Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
flyingkiwi1
Trad climber
Seattle WA
|
|
For some people it's about the climb itself.
For some people it's about how other people expressed their disapproval of the climb.
For some people it's about how the climbers expressed their desire for vindication.
But I think the common-denominator issue is, what's the appropriate way to express disapproval? It is in the end a highly philosophical issue with extremely practical implications.
|
|
Elcapinyoazz
Social climber
Joshua Tree
|
|
You people who are so obsessed with this shitting sh'it need help that money can't buy.
Maybe they're German, Werner.
|
|
LAP
Boulder climber
|
|
Steve Schneider
Kurt Smith
Bill Russell
|
|
deuce4
climber
Hobart, Australia
|
|
For most, the whole concept what defines an appropriate line is too abstract. I suspect many of the critical commentators on this issue haven't even been up to the base of El Cap, let alone climbed it.
The higher order critical thinking required to appraise the context of the natural aspects of the granite monolith we call El Cap is yet another stage in this thinking process.
Outside of the occasional key piece of evidence that appears on these Supertopo forums, this discussion seems to have two main threads:
--an arena for pundits to vent their general frustrations with life in a context that has some parallels; specifically, the concept of exclusion, of which Yosemite contains an element (like just about everything/everywhere in life).
--academic commentary on a endeavour, in the same vein as someone speculating on whether a Tour de France rider used steroids or not--the facts might never be known, but the implications have broader contexts, and can be discussed and debated. In the end, the commentary and speculation may or may not have an influence on the overall trajectory of the discussed endeavour.
It is interesting, of course, and well worth a few minutes here and there clicking on a bookmark to see where its all going...
|
|
deuce4
climber
Hobart, Australia
|
|
So no it's not modern A5 by any stretch, even Totto way back in the day, said it wasn't too bad.
Coz, not sure if that's true. Toto and I climbed Sheep Ranch (which we considered A4+ at the time), and I recall Xaver saying that he thought Jolly Roger was harder than "the Ranch". Course, he had soloed Jolly Roger, which might have affected his thinking.
I believe Toto climbed Jolly Roger before it received added holes which apparently have significantly diminished its original difficulty.
I don't think there's any fruit in diminishing Jolly Roger. Cole and Grossman were at the top of their game when they teamed up for that one, and though I haven't climbed the route, I discussed their climb at length with both parties soon after, and I believe it was state of the art at the time, and might even represent the apex of standards on El Cap.
|
|
flyingkiwi1
Trad climber
Seattle WA
|
|
That's a reasonable summary (Deuce4). I would broaden the exclusion bullet to include what to do when someone does something that pisses you off, though. I think that's at the heart of this, and the parallels go all the way from your neighbor's backyard to Syria.
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Ice climber
Pomfert VT
|
|
Werner. In the context of what is appropriate response to climbs that you do not approve of I believe my question is quite appropriate. As for needing help i would think that those who feel the deficating is no big deal need a lot more help than those who feel that it was way out of line.
|
|
the kid
Trad climber
fayetteville, wv
|
|
LAP- FYI
i had nothing to do with the WOS controversy other than listening to the deli trolls talking about it endlessly.
I was too busy climbing to waste my time getting involved in something i had no interest in. Pretty sure steve Schneider felt the same way.
Bill Russell- you will have to ask him
Kurt
|
|
'Pass the Pitons' Pete
Big Wall climber
like Ontario, Canada, eh?
|
|
LAP - I have found no evidence to support Kurt Smith as being one of the Shitters. An unnamed troll who used the name Meaty. as in Meaty dot, and who is not Dimitri Barton [another suspected Shitter, but again no evidence] sent clues in a post above suggesting Kurt Smith. But I don't believe Kurt was among the Shitters.
I do know who they are. I have only spoken to one so far, but hope to talk to the other two at some point.
I'm curious about Ammon's ratings on WoS. They differ significantly in places from Mark's and Richard's. I don't pretend for a moment to understand new wave vs. old school ratings, or hell, any damn aid climbing ratings for that matter, and this after 44 different El Cap routes of all difficulties. I am wondering, for instance, why Ammon would rate a hooking pitch A3+ that required him to take a number of very long falls? Didn't he have a cumulative length of falls of many hundreds of feet? Should this not be harder than A3+?
Another thing I noticed, if I read it properly, is that Ammon rated an aid crack above the Overseer as A3+ as well, just as hard as the crux hooking pitch[es]. I have yet to meet a crack on El Cap I can't [aid] climb - heads, beaks, whatever, it will usually surrender to a bit of technical gadgetry. A few Yates Screamers and Scream-Aid guarantee I would NEVER take a fifty-footer off the thing. In fact, the longest fall I have ever taken in my life was a thirty-footer on one of my El Cap solos.
Now, on the other hand, I found the hooking on the first couple pitches of WoS to be absolutely desperate. Way too hard and scary for me to commit to, as I am unwilling to take long falls! So I bailed with my tail between my legs. This was only a few years ago, at a time when I had significant El Cap experience.
