Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
healyje
Trad climber
Portland, Oregon
|
|
Bob let's try another tact as you aren't getting it - my objections have nothing whatsoever to do with 'emotions' and everything to do with the growth, impact, crowding, and access problems which can be directly attributable to the combination of gyms and sport climbing - it's the unavoidable and undeniable truth of the "bolt it and they will come" aspect of it if you will. The 'philosophical' (or 'judgmental' as DR says) foundation of my opinions is based entirly on my clearly old-school belief in climbing being about self-reliance and self-responsibility, i.e. if you can't get up a rock on your own, you probably shouldn't be on it.
As for not buying my 'doomsday' scenario? Well, now that truly is judgment rooted in the eye of the beholder - what isn't debatable is the rate bolts are flying. I can only speak for here, but there's been a steady buzz of drills marching out of PDX up both sides of the Gorge to a ring around Mt. Hood and on to Bend for several years now with no sign of it letting up anytime soon. How about on the Front Range there, say heading south of Denver down the I-25 corridor to Taos? From the look of it, it's going to be a nice weekend down your way - care to guess how many bolts might be going in from Denver to Taos over the course of it? Me, I'm guessing it'll be a busy weekend.
Now, you may think that's a thing of beauty, but I don't happen to share your perspective - I find it relentless and insatiable, though, maybe not for the reasons you think (read on). And is that a bad in and of itself? Clearly no. Where the problem comes in (for me), and where it intersects this discussion of Growing Up, is in the [new] notions of 'developers', 'development', and 'community service' - and of 'safety' and 'quality' (and at what price). And that problem is vastly compounded a climbing demographic 80-85% of which has been established and is maintained purely on bolting alone.
Where that intersects with Sean, Doug, and Growing Up in my mind is the notion of 'development' as a rationale. And the problem is, to what standards? In most cases the primary question is to what level of 'spice', 'risk', or 'safety'. It doesn't so much matter how 'good' this particular route is so much as it establishing the precedent that anyone can make that call. No one is arguing these guys aren't stellar climbers, or that they didn't do the best possible job once they made their call.
But as Couchmaster asks, what about a clip-up next to Snake Dike with bolts 10[, 12, 15, 20] feet apart established top down? On what basis could you possibly defend objecting to such a route if the FA's rationale was to leave a 'safe', fun route up that section of stone without the clearly 'dangerous' runouts on Snake Dike? It's not like they're retro-bolting Snake Dike. And they'd likely say if you want to take that type of risk just hop on Snake Dike. But Snake Dike is clearly not for all of today's climbers, and legions of them who aren't prepared for those runouts have been and are being excluded from climbing that face. Ditto for a wrunged via ferrata on the other side of Snake Dike. Again, the problem for me isn't the route so much as the rationale used to put it up and the assumption that 'shared' standards of 'quality' and 'risk' can somehow be policed and maintained at a high-level after such a precedent is established.
You think such concerns are unfounded and irrational - I would have said the same thing had I not seen the 'progress' of climbing with my own eyes the last several decades. For every year the young 'stars' of these recent generations push climbing to ever more dizzying heights, the breadth - the number, and percentage - of 'climbers' who will never climb harder than sport 5.9-10 and never more than a few feet out from the last bolt swells to ever greater numbers, and ever more risk-averse. That 'progress' - one of an ever growing base of 'climbers' for whom climbing is simply another risk-free entertainment option - works against climbing in many subtle and not so subtle ways in my opinion.
We have inadvertantly made climbing not just 'safe' - but are raising generations who not only think climbing 'should' be safe - but do and will increasingly demand that it actually be 'made' safe. And having planted that seed, along with successfully embedding climbing into the popular culture via our media, birthday parties, etc., we are breeding a 'new age'. It's a new age alright, but one where climbing itself is merely an [entertainment] entitlement on one hand and where 'safe climbing' is both a right and an imperative on the other. Sorry, I just don't believe this is simply my imagination, or that it's a static phenomena, it has been a steadily growing and observable trend with no end in sight.
