Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
GDavis
Trad climber
SoCal
|
|
Someone has to fall on an A5 to retain the rating?
He's talking about old school ratings. Now its based on the number of body-weight placements in a row, or potential fall distance.
To throw a wrench into his argument...
How many people have died on X free climbs? People don't die on A5 routes because gumbies aren't jumping on routes that hard. Just like a solid 5.11 climber isn't going to go for a lead on the BY, or despite the rating of 5.7, Snake Dike will *rarely* be a first lead for a burgeoning climber.
A5 is hard. Putting up a route that will kill 3/5's of the climbers who ATTEMPT it would be akin to putting up a solo 5.12 FA. Those who would die on it, won't try it. Hell, Reticent wall I'm sure would kill me. That's why I'm not on it. I have pussy walls to climb :D
he seems like a cool guy, drinking and spraying is part of life, be kind to him :D Funny point, although inherently flawed it may be.
|
|
Euroford
Trad climber
chicago
|
|
lately I've been thinking how much i miss aid climbing. after concentrating on it for a couple of years i turned back to focus on free climbing this season. as the weather here becomes winter again I'm looking forward to spending the time I'm not using ice climbing to get back into my aiders.
the rant just simply must be correct, though I'm no master I've managed to send every pitch I've started out on. it must not be that hard after all.
still fun tho.
thats all i give a flyin fuk about.
|
|
tomtom
Social climber
Seattle, Wa
|
|
9. I do not believe that aid climbing is stupid or not fun. Just that it isn't as challenging as free climbing. Ask anybody that has done both at a high level. Our system supports this simple statement by that fact that an achievement of note is to free an aid line, while aiding a free line is seen as a form of concession and failure. Even partially eliminating aid is seen as better style.
This is bogus.
Too may freeclimbers have retrobolted aid cracks so that they could go 'free'. Free climbers are as guilty of misusing drills as well.
|
|
426
Sport climber
Buzzard Point, TN
|
|
Too may freeclimbers have retrobolted aid cracks so that they could go 'free'. Free climbers are as guilty of misusing drills as well.
One could append that statement to "too many aid climbers have retrobolted aid cracks so they could go (for said climber)"
I's seen it on the Muir (Royal's retro). I even used it on the Muir, throwing a small nut over the feller.
ask some of the locs about their FA's being drilled on...
|
|
Jello
Social climber
No Ut
|
|
Far as I'm concerned, I'm always happy when one of my old aid routes gets freeclimbed. Progress, in my book.
-Jello
|
|
HighDesertDJ
Trad climber
Arid-zona
|
|
You know I began writing a little rebuttal because the beginning of his spray was a little weird but when he got to the part about a drill I could see where he was getting at. If you drill you can always get up, and it's been the battle since Harding did the Nose to draw limits around what is acceptable and what isn't.
|
|
Mungeclimber
Trad climber
sorry, just posting out loud.
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2010 - 02:44am PT
|
bump
discuss
|
|
ß Î Ø T Ç H
climber
. . . not !
|
|
|
Jan 15, 2010 - 03:21am PT
|
Are there any freeclimbs of ElCap with all natural (no pin-scar or drilled etc) holds ? Maybe westface , but I doubt it . Aid climbing is fine , but having people then come in and claim the free ascent(s) is dumb . There is no more "free" after-the-fact (like virginity) .
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2010 - 12:09am PT
|
I'll pick up on Kevin a little bit here.
The topic here is difficulty and that is the same for both aid and free. The truth is the chance of failure or a fall is calculated by dividing the magnitude of the risk one accepts by one's ability. There are two inputs, not one.
So to get a quantifiable comparison between two individuals you have to do the whole experiment. If climber A falls off after doing the climb successfully 10 times you know that person's risk/ability quotient is larger than that of a person who fell off on his 100th attempt.
You don't know who was taking the most risk nor do you know who had more ability.
Participation in an experiment of this sort does suggest the two individuals both have a problem of one sort or another. But we won't go into that.
Edit to avoid a bump:
Your concept of risk is different from the one I use, possibly.