On the other hand, I climbed Jolly Roger in 99 when I was still pretty much of a n00b. I led all the hard aid pitches, and my rope gun partner Jon Fox led the hard-scary free climbing. Ours was the eight ascent of JR, so I am wondering what on earth was done by the intervening six parties to reduce its rating? Certainly we found it very hard, and it remains one of my favourite routes on El Cap.
Basically, here is what I am saying - I climbed Jolly Roger when I was still fairly inexperienced. I tried Wings of Steel years later, at a time when I actually knew what I was doing. And I found Wings of Steel to be much much harder than Jolly Roger. Does this mean JR is now A3?
Geez, still haven't read the article. Better do that now. It is rather different than Ammon's original draft.
Cheers,
Pete
|
|
LAP
Boulder climber
|
|
Steve Schneider
Kurt Smith
Bill Russell
2 of 3 isn't bad.
|
|
Matt
Trad climber
primordial soup
|
|
pthp wrote:
I am wondering, for instance, why Ammon would rate a hooking pitch A3+ that required him to take a number of very long falls? Didn't he have a cumulative length of falls of many hundreds of feet? Should this not be harder than A3+?
hmmmmmm-
that right there would be the very 1st time i have ever heard of the "cumulative length of falls [on a given pitch]" statistic... not that you have a dog in the fight or anything, right?
I found the hooking on the first couple pitches of WoS to be absolutely desperate. Way too hard and scary for me to commit to, as I am unwilling to take long falls! So I bailed with my tail between my legs. This was only a few years ago, at a time when I had significant El Cap experience.
...
On the other hand, I climbed Jolly Roger in 99 when I was still pretty much of a n00b. I led all the hard aid pitches...
...
Basically, here is what I am saying - I climbed Jolly Roger when I was still fairly inexperienced. I tried Wings of Steel years later, at a time when I actually knew what I was doing. And I found Wings of Steel to be much much harder than Jolly Roger
say- didn't you deck pretty good on a ledge and break an ankle or both ankles? and wouln't that tend to make future tenuous low angle hook placements seem muchmuch harder afterward? (i would say yes, it would)
for all the experience you like to gab about, from what i have heard about other attempts on WoS, they all made it through the pitches you TR'd, just weren't motivated enough to top the variation out, for either unknown or unreported reasons, which you took some broad "editorial discretion" in describing, when you stole some of ammon's and kate's thunder to report on their ascent for pay in a rag awhile back.
elcapupinyoarse wrote:
With 3-4 parties having climbed through the cruxes on the route (Slater, Poedke, Thaw el al) and only bailed due to time or water issues, the claim that they were "thwarted" presumably by the difficulty, is a joke. Why nobody can get this simple aspect of the history correct is baffling...makes for a better story I suppose if you can hookwink the masses into thinking it was just so technically difficult that nodoby had the skills to repeat it.
Sadly, the climbing rags remain unworthy for use as toilet paper, much less as a historical record of the sport.
actually i think pedro (who of course has no agenda here whatsoever) wrote that in his even-handed and unbiased "press release", when he published his take on the 2nd even before A+K had landed for a shower and a beer, much less having told their tale.
(or so it seemed from over here)
(edit)
also-
Another thing I noticed, if I read it properly, is that Ammon rated an aid crack above the Overseer as A3+ as well, just as hard as the crux hooking pitch[es].
here's the link to the topos:
http://rockandice.com/news/1648-wings-of-steel-original-topo
what i see is that where he wrote A3+, it's not clear what he's labeling, there is also a span 'tween features. more notably, higher still the FA gave a crack A4 and he called it 'A1 tricky', which obviously doesn't add to their cred at all.
(maybe that was just a topo typo? or maybe experience played a part?)
|
|
Studly
Trad climber
WA
|
|
Its all A1 right? Until you fall. and sounds like you will fall, allot.
A3+? Sounds like a sandbag rating to keep up the vacillation.
|
|
justthemaid
climber
Jim Henson's Basement
|
|
Different tools, different times. 30 years is a long time.
|
|
Mighty Hiker
climber
Vancouver, B.C.
|
|
Skip raises a key issue, which is that the route can only be assessed in context of the equipment and techniques that were available in 1982. For example, Ammon and Kait's topo includes comments like "many beaks" and "many cams". The former weren't available at all in 1982 - the nearest equivalent was knifeblades or rurps. The latter were available, but only as Friends, in a limited size range. Likewise, hooks are now available in a larger variety. Given the equipment and techniques available in 1982, was the route climbed in an appropriate manner?
It may take several weeks for copies of R&I to trickle out, and perhaps in the meantime people are furiously scanning the article and sending it to each other. Notwithstanding copyright and such. How many have actually gotten a copy, by subscription or at a store? It will be interesting to learn what Kait and Ammon saw, and what they thought of the climb and the style in which it was established. Facts, that is.
|
|
Wade Icey
Trad climber
www.alohashirtrescue.com
|
|
Different tools, different times.