Everyone here, on both sides of this debate, are 'elite' climbers on a statistical basis. I'm simply suggesting that while we quibble over the merits and attributes of a climb only a small fraction of us 'elites' will ever climb, something larger, longer-term, and sad is happening as climbing is absorbed and assimilated into our society and popular culture - we aren't raising it to our level, it's remaking 'climbing' to suite its own wider needs. Are we still a decade or two out from retro-bolting classics and an influx of via ferratas on public lands and your local crag? Sure (we can hope), but three decades of observing climbing's 'progress' leaves me in no doubt that's exactly where this train is headed.
And last, with specific regard to Growing Up - I believe it did leap from a matter of style to one of ethics (or morality if you insist), doing so when the route they hoped to leave behind simply didn't pan out. At that point they made ethical, as well as a style decsions. My sole objection to that is the precedent its now set for others who may well not share their skills and experience and happen to have a vision of a very different climb in mind. Only time will tell - and call me crazy - but I hear a train whistle blowing in the distance and am in no hurry to hasten its enevitable arrival.
|
|
Clint Cummins
Trad climber
SF Bay area, CA
|
|
Thanks for posting, Sean.
Kind of an out-of-control discussion for your first intro to supertopo - sorry about that!
How about one question that is hopefully neutral and simple enough to answer:
Is there going to be a topo released for this route, or do you feel that the route description in Doug's article is about right for people to go up and do the route?
|
|
survival
Big Wall climber
A Token of My Extreme
|
|
Sean, thanks for joining the "conversation". I respect you and your partners for participating in a civil way. This was originally an intelligent conversation. It got away from us for about 60 posts there, but the "intelligent" part seems to be back.
Once again Tarman, you have said it about as well as it can be said. You have put words to thoughts in my head. Thanks.
I have always prided myself on my ability to participate in a conversation, discussion or debate rather than an argument. The difference to me is that in a discussion, the parties actually listen to one another and hear what the other is saying. In an argument, that doesn't happen. I may be called wishy-washy, but I have the ability to change my mind. I have the ability to adapt to a new viewpoint. I even saved my most long winded post until it was more fully formed in my mind!!
In this case even the "new generation" is split over whether this is a great thing or not.
I too stick to the idea that ground up is preferable. Even Doug and Sean appear to have the same basic concept, it just wasn't going to work out for this new route.
I would never have supported chopping this or other routes anyway. I always hated the idea that RR thought he was the brain police of El Cap back in the day and had the audacity to attempt removing the Dawn Wall. I have always basically wanted to be left to climb the way I saw fit, myself and my partner. In that sense I say let this climb live, what's done is done. I never questioned Sean and Doug as people or climbers either. It just takes a lot of effort and heart to put up anything that is pitch after pitch of 11 and 12. I still have the feeling that Sean and Doug support this decision because it's their baby. They feel that their motives and vision were pure and well meaning, but I doubt that sentiment extends to any and all rap bolting on SFHD. Am I right guys? That's why I asked your opinion about what you view as unacceptable. Maybe it's too slippery for you to address. I do think it might further the conversation for you to at least express what you feel is good vs not good.
For example, I am no longer a 5.12 climber, but I'm still capable and I'd like to have a route on SFHD too. What if I built a route from the top down with bolt ladders linking up everything harder than say 5.9? Or is it only O.K. for 5.12 climbers to build routes like this? It would be built in an acceptable rap bolt style and there would be plenty of good protection for the hard stretches where people could free more than I did. DOUG, SEAN, I'm asking you a very specific question. If this is cool then maybe I'll get a route on SFHD after all.
But make no mistake, I also believe much of what Healyje is saying about "the Future". I too have seen it happening. There are 5.6 face routes at Smith Rocks now with bolts no more than 8-10 feet apart in places. Not only that, but just last spring I watched a large group of the "new generation", about 10 of them as a matter of fact hangdogging, tensioning, clipping a bolt on the face route next to them to help them achieve the next bolt on the 5.9 route they were working. It took five of them to lead the thing. There wasn't one decent set of balls between them. Back in the day, I wouldn't have been caught dead hanging on that route. If I didn't get it on my second try, I would have stepped back to 5.7 and 5.8 until I was ready for another go. The whole idea that there was some sporting "way" to go about this thing was foreign to them. They were gang banging the thing, no doubt about it. These guys/gals were like the keystone cops, almost to the point of shoulder stands and all.
