Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2009 - 01:40pm PT
|
Is it not true that the pecking order has more to do with how many holes you were allowed to drill than anything else?
That's just spin.
You are allowed to drill a bolt ladder from bottom to top of El Cap.
Take the whole historic evolution of all the players and individuals from all sides into the picture before you try to paint it.
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Ice climber
Pomfert VT
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2009 - 01:44pm PT
|
It may well be spin but my bet is that there is a lot of truth in it.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2009 - 01:44pm PT
|
You are allowed to drill a bolt ladder from bottom to top of El Cap.
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Ice climber
Pomfert VT
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2009 - 01:48pm PT
|
The park service did just that on Half dome...
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2009 - 02:05pm PT
|
SG what makes you hate these guys so much?
I respect your climbing, and really appreciate your contributions to this forum, but you obviously have a vendetta against these guys. I understand their peronalities rub you the wrong way, but try to let that go and listen to what they have to say.
Every post I read from you on WoS make me lose respect for you. Ever think of actually getting on the route to judge it's merits before you condemn it? It's obviously not the type of climbing you like, but you may be impressed with the difficulty and commitment and understand why it appealed to them. Ever think that climbing means different things to different people and there is nothing wrong with that? Ever think that you have a certain idea of acceptable style that is good for you and gives you the kind of challenge you want, but you can't dictate that to everyone else? What if someone dissed you because they thought you took too long on a route?
I'd rather you put your effort into posting TRs of your climbs and why you did them the way you did rather than bashing someone else because they don't do things how you think they should be done. Lead by example.
It's a free country, do what you want. But I wish you would be more productive by expending your energies toward positive productive writing, rather than wasting it attacking someone who is different than you.
|
|
Mungeclimber
Trad climber
sorry, just posting out loud.
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2009 - 03:10pm PT
|
Defending propositions that are not relevant to the issues is not arguing from strength, FWIW. <-- i.e. FWIW, reflects my personal opinion and should not be taken for absolute Truth, but reflects an alternate way of looking at an issue so as not to alienate the original creator of the proposition I'm replying to.
I'm confident that this post is a strong one regardless.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 24, 2009 - 03:17pm PT
|
Werner,your count is wrong. I'll leave it to you to find the actual counts, which are posted ad nauseum. And now even "excessive copperheads" are an issue? Hahahahahahahahaha... I really belly laugh at that one! The "moving target of botch."
SG, the burden of proof is on you. You have spent decades defaming us, and "style" is apparently your own personal fiefdom. So, how about you define it for us. Then, I will systematically show (in my enviable long-winded fashion) that many climbers and routes on your "most respected" list flagrantly violated that "style."
"Moving target of botch...." Now we're talking "style," when before we had committed "clear ethical violations." Well, if "style" (by your own personal definition) is all you've got left, then I say you're done... unless, of course, you want to try to bring us all into your fantasy-land fiefdom.
We didn't "leave the ground in a state of war." We started the climb blissfully ignorant of how idiotic some of the Valley locals would turn out to be (idiocy that continues to this very day, I might add). And, contrary to Werner's claim, we didn't seriously consider abandoning the route in the "face of the heat." We very quickly saw the "pissing on trees" for what it actually was and then simply rejected that "proposition" as we decided to continue. It was after that the some of the Valley locals "declared war" (which continues to this very day, I might add).
And, I didn't "sprain" my ankle, as SG claims in yet another attempt to subtly spin the facts into something else. I'm well aware that the "sprained" claim is just another version of SG's trying to keep me going in an endless game of "whack-a-mole," as the stream of intentional distortions is all he has left to play with. But, it's an easy game to play, so I'll keep playing. The ankle was dislocated and didn't fully heal for several years after the ascent.
SG, I want to honestly appeal to you, man to man. Do you HONESTLY believe at this point that Mark and I are lying about any aspect of the route? Do you HONESTLY believe that we drilled any straight-in "dimples?" Do you STILL honestly believe that "every other placement required the use of the drill" and other such claims you and your cohorts have made? Just answer these questions, because those answers will go further toward burying the hatchet than anything else. If you can't/won't simply answer those questions, then there is nothing that can be done for you.
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Ice climber
Pomfert VT
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2009 - 03:26pm PT
|
It still boils down to the simplest of equations. Either climb the rout or STFU. They could have climbed it BINTD istead of rapping in to vandalize it. If you can't climb a rout you quite simply have no right to declare that it has too many bolts.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2009 - 03:32pm PT
|
The actual counts for the route itself was 145 as you explained.
The other 20 are part of the replaced original start which comes out to a total tally of 165 in reference to your book appendix.
I used the total tally as this is the total number of drilled placements attributed to the whole affair.
Man I hope I don't become this anal?
Anyways ..........
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2009 - 03:38pm PT
|
Steve has loved this sport as long or longer than I have, and he's done more with it. He has absolutely earned a place here, and should not be told he is disrespected for voicing the opinions that his 40 years of climbing has developed.
Absolutely, and we need people forcefully stating why style is important.
But he isn't just voicing his opinions in this instance, he is condemning others without adequate knowledge of their supposed transgressions. That kind of disrepect makes me lose respect. It seems motivated by the personalities involved, not by a moral stance about the climbing.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2009 - 03:41pm PT
|
Werner's claim, we didn't seriously consider abandoning the route in the "face of the heat."
