Erik Sloan’s Latest Victim – Ten Days After

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List

This thread has been locked

Messages 181 - 200 of total 723 in this topic

<< First | < Previous | Show All | Next > | Last >>

mtnyoung

Trad climber

Twain Harte, California

Oct 16, 2015 - 01:53pm PT

fivethirty said:

As a "young" climber, I have yet to hear a compelling reason why the FA party should blanket own the route.

This is an honest and appropriate question from a poster who's been consistently positive and upbeat on this site. He's clearly an actual climber and is also the type of poster that makes Supertopo better.

So here's my stab at answers:

1. This ethic avoids chaos:

If the decisions made by the first ascent party aren't to govern the route after the first ascent, then what will govern it? It bears repeating - what "rule" would apply if it isn't this one?

It seems obvious that if any climbing party could add bolts to any route, total chaos would result. To an extent, the same result would follow if any party could subtract bolts from a climb, too.

There's no way that all climbers will ever agree on what is the higher value as between safety and risk. Parties will (and do) disagree on what makes a good route. They disagree on what makes a fun route, and they disagree on what makes a challenging route. There won't be agreement on this subject in general and there won't be agreement on it as to various, specific climbing routes. And so, if there is no "rule," no strongly held consensus of whether a route can be "changed" after it's first ascent (especially by the addition or subtraction of bolts), parties will add bolts and they might also subtract them at will.

In short, total chaos would result. Neither the rock itself (which is highly worthy of respect) nor the climbing community would benefit from such chaos.

A hard and fast rule (especially one steeped in tradition and history; see below) is one very good way to avoid such chaos. It may be the only way.

2. This ethic is clean and easy to apply:

Again, if the decisions made by the first ascent party aren't to govern the route after the first ascent, then what will govern it? What rule will apply?

If this rule isn't valid, then can a route be changed after the first ascent by consensus? If so, how strong a consensus, and who decides? How is a consensus to be formed? Would a consensus to make a route more dangerous require a stronger consensus?

What about leaving such decisions in the hands of the "best" climbers? Would that work? As an exercise, find me five climbers who can agree on what makes up the "best" climber. Just five who agree. Not likely?

Am I a "better" climber because I handle risk better than my buddy who climbs only on "safe" routes? Or is he the better climber because he leads 5.12s, while I max out on 5.11s?

I can't imagine a different "clean" rule, one that's easy to apply and is thus likely to be followed by a vast majority. Can any other climber here plainly and clearly describe such a rule?

3. This ethic has a strong tradition:

This argument in favor of letting the first ascent party "own" a route - "tradition" - is the best known and most frequently made. And it's a damn good argument to many. It's especially a good argument to those who enjoy the history of our sport. After all, what place in history would routes like Bacher Yerian (in Tuolumne Meadows), or Conduit to the Cosmos (at Pinnacles) have if they'd been dumbed down by subsequent ascents?

4. This ethic would prevent the "dumbing down" of all routes:

I, for one, value risk as an essential element of climbing. I'm glad that I'll never exist in a climbing world where all routes are "safe." I even resent those who try to make all routes "safe." Should all routes be safe? Aren't there plenty of safe routes around? Or should all climbs be gym-like so that injury is factored out and climbing becomes an exercise in outdoor gymnastics?

The question is phrased in a way that makes my answer to it clear. Is there really any climber out there who wants all routes to be equally safe? And, in the unlikely event that anyone can truly answer "yes' to this question, don't we circle back to the question: "then who gets to decide what "safe" means?

5. This ethic shows respect for others:

So, a clear and easy to apply "rule" prevents dumbing down every climb; it prevents chaos. What other value does such an ethic have? It fosters respect for others, respect for other people; in this case other climbers who came before us.

The older I get, the more that I value respect and kindness toward other people. In climbing and in life in general, discounting other people's values can be insulting and disrespectful. In this sport, there's tons of safe climbs out there, and tons that aren't safe. Is it really ever necessary to "tell" the first ascent party that their decisions were "bad" decisions by altering what they did?