When I think of risk I am considering how close to falling off one is pressing oneself. If on something you will not fall off, like a sidewalk, the risk factor is low. If you have only one leg and you are trying to hop over a curb two inches higher than you can jump, you don't have much headroom. Risk is high.
It is also possible my OP is nonsense. If one never works with any appreciable risk, ability is irrelevant. You won't fall off.
Have to consider more. There may still be something here.
Objective dangers I ignore. Anyone looking for objective danger will be on a mountain.
|
|
Mungeclimber
Trad climber
sorry, just posting out loud.
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2010 - 01:21am PT
|
chance of failure or a fall is calculated by dividing the magnitude of the risk one accepts by one's ability. There are two inputs, not one.
So to get a quantifiable comparison between two individuals you have to do the whole experiment. If climber A falls off after doing the climb successfully 10 times you know that person's risk/ability quotient is larger than that of a person who fell off on his 100th attempt.
jstan, beg to differ, or I've missed your argument...
"chance of the fall" is not reducible to accepted magnitude of the risk over ones ability. It's a neat idea, but chance of the fall is a product of loose rock, temperature, strength, mindset, etc.
but even if we factor the variables out as much as possible, the quotient implies that the value is larger the greater the number of attempts to successes. But if the outcome aka the magnatude of the fall is to be factored in as you mention, then the sheer number of attempts can't account for how a person falls. e.g. falling on their heads, spinning, let behind rope, broke ankle, broken rib, mere scratches vs. cranial contusion.
just because someone accepts the risk and succeeds doesn't mean they have a better chance of not falling on the next go with all other things being equal.
I guess, really what I'm saying is, all other things are not equal and can't be factored out under the above proposition.
thoughts?
|
|
Cracko
Trad climber
Quartz Hill, California
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2010 - 12:13pm PT
|
As a mere "Punter" among "Kings" on this site, I would like to provide a perspective. First off, I liked CK's rant. He seems genuine to me, and isn't taking things to seriously. I have been climbing for over 40 years. For the most part, I prefer free climbing to aid because it is logistically less challenging, much more natural, and physically more rewarding. However, big wall aid is far more of a Grand Adventure to me and therein lies the draw. Free climbing has taken me all over the globe in pursuit of classic moderates, and has filled me with rich memories. But my first El Cap route, Zodiac, still stands today as my favorite climbing experience.......the Grand Adventure. As for CK's argument concerning the difficulty of aid, I can't argue. Hell, it's all scary to me ! But the aid tools of today have to make it an easier game. Damn, I'm starting to ramble like CK and I haven't had anything to drink yet !!!
Cracko
|
|
Captain...or Skully
Social climber
You wanted to!
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2010 - 12:16pm PT
|
Dude....I'm thinkin' we all do a bit o' that.
lol!
|
|
Toker Villain
Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2010 - 01:49pm PT
|
Anybody know where Chris is at these days?
|
|
R.B.
Big Wall climber
Ripped from Salmon
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2010 - 02:21pm PT
|
I was glad to see Chris 'fess' up to his "rant" as being a tongue-and-cheek diatribe.
With that said ... it seems that everyone (on this thread) has lost their way.
Aid ratings traditionally are refering to a blend of objective variables, such as How solid (bomber) is it; how difficult is it to place; and what kind of fall can it hold;
versus subjective factors such as the ability of the climber, etc.
Wasn't A5 supposed to translate to:
multiple, equalized body weight only peices in a row that would not hold a fall.
And wasn't A1 supposed to translate to:
very solid placements at will, would hold a Mac truck of a fall.
It's all about the placement and it's quality (ability to hold the fall)
As with any rating system, whats 5.10 to me may be A5 to you, or vice-versa.
