Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
jaaan
Trad climber
Chamonix, France
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2012 - 06:54am PT
|
It seems a very great shame that the one of the easier pitches on the route should be the stopper... that to lead this 5.7 pitch, you'd have to be, say, a 5.10 or 11 leader - when the hardest pitch is only 5.9 and very well protected (I'm guessing?). When you made the FA, Rick, you dictated to the rest of the climbing community that they'd either have to be able to solo that pitch or back off the route. That was then, of course, and this is now, but the fact that you weren't putting up a statement route like the B/Y, it seems to me that you'd be doing a great favour to moderate climbers like me, by adding a few well placed bolts.
|
|
climbingcook
Trad climber
sf
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2012 - 11:29am PT
|
Should we lower the rim on a basketball court so that everyone can dunk?
Part of what is missing in today's modern climber is the willingness to take the time to work up to things, improve one's skill physically and, more importantly, a solid mental focus.
Perhaps it's a symptom of our instant gratification society, wanting everything NOW!
My position remains the same on this, and any other Tuolumne testpiece. Leave it as exaclty that......a test.
By what bizarre logic do you come to the conclusion that someone soloing 5.7 terrain has "worked up to it"? Either the climbing is cruiser for them or they are in over their head. I'd argue that at this point there are far more climbers who want to spend a nice day climbing in a beautiful place than there are people looking to prove themselves on a low angle dome.
Personally, I couldn't possibly care less about hiking a 5.7 slab, well bolted or not. I think it's ridiculous to use laziness on the part of the FA team to justify a beginner-level route being poorly protected so that the very people who would find it engaging to climb are unable to attempt it.
|
|
jaaan
Trad climber
Chamonix, France
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2012 - 11:32am PT
|
My position remains the same on this, and any other Tuolumne testpiece. Leave it as exaclty that......a test.
But isn't that the point - it isn't a test piece.
|
|
survival
Big Wall climber
Terrapin Station
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2012 - 11:43am PT
|
My position remains the same too. There shouldn't be much of any 5.7X that's in a guidebook. It's an ego trip for those that have done it IMO.
I have done plenty of X in my life, but I try to avoid it in every situation possible now. NO ONE is advocating turning it into a sport clip job.
I've seen lots of 5.9 climbers come unglued on 5.7. RA might be able to sleep well if someone took a fatal plunge off of it, but I wouldn't if it were my route. It's not worth dying for.
|
|
jaaan
Trad climber
Chamonix, France
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2012 - 11:49am PT
|
I'm quite glad I saw this thread. My guidebook - Reid/Falkenstein - just has that pitch down as 5.7.
|
|
caughtinside
Social climber
Davis, CA
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2012 - 11:55am PT
|
By what bizarre logic do you come to the conclusion that someone soloing 5.7 terrain has "worked up to it"?
Makes perfect sense to me. I've been climbing 5.7 for many years, but I have only been soloing 5.7 for a much shorter time. It's a different process to 'work up to' than just pure difficulty.
Just because you can lead 5.7 comfortably does not mean you are ready to solo it.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2012 - 12:00pm PT
|
it seems the majority of climbers who climb this do not do the upper pitches...
there are some that do
why not leave it at that?
|
|
Chris Brent
Sport climber
San Francisco
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2012 - 12:26pm PT
|
How did the term "test piece", when referring to a free climbing grade, come to mean, "You fall, you die or get really hurt"? Isn't "test piece" supposed to be about a climb being the representative climb at a grade in a given area. What if someone FA's the prefect 5.9 "test piece" but makes it a well bolted line? Should we pull bolts so it's R+ or X just so we can stroke our egos on us completing the "test piece".
|
|
jaaan
Trad climber
Chamonix, France
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2012 - 12:40pm PT
|
you have obviously not climbed the route.
You're absolutely right. Clearly Rick A - who has climbed it - questions his actions though, or this thread wouldn't exist.
|
|
jaaan
Trad climber
Chamonix, France
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2012 - 12:51pm PT
|
There's really no need to get angry here. I will stay off it. I was trying to contribute.
|
|
surfstar
climber
Santa Barbara, CA
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2012 - 12:53pm PT
|
From the FA's OP
SC is not a test piece like the Bachar Yarian or Southern Belle.
I started climbing two years ago (in the Meadows too), on my third trip (5-6th day of climbing) I got to TR the crack on Super Chicken. I had only one fall despite not knowing how to hand jam yet.
This pitch is on my ticklist this summer as a lead. I think I would feel comfortable leading this now, but would never think of getting on that second pitch. 3-4 bolts - maybe. Perusing the guidebooks for climbs to do this season and what gives me pause are pitches like the top out on South Crack, due to lack of bolts. I do like to have something to aspire to and something that will test me mentally more than physically. I love the traditional ethic of Tuolumne and how badass those FAs were.
However, 0 bolts is plainly a solo. The FA didn't feel he needed any, but now questions that decision when he no longer climbs as hard. A 5.7 pitch for 5.11+ climbers. It wouldn't be the end of the world if bolts were added. It also wouldn't be the end if none ever were.