I don't think so. As demonstrated in other threads on this forum, other climbers are willing to do that (and, ironically, the "other," disrespected climbers are then willing to be jerks to the original offenders and thus perpetuate a vicious cycle).

Ed Hartouni

Trad climber

Livermore, CA

Oct 16, 2015 - 02:44pm PT

If you ran across a crag in the woods with old crappy bolts or old pins or whatever and it hadn't been climbed at for 25 years, I don't think it would be any great loss retrobolt those routes. It's not like anyone was there enjoying them in the mean time and as the popularity of the sport grows congestion at crags is real.

You might rebolt the original route, you might replace the pins, and you might do all this on lead...
that would properly recognize the FA's vision on the route.

As far as the convenience of "opening up more rock" because of congestion at the crags?

If you have any example where this has actually worked I'd be interested to hear about it... I think it is an argument made as a "hypothetical."

Congestion at crags is caused by lots of climbers climbing what they are told are the routes to climb. In Yosemite Valley, there are 4000 routes (2500 in the last comprehensive guide). I doubt that 90% of those see many climbers...

...this is a justification of retro-bolting which routes in order to reduce congestion? It would be great to have a list...

There are many fewer aid routes, it would seem even more problematic to apply the "reduce congestion on the Nose" by opening up which El Cap routes? Or WFLT by bringing Ten Days After down to its level?

And who decides that "congestion" is a problem, and being so, requires mitigation?

"If you ran across a crag in the woods..."

have you ever? I have, and in Yosemite... leave it be or replace what is there in need of replacing. Don't add... or take away...

pyro

Big Wall climber

Calabasas

Oct 16, 2015 - 02:57pm PT

WBraun wrot:

It's the warrior class.

It's now infiltrated and run by the pussy class.

The pussy class is trying to imitate the warrior class.

Some routes have been done in a certain way for a reason of high caliber.

When the world has become soft the soft will come to alter these routes to their present soft consciousness.

And thus the world will continue to slide downhill into softness (pussyfide)

It's happening because the fools "think" there's only one life period.

They are clueless ....

Godamn too funny!

madbolter1

Big Wall climber

Denver, CO

Oct 16, 2015 - 04:00pm PT

Old guys butthurt about old mank hardware getting replaced get slanderous

Nobody is "butthurt" about old, mank hardware getting replaced. That claim is itself slanderous. The vast majority are rightfully unhappy about ONE guy unilaterally taking it upon himself to entirely change the character of entire routes, particularly when he pounds his own chest about it.

real climber

Who might that be? ES? Opinions vary on that point! Drilling an existing route down to your (low) level is not being a "real climber." Werner is spot-on regarding the pussification of existing warrior routes.

and they revert to their usual spewing of ethical prattle

It's "prattle" to express unhappiness at the pussification of existing routes? LOL

Such a "summary" is a pussification of legitimate discussion.

the Fet

climber

Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La

Oct 16, 2015 - 04:26pm PT

530 you're not running your mouth, you are engaging in a discussion and seem willing to learn. If more people were like that we wouldn't run into these issues as much.

The leave the route as the FA did it "rule" isn't arbitrary, it's well thought out and really the only practical idea that I can think of that will preserve the original challenge of most routes as previous posters have discussed.

It's not perfect for reasons you mention. But the few cases where it limits the popularity of some climbs is an acceptable trade off for helping to maintain many other routes IMO.

For the record I'm not against adding belay bolts (I'd prefer the minimum number of the beefiest bolts for aesthetic reasons) and rap routes, because they don't affect the nature of the actual climbing. Unless it's some A5 horror show, where a sketchy belay is PART of the challenge of the climb, then you must leave it alone.