So my reservations are not about Sean and his partners or this route that I will never get on at all. My reservations are based totally on opening the door to what I have seen with my own eyes at other climbing areas. Pointless really, since the door is already open.
Does this mean that I can't find plenty of places to go and enjoy my climbing in the way I see fit? No. Does this mean that new climbers don't have the right to learn about climbing in a manner that won't cripple them? No. But, in the way back machine we called it toproping. Leading was a different game all together. It definitely was not cool to go out and spend the day dangling on something that was above your level.
My partner and I recently did an hour approach to get on an easy route that was "away from it all". When Smith Rocks climbers first started seriously hanging out in the valley, they called us the "approach masters" because of our willingness to go far to get the route that we wanted. Luckily, I still have the legs to do it with.
Healyje, the train is already here. It's just going to park forever and get bigger and louder.
Call me old fashioned, call me wishy washy, whatever.
"The wheel is turning and you can't slow down. You can't let go and you can't hold on. You can't go back and you can't stand still. If the thunder don't get you then the lightning will."
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
I hope everyone saw Kevin's Post (warbler) on the previous page because it was outstanding. as well as Tarbuster's post.
Survival wrote
"Sean, thanks for joining the "conversation". I respect you and your partners for participating in a civil way."
Welcome to Sean, and I agree with Survival here. When the community is hashing out these kind of issues. Some respect in the dialogs keeps the possibility of communication alive.
For folks who are worried about a rap bolted 5.8 or 5.9 near Snake Dike. Relax, the perceived enemies of the future could drill it ground up at that level, or certainly run-out the pitch and fill in the bolts following it.
It would cost them hundreds of dollars and weeks of hand-drilling and miles of hiking, so I wouldn't fear that they'll be dozens of routes.
But the routes WILL appear cause climbers, unlike me, aren't always content to follow the routes of others, particularly when they are run-out 1.4 in nightmares. (props to shaggy and others for fixing some of those with bigger bolts)
Still, sticking up for the little guy, why is it OK for the 5.12s and 5.13 going up, EVEN in Tuolumne, to have bolts every 10 feet or closer, but a route for the average climber in Yosemite at 5.9 is supposed to keep em 50 feet apart?
The lines on Snake Dike go for HOURS. I, blaspheming again, would welcome this feared route and think the stone is big enough that the 5.13 climber don't need to monopolize the 5.9 terrain as well as the 5.12 terrain.
I'd like to point out again that, since the FA teams says the slab part of the line was really inobvious, like the fourth choice they would have made ground up, that the ground up proud finish variation is still there for somebody to make
They could call it "Smacking Down" if they felt like it.
Peace
Karl
|
|
Delhi Dog
Trad climber
Good Question...
|
|
Once again from the side lines, I too both appreciate the level of "dialogue" which is being written by Healyje, Survival, Warbler, Karl, and others.
That DR and Sean have the balls to stand by their decision and to open themselves up on this thread is admirable as well.
Thanks guys.
I am keen too however to hear their responses to Survival's questions.
I assume DR and Sean knew these kinds of questions were coming anyway.
And, for what its worth, true understanding and positive action comes from the opening up of the heart.
Cheers,
DD
|
|
Owlman
Social climber
Montucky
|
|
"This is really my last post on this thread"
Thanks to Doug, Sean, Wildone, et al., for graciously reacting to our comments, teases, fears, some anger, and probing.
Thanks for being so open, too, and taking time to tell us where you at.
I've been up the RNWF, Tis-sa-ack, Snake Dyke.
That rock has made me laugh, cry, puke, roar.
To me, the Dome is alive, something unique, and I think we should be very respectful up there, set a high example for others to follow.
I'm glad we've had a chance to discuss our methods up there, and hope we all reflect on the thoughts and feelings that the community expressed.
I apologize if I hurt anyone's feelings. I don't really think Doug's rationale was lame. Hell, it's a free country. I'll always see you as a leader and muse. Your writing and actions were part of my initial feeling that climbing was more than sport, more a meditation of movement.
Thanks, Doug.
Abrazos.
-Dave Willey
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
Coz, lay it on the line. Did you ever rap bolt?