Some tools haven't changed with the times.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
Geez, why all the hate? The dudes put a lot of effort putting up a line that was pretty hard and probably can't be seen from more than 50 feet away, so why so much angst about it? If they weren't taken to task, the whole thing would have disappeared into slab-who-cares history. It's no skin off anyone's nose but everyone had their panties in a bunch in the early 80s, the time of rap-bolting fistfights and Todd Skinner-phobia.
And then some Celebration that it's only A3+. Aid climbing ratings are the ultimate BS. If Ammon fell 10 or 20 times on it, and even got injured, then A3+ is PDH. And is there a route he fell more on?
Everyone has this investment in their view but we're full of our prejudices and home gangs.
Let go. Live and let live. Not everybody who choses to try to put up a route is obligated to be the very finest or boldest climber on the planet for that route. If that were true, all the face routes below 5.11 would be X rated put up by soloists and 5.14 climbers.
Peace
Karl
|
|
MTucker
Ice climber
Arizona
|
|
Ratings
A0: Also known as "french-free", using gear to make progress, but generally no aiders required. Examples: Half Dome regular route, sections of the Nose route on El Cap, the first two pitches of the West Face (either a quick 5.10, A0 with three points of aid, or tricky 5.11 c).
A1: Easy aid: placements straightforward and solid. No risk of any piece pulling out. Aiders generally required. Fast and simple for C1, the hammerless corresponding grade, but not necessarily fast and simple for nailing pitches. Examples: (clean) the non-5.12 version of the Salathe headwall, Prodigal Son on Angel's Landing and Touchstone Wall in Zion.
A2: Moderate aid: placements generally solid but possible awkward and strenuous to place. Maybe a tenuous placement or two above good pro with no fall-danger. Examples: the Right side of El Cap Tower (nailing), Moonlight Buttress and Space Shot in Zion (clean).
A2+: Like A2, but possibly several tenuous placements above good pro. 20 to 30 foot fall potential but with little danger of hitting anything. Route finding abilities may be required. Examples: the new wave grades of Mescalito and the Shield on El Cap, the Kor route on the Titan in the Fisher Towers area.
A3: Hard aid: testing methods required. Involves many tenuous placements in a row. Generally solid placements (which could hold a fall) found within a pitch. Long fall potential up to 50 feet (6-8 placements ripping), but generally safe from serious danger. Usually several hours required to complete a pitch, due to complexity of placements. Examples: The Pacific Ocean Wall lower crux pitches (30 feet between original bolts on manky fixed copperheads), Standing Rock in the desert (the crux being a traverse on the first pitch with very marginal gear with 30 foot swing potential into a corner).
A3+:Like A3, but with dangerous fall potential. Tenuous placements (like a marginal tied-off pin or a hook an a fractured edge) after long stretches of body-weight pieces (here body-weight placements are considered for all practical purposes any piece of gear not solid enough to hold a fall). Potential to get hurt if good judgement is not exercised. Time required generally exceeds 3 hours for experienced aid climbers. Example: Pitch 3 of "Days of No Future" on Angel's Landing in Zion, the crux being 50 feet of birdbeaks and tied-off blades in soft sandstone followed by a blind, marginal Friend placement in loose rock which was hard to test properly, all this above a ledge.
A4: Serious aid: lots of danger. 60 to 100 foot fall potentials common, with uncertain landings far below. Examples: pitches on the Kaliyuga on Half Dome and the Radiator on Abraham in Zion.
A4+: More serious than A4. these leads generally take many hours to complete and require the climber to endure long periods of uncertainty and fear, often requiring a ballet-like efficiency of movement in order not to upset the tenuous integrity of marginal placements. Examples: the "Welcome to Wyoming" pitch (formerly the"Psycho Killer" pitch) on the Wyoming Sheep Ranch on El Cap, requiring 50 feet of climbing through a loose, broken, and rotten Diorite roof with very marginal, scary placements like stoppers wedged in between two loose, shifting, rope-slicing slivers of rock, all this over a big jagged loose ledge which would surely break and maim bones. The pitch is then followed by 100 feet of hooking interspersed with a few rivets to the belay.
A5: Extreme aid. Nothing really trustworthy of catching a fall for the entire pitch. Rating should be reserved only for pitches with no bolts or rivets (holes) for the entire pitch. Examples: pitches on the Jolly Roger and the Wyoming Sheep Ranch on El Cap, Jim Beyer routes in Arches National Park and the Fisher Towers.
A6: (Theoretical grade) A5 climbing with marginal belays which will not hold a fall.
http://www.bigwalls.net/climb/Ratings.html
|
|
raymond phule
climber
|
|
If Ammon fell 10 or 20 times on it, and even got injured, then A3+ is PDH. And is there a route he fell more on?
But doesn't this show one problem with aid ratings, that an aid rating is a danger rating that might get mixed with a difficulty rating.
50 m of good hooks above a big ledge would probably result in a A5 rating due to the danger.
What aid rating would 2-3 extremely difficult hook moves above a good piece and a clean fall result in?
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!