I'm not really opposed to changing rivet ladders to bolts, because that is contrived difficulty IMO, but a big part of the challenge of climbing is mental, so if an FAist wants to leave sketchy rivets as part of that challenge I think we should respect that wish. But for climbs like the Nose where Harding left the bolts hanging out because it was taking too long to put them in all they way, and with the nature of that route, then putting in the best hardware in is fine.

Gene

climber

Oct 16, 2015 - 04:37pm PT

What about replacing/filling a bathook hole with a rivet? FA’s rights versus ‘if you drill it, fill it?’

MisterE

Gym climber

Being In Sierra Happy Of Place

Oct 16, 2015 - 04:47pm PT

Awesome rant by WBraun!

Really tops - 9/10!

mtnyoung

Trad climber

Twain Harte, California

Oct 16, 2015 - 04:51pm PT

Awesome rant by WBraun!

Really tops - 9/10!

He really does hit it perfectly now and then :)

Handjam Belay

Gym climber

expat from the truth

Oct 16, 2015 - 04:54pm PT

Wbraun +1000000000000000000000

Truth.

mtnyoung

Trad climber

Twain Harte, California

Oct 16, 2015 - 04:55pm PT

fivethirty,

I like your views and your posts have made me curious about your age. Would you be willing to post how old you are here?

Also, I'd be happy to run into you at Pinns this season.

Any chance you're working at the trails work weekend the last weekend of this month (next weekend)?

If not, look around while you're climbing there in the next few months. Look for an old guy ranting about ethics (or, actually just ranting in general).

couchmaster

climber

Oct 16, 2015 - 05:11pm PT

Wade quote:

"So Couch, you just bumped the thread to twist panties and engender more hate? Nice work. "

No, I bumped it because it was climbing content I tripped over and there were so many non-climbing topics on the front page. The panty twisting was an unintended consequence. I guess I should have expected it. Intersting that RS asked twice for a first hand report from a person who has climbed the route and no one has stepped up.

I know nobody could ever chase you off Ammon, but I thought that having a bunch of people who admittedly have great keyboard skills, but couldn't carry your jock strap at the rocks, all pouncing on you and giving you needless crap for a single pin, was way too much for me and I felt bad for you cause it was bullsh#t.

Werner - great rant! Woot Woot !!

madbolter1

Big Wall climber

Denver, CO

Oct 16, 2015 - 05:22pm PT

Indeed, props, fivethirty. You've shown some admirable maturity and restraint here, imho. Thanks for genuinely contributing.

And THANKS, Werner.

james Colborn

Trad climber

Truckee, Ca

Oct 16, 2015 - 05:53pm PT

I got lost on Mid East Crisis and ended up finishing up on what I later learned was Saddam Hussein. We topped out at a bolt ladder exiting over the lip near where Great Slab Route exits. At the time I was blown away someone would hand drill all those bolts exiting the roof. Now I realize those were power drilled by Mr Sloan. Not so impressed now.

How does one get away with consistently using a power drill in the park? I now see after doing a couple of searches on supertopo, he's been called out since 2005. WTF? If the climbing community can't contain and eliminate acts like this then it will end up being dealt with by park officials.

Out of the 2000+ bolts, how many were power drilled? Lets make it easier...how many were hand drilled?

c wilmot

climber

Oct 16, 2015 - 06:52pm PT

I am guessing older generations thought swami belts were part of the pussification too

mtnyoung

Trad climber

Twain Harte, California

Oct 16, 2015 - 06:52pm PT

fivethirty,

With your obvious affection for Pinns, you should probably join us on the Mudn'Crud site too (although I've got a sneaking suspicion that you've at least visited that site).

I'm hoping to replace Conduit's first pitch anchors with Jim McCon this season (as you likely know, he's one of that route's first ascent authors). While the second pitch anchor is in great shape, the first pitch anchor doesn't inspire as much confidence. And I think Jim was going to replace some of the lead bolts with more modern stuff too (he's retired now).

So there might be bolting activity on that route this season. But it'd be LEGITIMATE bolting activity ;)