(Even money says he'll take the 5th.)
|
|
GDavis
Trad climber
SoCal
|
|
20 year old bolts that haven't been replaced and a vehement FA'st. What we have is a museum climb!
All kidding aside... interesting point. Karma will be climbed, if the B-Y was 5 miles uphill I don't think it would have near as many ascents.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
DMT has it functionally correct, it's up to the team on the climb. Community influence comes long before, in setting the acceptable style for the climbing area. Sean Jones has authored many routes in the Valley over 20 years. Most, if not all, of those routes are largely unknown to the greater climbing community as information is scarce. There are climbers who have been on Sean Jones routes, or near those routes, who have commented on them. Sean Jones' style is the result of being in the Valley and putting up those routes. His new route on SFHD is the culmination of this work, and now a very notable issue in Valley climbing.
Why is style an issue? well the number of lines to climb is finite, even in the Valley. Most of the STForum readers believe that there is no limit to climbing difficulty, so let's suppose that is true for the purpose of argument. The issue then becomes what should be done now in a style which does not meet the historical consensus of what constitutes the "best style" in Valley climbing. This may seem abstract, and the process of defining the "best style" is indirect and murky, but actually few would debate that the "best style" FA in the Valley is ground up, no on-route preview, minimal bolting (and bolted from stance), minimal impact on the environment of the route. While many routes, and even some now "classic" routes have been authored with less-than "best style" the ideal is what a Valley FA team has in mind on every route they conceive.
By doing a route in less-than "best style," the FA team takes something away from future climbers, climbers who will be better, more capable, perhaps even bolder than the earlier generations. Once the route has been done it is difficult to "undo" it, especially if it is a great line which attracts more climbers to follow.
The SFHD is the location of many bold attempts to find classic lines on a compelling stretch of granite. While we can say the R/X routes are inaccessible to most of the existing group of climbers, we don't know what the future generations might do on that wall. I am not afraid that this wall will be grid bolted, and this single route is unlikely to be the demise of climbing on the SFHD, but it does deny the future generation an opportunity to figure out how to put a route up in the "best style" on that line.
Ultimately, the thinking process that leads to the justification: "it's such a good line it has to be done," is hugely selfish when the line is forced by technique less-than "best style." The selfishness stretches from the individuals, to the local community to the generation. Sometimes the line is so good that it has to be done, and so the ends justify the means.
But who are we to decide what future climbers will be able and willing to do?
I am optimistic that they would find a way to climb that, and other lines in the "best style." And so when I look at FA lines, I think to myself that I have to be honest enough to back off if I have to resort to less-than "best style" tactics. Someone else better than me will come along and do that line some other day, and it will be a fantastic climb because of the collective vision of what a climb should be in the Valley.
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
Warbler wrote
"A lot of guys are calling bullsh#t on Doug's claim that they did the route for other climbers, or with other climbers in mind. I probably would have done the same when I was around twenty, and doing new face routes in the Valley. It was a small, exclusive group back then, and in retrospect, we were doing the routes with other climbers in mind too, but in a different way - one reason we pushed the runouts was to challenge our peers. "
Rap-bolted route or ground up testpiece, it's true that ego can often play a huge role.
Why don't those bold routes get repeated these days? (except for a few) cause there's no real glory in it.
The guys who put them up got glory and a place at the table with the other hardmen. Maybe, if you're young, that's worth risking your life over. (particularly if you have 5.13+ potential and you're climbing 5.10)
Then they got repeated, due to the buzz and "second ascent" status, plus then you could be part of that same elite crowd.
Now, nobody gets laid for climbing 5.10R/X. Low angle face ain't popular and so it's not worth risking your life over.
I'm one of the few who like lower angle long faces, cause it's meditative and cause I don't have big guns for super pumpy stuff. I used to do the 5.10 R/X cause I had to to get on the stone. Now I'll only do the super run-out stuff if it's well below my limit.