Ponder it for a while!
|
|
Burt
Big Wall climber
Las Vegas, Nv
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2010 - 02:28pm PT
|
prob climbing harder than most at this point. As Chris said before ask most who are at the top of both spectrum's. From my experience with some of the people that excel at both free and aid, the free seemed more rewarding and more adventure. Just helping out and freeing an old aid route in Zion, the amount of effort and scariness way outweighed the first one day ascent I did on the route just months prior. I lead every pitch, bagged the first one day but just months later just going up there with free shoes seemed out of this world. It was the BEST experience of my life. One of the most rewarding also. The Hubers are another clan to debate this with. These guys have done both, but I am pretty sure their stance on free VS aid is prob the same. Aid is hard, and then its not guys. Come on. We over glorify the "dark art" as some life changing near death experience when in reality where you that close to the brink? Lambone yes Ammon whipped, we all have whipped (if you haven't climb harder you puss) that is not necessarily reflectant on the grade of the pitch. I have fallen on "A4" and popped one piece in the middle of the A4 crux,and hooks, beaks, heads that shouldn't have caught did, and then I have taken the full 50+ft ride on baby A2, just the luck of the draw. Leaning to place gear comes with time, but not that much time, wall climbing is more about moving a big amount of freight up a cliff without turning into a total clusterfu&k. That is the art of wall climbing. Just look at who and what has been done on these "mega hard" routes. Thomaz Humar soloed the Reticent Wall without ever climbing El Cap before. His systems where all fu&ked up, he didn't know that much about aid, just went up and did it. That is why it is not that hard. To many guys have walked up and done the hardest without spending years perfecting the art. There are very few people that have walked up to a cutting edge free route, climb the thing without many years of prep and determination. So yes aid climbing is not that hard. Control the mind a little bit, have some perseverance and just keep standing up in those ladders, eventually you will get to the top.
Kurt
|
|
426
climber
Buzzard Point, TN
|
|
|
Jan 24, 2010 - 03:10pm PT
|
I tend to agree with you kurt.
Freeclimbing (hard) is so complicated...relies on coordination and numerous other factors, atp, anaerobic systems, recruitment, etc, blah bla.
aid relies on technical know how and what's in your toolbox. while rare placements may be ticking time bombs, there is really no "pump" clock...
|
|
xbow
Trad climber
TWENTYNIN PLM
|
|
|
Mar 28, 2011 - 07:55am PT
|
I never looked at aid as a dark art or anything like that (especially not the clean variety). I always looked at it as a tool to connect the parts of a climb that I can free climb with those parts of it that I can't. The key (for me) is to give it a go free first if it looks at all possible for me and if its a no-go then I'll resort to a little aid to bypass the section. I enjoy the hell out of mixed climbing because it puts me in places that I wouldn't be otherwise. However, I have to admit that it sure feels good after aiding a section to get out of the slings and continue up on internal power again.
But climbing on aid has done one thing for me that it has probably done for everyone else that practices it. And that is that I see placements and the possibility of such in my sleep and have developed a better ability to set up solid protection in questionable rock because of my aid climbing. And I have to admit that there is aid and then there is AID, its one thing to climb pin scars with small cams and Lowe balls and its quite another to HOOK your way through a blank section to a location that offers something more tangible (that puckers me but it sure feels good when its over). I just love climbing...all of it.
The only things that I can't abide are individuals that rap bolt stuff with electric drills, stuff that should have been left as top rope problems or have been led from the ground up. And seeing a line of over driven direct aid copper heads that have been smeared into thin shallow cracks for an eternity is nasty. But that's just me and I have no right to judge others....lest I be judged.
|
|
Auto-X Fil
Mountain climber
|
|
|
Mar 28, 2011 - 10:25am PT
|
I think it's funny that he can say in the video, and then in this thread, "hey, this is a troll!", and yet still troll so many people.
A Master!
That said, the comparisons between drilling and expedition climbing ring particularly true. Both are hard and scary, and yet somehow not "pure".
|
|
hoipolloi
climber
A friends backyard with the neighbors wifi
|
|
|
Mar 28, 2011 - 11:40am PT
|
A friend of mine who doesn't really aid climb always brings this up. I tell him it's a different game with the same tools, if you don't like it, STFU and don't do it.
|
|
'Pass the Pitons' Pete
Big Wall climber
like Ontario, Canada, eh?
|
|
|
Mar 28, 2011 - 11:56am PT
|
I got a good laugh out of that rant when I first saw it. My initial thought was, "Hell yeah, it's easy. Look at all those people climbing the A5's all the time."
In case you guys missed it, you need to scroll up and read Chris' response to his own video, which I missed before and just noticed for the first time now.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!