Despite all our posturing, its still up to the FA's decision.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2012 - 01:15pm PT
|
young guys become old guys, with a little luck...
style debates might not seem very relevant... but taken as a true debate, they help to review history, intention and temperament, and lead to acceptable solutions to community issues
the FA/FFA team are a part of that community, the community has grown, expanded and diversified over time and some of these debates are worth engaging in
there was a thread (I'll try to find it later) about when the FA/FFA "rights" end and the community becomes the determining factor in route modification, obviously routes pass into "public domain" at some point, popular routes do this earlier than obscure routes, most people don't have a strong opinion about Super Chicken because they haven't done it
as some point, the community opinion may outweigh the FA/FFA team opinion
my feeling is that we leave it as it is.
|
|
the Fet
climber
Tu-Tok-A-Nu-La
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2012 - 02:01pm PT
|
I still think the 'rule' that the FA decides the nature of the route is the baseline and a good one at that.
I think there is a little controversy in Tuolumne due to the era in which many of the climbs were put up. You have some of the best climbers in the world, honed in Yosemite Valley, putting up routes on moderate lines with cruxes below their ability so there are more run out climbs than in many other places. It's part of what makes Tuolumne climbing special, but it also means there are a higher percentage of routes that appeal to a limited number of climbers.
From the 1992 Falcon guide I have about:
26 climbs no rating
1 G rated
33 PG
17 PG/R
37 R
6 R/X
8 X
There are a limited number of climbs. And there are lots of climbers. So you do see crowds on popular, well protected climbs, and few ascents on many run out climbs.
Again I go back to the FA prerogative rule. If it was my FA I would probably add a few bolts:
*I think there are plenty of run out climbs in Tuolumne and not enough well protected moderates
*I would want to maximize the star rating for the climb
*I would want the last pitch to follow the character of the rest of the climb. I think run outs should typically occur on terrain about 3 or 4 number grades lower than the crux, so for example a 5.9 climb has 5.6 runouts
However:
*Shagedelic is nearby and it's similar and has more protection
*As mentioned Tuolumne's history is run out climbs
*You lose that challenge for people that want that testpiece
I think an argument can be made either way, but it's Rick's decision and I'm happy he thought it through and asked for input.
|
|
Todd Townsend
Social climber
Bishop, CA
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2012 - 03:00pm PT
|
There's been a lot of debate about keeping the route within the character of the meadows. Here's an honest question: How many routes in Tuolumne have entire pitches with absolutely no pro at only 2 grades below the crux pitch?
Having recently climbed South Crack I'd agree that it's an all time classic, in part because of the runout 4th pitch. How classic would it be if that pitch wasn't relatively short (90 ft) and didn't have pro halfway through? Would it still be as great a climb if the majority of climbers rapped off at the end of the crack?
(edited for spelling and clarity)
|
|
climbingcook
Trad climber
sf
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2012 - 04:47pm PT
|
Having recently climbed South Crack I'd agree that it's an all time classic, in part because of the runout 4th pitch. How classic would it be if that pitch wasn't relatively short (90 ft) and didn't have the pro halfway through? Would it still be as great a climb if the majority of clibmers rapped off at the end of the crack?
The last pitch of south crack is just part of the decent. Wandering around on 5.4 terrain does nothing to improve the climb. It's the same basic thing as the top of travelers buttress and the other main wall climbs at the leap.
If there were a bolt up there somewhere I probably wouldn't even find it, I seem to take a different path to the top every time a climb deteriorates into steep hiking.
|
|
Todd Townsend
Social climber
Bishop, CA
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2012 - 07:54pm PT
|
It sounds like you're thinking of a different pitch than I am. I mean the 5.7R pitch where you cut left at the top of the crack and end up in the scoop belay. From there, there's still 2 more pitches to the top.
|
|
johntp
Trad climber
socal
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2012 - 09:28pm PT
|
Your choice. It is your route.
BITD as a weekend warrior, on a low gravity day I could thrutch my way up routes in the low 10s, but mostly led 8s and 9s. I had an issue with the hardmen running it out on the easier grades because it was so far below their skill level. Such were the ethics of the day and I had neither the skill or cajones to take the risk. I could deal with moderate R climbs but stayed away from the Xs and hard Rs. I missed some really nice climbing due to the FA team's climbing below their grade and not puting in some pro for lesser climbers.
In my mind test pieces should remain pure, but for moderate grade, high quality routes that are just fun stuff and have sweet climbing, what is the harm? That said, I definitely am in the camp that retro bolting should only be done by the FA party or with their consent.
|
|
Byran
climber
Merced, CA
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2012 - 10:06pm PT
|
I don't understand the argument for adding just a bolt or two, to make it R instead of R/X. What's the difference between a 50ft runout and a 100ft runout? When you're feeling shaky up there on those crumbling knobs are you really going to look down and think "ah, it's cool, I got a bolt 40ft below me"...?
Bolts every six, no five, every five feet! I'm not a pussy, I just got a wife and kids to think about, unlike you reckless dirtbags with nothing to live for.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2012 - 10:31pm PT
|
Harlequin Route 5.7
http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.php?topic_id=1843297
last pitch, 5.6, is runout for ever... I ended up sitting in a divot giving a hip belay on top... sounds familiar...
you wouldn't want to fall leading that last pitch, but you're probably not going to
of course, it probably isn't a route for a new 5.7 leader, either... but that leader will figure that out on the first pitch, second at most... and rap off
|
|
pa
climber
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2012 - 10:33pm PT
|
Rick,
you are lawyering with yourself...does quantity stroke your ego, or does quality?
Perhaps, letting go of your professional training will allow you to follow your heart.
Much love
paola
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!