with the opportunity to hook. when they couldn't do that, they drilled a rivet. they drilled regular but infrequent protection bolts to prevent their potential falls from being suicidal or otherwise unacceptable, and the need for those bolts was maximized, relatively speaking, by the fact that the line they chose offered little in the way of natural protection.
as i read these threads, none of these points are contested. all that has been argued (and argued w/ some success by R&M) was that what they did was no different that what was done by this guy or that, in various well respected instances.
that does not mean that i as an individual see their tactics as acceptable or ethical, in terms of my own relationship w/ the rock that i climb, or in the world that i live in, as i see it.
you pedro, state repeatedly that you cannot see any evidence of drilling/chipping/manufacturing on the 2 pitches that you ascended via toprope. in my opinion, in terms of what sort of interaction i find acceptable, that is not the measuring stick, but i do recognize that it's not so different than what goes on in other venues (consider for example the cleaning of a
"new" bouldering problem w/ a wire brush, or the use of a crowbar to make a sport climb "safe").
my opinion, which again i have specifically retracted from any sort of criticism of R&M or their route, would be that using the drill bit as a chisel cheapens the climb. obviously, they can defend that in terms of the tactics of others in that era, and i only make that statement in terms of my own value system, which is not in any way important in terms of the legacy of WoS, which i have repeatedly stated i believe should be judged in the context of the era it went up. so w/ that in mind, if the drill/chisel was used only 3-8 times (as you, pedro, stated in one post) than those few indescretions hardly seem worthwhile in terms of the requirement of such a significant footnote (a footnote that, just like the use of a cheaterstick or a bathook or whatever, is necessary in terms of the legitimacy associated w/ full disclosure), and if in fact it was 10-20% of the hook placements (as M stated in a post in 10/05), that strikes me as a manipulation to a very substantial portion of the hard hook placements (can we not assume that at least a few placements were bomber, and others moderate, leaving some percentage of the total as truely sick? so the percentage of the hard placements overall, would then be greater than what was mentioned above).
in terms of my relationship w/ the rock, all of that is bogus. that is not to say that i can criticize them anymore than i can disrespect the practices of aid climbing in general, and the wide acceptance of continuously progressive damage and destruction to rock, in the name of manufacturing repeated ascents. when you layer that over the regular placement of protection and anchor bolts, and then divide by the total # of climbers who ever have or ever will use them, the overall impact easily surpasses any threshold that i personally, in my own mind, and in my own perspective, could ever become comfortable with.
the fact that you, pedro, are not of the same opinion, is of no consequence to me whatsoever, and the fact that you could go through your whole big wall career and become competent to ascend horse chute, and still need to be told, after the fact, that drilling a rivet on a route like that for only the convenience of hanging a ledge is unacceptable, makes me laugh heartily when you call me a moron.
R&M, i did not write any of that post w/ the intent to criticize you, and again, i was not climbing in 1982 and i am not judging you. best of luck to you both, you do seem like bright guys and have been remarkablly patient here.
carry on.
EDIT
i still fail to understand why each and every time the drill bit touched the rock, that is not recorded and considered an equal entry in the hole count, but that again is not my fight. R stated above somewhere that they were not criticized at the time for that, and i would counter that perhaps among all the ruckus at the time, it was not clearly communicated by them? either way, it's all just banter now, and they have taken more than their share of public flogging, so if there ever is/was and discrepancy, time served...
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2006 - 05:10pm PT
|
Christian, things seem to be happening on this thread now, although you posted your summary of points on the "apology" thread. My voluminous responses didn't seem appropriate there, so I've posted them on the "Mimi" thread (which seemed the active thread at that time):
http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.html?topic_id=236000&f
Thanks for the great summary of issues.
And, Matt, points taken. Thanks.
|
|
elcapfool
Big Wall climber
hiding in plain sight
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2006 - 07:50pm PT
|
Randy,
I am not cool with that. Nope, not at all.
You are doing to me what "the unseen hoard" did to R&M back in the day. And that is ironic, since I reported that I failed on the route. I freely admit I couldn't muster the gumption to climb the route, and you feel the need to say you heard from "sources" that I failed even lower than I really did?
Should I send you a rope to shlt on?
That's really uncool, especially since I am doing far more than most to be rightous about this whole debacle.
|
|
Nefarius
Big Wall climber
Fresno, CA
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2006 - 08:30pm PT
|
Christian,
I'm thinking maybe you need to read what I actually wrote, in the first place. Maybe "heard" was a poor choice of words, but frequently gets used online in place of read. Human nature. I think you're getting your panties all in a bunch for assuming it was told to me. I stated, for clarification, that I thought I read it here. As far as anything else, I honestly couldn't say. See, I actually talk to a LOT of people about this thing real time. Not just post here. I've heard every opinion on this there can possibly be. Anything about your claims is nothing I've saved any notes on or made any real special note or effort to remember.
Now if it's honestly your concern that either Pete or Ammon said something to me, then it sounds like you have something to talk to them about. Sounds like you have some issue with one of them and are rather defensive that he may be saying something about you. That is rather removed from me. And, incidentally, as far as my part, 3500 miles really has nothing to do with it. I really don't have a problem with sitting down and talking to someone and being open with them. I'd ask the same questions of you in person.
I expressed my own questions/doubts, whatever you want to call it, based on the hammering and why no one else, including myself has noticed it. I believe even Mark and Richard has wondered about that, possibly here or maybe in person. Ya got me, at this point as to which with a thousand emails and a thousand posts.
Regardless, any issue you might have with me is outside of this "debacle" and how you should feel about it. *I* in no way should have any influence on that. Especially since you spent time on the route.