Seems like you really did forget some of that conversation we had minutes before that meeting.
You did mention that there was a consideration to abandon doing the route.
You using the word "seriously" which I never used.
Again anal .....
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Walla Walla, WA
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Nov 24, 2009 - 07:37pm PT
|
Well, I guess that one man's "anal" is another man's "accurate." If you're going to include both starts, then count it as 11 pitches for the slab, and then another 4 above the slab (all of these but the last are LONG pitches, btw), for a total of 14 LONG pitches and 1 short one. I don't think it's "anal" to say that considering the ACCURATE tallies puts WoS in line with MANY routes of the 80s and 90s... certainly not worthy of special condemnation on that basis. Of course, if the "botch target" moves to copperheading... well, then all bets are off. But, then, many, many routes from the 80s onward will fail that test.
I think you're building an awful lot into the word "considered" in the context of our early discussions. We "considered" aborting the route from almost the first hook move until the top of the slab. Your emphasis, however, was on "in the face of the heat," and that was not a significant factor in our deliberations. Just look at thousands of posts on the taco about WoS and ask yourself if we come across as guys that shrink from a little "heat." In response to the "heat," we didn't seriously consider quitting, nor did we have a "fvck you" attitude, as some have suggested. The second through tenth hooks of the route (long before we encountered any "heat" at all) had me more seriously considering quitting than all of the "heat" combined. And the dislocated ankle put some serious consideration into the mix!
From the start of the resurrected WoS controversy on these threads years ago, we have sought the same thing: accuracy. If we are to be condemned, let it be on the basis of the FACTS. If the FACTS don't condemn us, then so be it. We have never claimed "greatness" (only SG can justifiably claim that). We have only claimed that the route was not a botch, by ANY of the moving measures of "botch" employed against us over the decades.
|
|
caughtinside
Social climber
Davis, CA
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2009 - 07:59pm PT
|
To think that Sh#t was used as a Weapon of Hate.
Juan
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2009 - 08:11pm PT
|
I'm with the WOS guys.
It's not like the route is an eyesore or squeezejob for anyone, and it doesn't sound like anybody could waltz up there and do it with fewer bolts...
So what's the big deal? There's all kinds of holey, heady routes on El Cap that nobody says anything about,
Peace
Karl
|
|
nature
climber
Tucson, AZ
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2009 - 08:39pm PT
|
It has less to do with the route and more to do with the players at this point, Karl.
At least that's my observation.
|
|
nature
climber
Tucson, AZ
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2009 - 08:44pm PT
|
yes.... on both sides of this civil discussion
one thing is certain for me... if someone where to go repeat the route I'd have a hell of a lot more respect for their opinion on the route in question.
|
|
JuanDeFuca
Big Wall climber
Peenemunde
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2009 - 08:44pm PT
|
Looking at the gear list its hard to believe they hauled all that crap up the rock.
JDF
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 24, 2009 - 08:50pm PT
|
"in the face of the heat," and that was not a significant factor in our deliberations.
Well you just lied right to my face. Because you did say at that point in time right to me that you considered it, not that there was anything wrong with the choices you made.
But have at it and spin it any way you want.
And your term:
the "botch target" moves to copperheading.
Your reading comprehension is so completely blinded by "defense, defense, defense" that you can't make heads from tails anymore.
The extensive copperheading comment was my own personal feeling and used your line WOS as an example.
You've personalized the route and you as one.
I could never really see why Steve had it out for you but your recent comments now are bringing a whole new light to me.
You lump anyone who has any kind of criticism, different views and understanding about your so called climb you did on a rock as some kind of enemy.
You've become psychologically damaged with the thing.
Unbelievably stupid.
And I'm unbelievably stupid and naive for even ever talking to you .....
|
|
Steve Grossman
Trad climber
Seattle, WA
|
|
|
Nov 25, 2009 - 12:31am PT
|
Werner- You have arrived at the truth with these as#@&%es. They are pathological liars, plain and simple. WE have had it with YOU CLOWNS!
I wholeheartedly accept the burden of proof and always have, just stay around for the fight this time tadpoles! No ankle injury? Yet another outright LIE and you were presumably there Richard, right?
Ahhh, The Book of Dick wherein all shall be revealed....
|
|
Prod
Trad climber
Dodge Sprinter Dreaming
|
|
|
Nov 25, 2009 - 08:06am PT
|
And I'm unbelievably stupid and naive for even ever talking to you .....
That statement is a load of crap, of all the posters who were there, you have brought a pretty level headedness analysis to the table. From someone who was not there it has been appreciated in this entertaining read. I can empathize with his defensiveness can’t you, a little?
You've become psychologically damaged with the thing.
Maybe so? There is most likely some OCD in there as well, that was always there is my guess. That does not make the man guilty though, just nuts. Mad Bolter is not the only one in this public forum who seems a bit psychotic over this issue. The other has just lumped you in as his team mate.
Werner- You have arrived at the truth with these as#@&%es. They are pathological liars, plain and simple. WE have had it with YOU CLOWNS!
WE have had it with YOU CLOWNS!
Not too sure I’d want to be part of that prosecutorial team……
Prod.
AKA Guy Kenny
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!