Done. And back to actually accomplishing real world stuff for a bit. I'd like to continue to make money.
|
|
elcapfool
Big Wall climber
hiding in plain sight
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2006 - 09:30pm PT
|
Nice try, but this is what you wrote.
"Here's the thing, concerning your claims. First, I've heard expressed doubt, a few times, about your claims of getting up that far on the route."
I shouldn't care, but for some reason i feel the need to get indignant at that.
If you're saying it wasn't Pete or Ammon, then I suppose it shouldn't matter at all.
|
|
Matt
Trad climber
places you shouldn't talk about in polite company
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2006 - 09:37pm PT
|
truce be damned, lets have the DIRT!
all this reconciliation is f*#king dull anyway
|
|
elcapfool
Big Wall climber
hiding in plain sight
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2006 - 09:44pm PT
|
Matt,
I love you man! (In a Bud light sort of way...)
I gotta go spend some time with the wife, but Dr. Piton is in the reticle, and the trigger finger is getting itchy.
Tune in tomorrow for the regularly scheduled ass-ripping...
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2006 - 09:59pm PT
|
"What you KNOW is that the rivets were never intended to hold falls"
Why put in a rivet with this kind of thinking?
Weird .............
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2006 - 10:48pm PT
|
To "keep the commitment level high" where we can't find a usable hook placement.
|
|
darod
Trad climber
South Side Billburg
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2006 - 11:15pm PT
|
Well, that sounds like manufacturing a grade to me, and I have to concur with WBraun on this one. IMO, if you're going to drill, then make the damage to the rock worth something.
To me that thinking is just a little better than a bat hook hole, bad style, actually no, i thnk is worse.
darod.
|
|
Nefarius
Big Wall climber
Fresno, CA
|
|
|
Aug 10, 2006 - 11:27pm PT
|
elcapfool wrote -- "You can't apologize worth shlt.
Makes perfect sense to me you're friends with Pete.
You both deserve a good punch in the teeth. "
Whatever, dude.
Well, the apology was really for your misunderstanding. For something you can't accept. I'd think, as evidenced by my apology up above, to Russ, that if I *really* felt like I had something to apologize for I would be pretty direct about it.
I'll count it as a failed attempt to keep things mature and civil.
I'd use your own words here, however, about the being so bold when 3500 miles away, bullsh#t. Tell ya what sport, since I am certainly good friends with Pete, and generally deliver him to the valley and pick him up for his return flight, not to mention all of the countless weekends I spend in the valley, in between, you should have no problems in trying to find and deliver on your threat. Or, you could just have a beer and chill/laugh over what is undoubtedly stupid.
I think we're done now.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2006 - 01:07am PT
|
I'm honestly not getting this one, Werner and darod. So, since I'm clearly missing something here, let's start with the presumptions I must be having and try to get to the bottom of them.
Are you advocating that every drilled placement be a bolt, and that if a drilled placement is not a bolt then it's "manufactured difficulty?" I'm honestly trying to understand your position here.
|
|
Matt
Trad climber
places you shouldn't talk about in polite company
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2006 - 02:38am PT
|
you didn't ask that of me, but i'll take a stab at it anyway.
what exactly do you think "manufactured difficulty" would be, if it's not defined by what you tried to do?
in your own words, " I'm honestly trying to understand your position here", so-
is this the logic(?):
we can't hook here-
we can't even improve a placement and hook-
so we are going to drill a hole here-
but, we still want to keep this fall potentially dangerous-
so we aren't going to put anything in this hole that will hold a fall-
and yet, we may have to "improve" a hook placement or 2 above this hole that we are drilling, because the fall from there would be too serious...
honestly, is there more to it than that?
cause this aid climbing sh#t may be even more "way gay" than i'd thought.
EDIT-
i just checked upthread, it says there are 75 rivets, is that right? in how many pitches? plus ther are about 30 protection bolts, right? and in 10/05 M posted that there are about 150 hook placements, is that also right? can that all be right? because that would mean, on average, there are 2 drilled placements (specifically rivets and in pitch protection bolts) for every 3 hook moves, not including anchors?
are there ladders that skew that ratio or what?
(shows you how much i know about the route...ha!)
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2006 - 03:00am PT
|
"and yet, we may have to "improve" a hook placement or 2 above this hole that we are drilling, because the fall from there would be too serious... "
I don't believe that is a fair characterization of what M & R or Pete and Ammon have said at all. The few grains they removed were to make the hooks [they had] work at all in those spots - not to simply make them more secure or bomber which is what you are implying. They also stated in some cases they may have been able to accomplish the same thing by weighting the hook, but that was going to make just establishing the hook a game of russian roulette. If Ammon spent 25 minutes pondering flakes and didn't see signs of their passage I think it's a safe bet your characterizations simply don't hold water. And again, short of having whatever Petzl hooks Christian had (along with his obvious skills) I can't believe you believe anyone (i.e. you, JM, or Ammon) would be able to traverse a line in that vicinity any differently. I still maintain the line dictated the means of travel, not M & R; especially since they climbed totally conventionally above the apron and on SoD.
Ammon: From what I did see on the first two pitches was: It is NOT a bolt ladder like I previously thought. They used every possible features to climb the slab. No lack of balls, either. I took some pretty good rides and was impressed with how far they made their run-outs.
|
|
Matt
Trad climber
places you shouldn't talk about in polite company
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2006 - 03:23am PT
|
re: "in some cases they may have been able to accomplish the same thing by weighting the hook, but that was going to make just establishing the hook a game of russian roulette"
i was pretty certain i read in some upthread post where the idea of hooking w/out improving might have worked, but it would have been too serious to find out the hard way, thanks for digging up the quote for me.
i'm sure there's a million different ways you can choose to see this stuff.
|
|
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
|
Aug 11, 2006 - 03:28am PT
|
I'd agree with that depending on the power of your microscope...
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!