People still go do BY to show the world they have the balls, (once they climb 5.13 already) but if the route doesn't have "Show appeal" (like Potter doing Southern Belle) it sits empty and will continue to sit empty (unless slab comes back into smackdown fashion someday)
I don't think this route opens the door to Rap-Bolting anymore that Cosgrove and Smith's Muir Epic opened up the door to power drilling (which would be much more dangerous to the park resource since people are so lazy)
Perhaps it's good that both acts got a ration at the time to keep a hurdle in place so things move slowly.
Peace
Karl
|
|
Karl Baba
Trad climber
Yosemite, Ca
|
|
DMT wrote
"The previous generations didn't exactly respect their forefathers either. "
Meet the new crew, same as the old crew.
or
New ways to walk to school for 3 miles in the snow
Peace
Karl
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
This thread is compelling to me because I am a staunch ground-up proponent,
yet I can understand the motivation behind Growing Up. It has forced me
take a good look at my belief.
For those against the style, there are two points that keep their argument alive:
1) This opens the door for others to rap bolt.
coz: "I thought if I don't say something, all the great lines will be rap drilled. "
2) It takes away the possibility for somebody to experience the thrill of the FA lead.
coz: "Daddy why did you steal my future?"
On the second argument: There are scores of slab routes that I have the
technical ability to climb, yet the FA teams stole my chances of doing those
by their style. They effectively made acres of climbable rock off limits to me,
they stole it from me and from hundreds of climbers, now and into the future.
Sure, there will be a few who sack up and send the lines. But it's been
proven, those climbers are few and far between. That style has a "Me Now,
forget those later" attitude so strong, that you simply cannot say
"Why did you steal my future."
This makes the first argument all the more important, the fear that all
the routes will be rap bolted into PG mundaneness. Routes engineered
to fit the lowest common denominator.
This is a real fear, and I've seen the gym attitude pervade most of the
new climbing generation.
The question then, does *this* route endorse top-down bolting by the masses?
I think no more than Peace on the sacred Medlicott (with Kauk-sized posters),
or the new route on Fairview that splits other proud ground-up lines.
There's no doubt for me, rap-bolting is a bad disease. But to single this route
out, one that has ground-up 5.13 pitches, seems off.
BTW, there is a third argument, which is that this route will open the
door to the gov't privatizing our open lands and charging for Via Ferratas.
Honestly, if this route were onsight soloed [instead of being rap bolted],
I strongly doubt it would make a difference.
[Edit: I do believe that some routes can be reasonably equipped (non-X rated) from the bottom, and rap bolting these
lines does in fact steal the best the route has to offer. Fine line. Here, upon inspection, the FA team realized the
upper wall could not be reasonably equipped [using ground-up tactics,] hence this discussion.]
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
I don't think that the ideal "best style" has changed, it has become a question of "what is acceptable style." The idea that the "best style" is unacceptable because it is unsafe is used to justify less-than "best style" to make the climb acceptably safe.
What is safe and what is not is most certainly dependent on the skills, knowledge and ability of the climbers doing the climb.
The "best style" is an ideal, and one we always wish to reach, I think that is true for every climber. What we are willing to accept short of the "best style" is a matter of debate. If Growing Up had been done in "best style" we wouldn't have 500+ posts to this thread.
|
|
bob d'antonio
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
Joe...I do get it. And have gotten it for a long time. My climbing isn't one dimensional like your is and in fact instead of being part of the problem I'm actually doing something. I helped establish a few climbing areas that have become some what popular. I worked with land owners and the BLM from the start and help create a relationship that help make these areas a model when speaking of climbers and land managers working together. I was the Colorado BLM state volunteer of year 1992 and quite proud of the work I have done.
You posted in another thread that If i was up to you ALL BOLTS would be removed. You my friend are an extremist on this matter and such ....can't argue in a rational way. Beware the Future...it is here and your stagnant way of thinking does nothing to help...only divide.
Sean & Doug have weight in...and in a most reasonable matter and I would have no problem hanging out and climbing with them. They have been called names and accuse of rape in this thread. Some people showed their true colors in this thread and Sean and Doug's colors appeal to me much more. Sean from his post seems to be a great father and husband and like most of us is trying to have some adventure and at the same time keep his family healthy and safe. I admire that much more as I have through my whole climbing career been with the same woman and together we raise three wonderful children, we have some adventure and do what is right for our family.
You don't agree with the style they used... (and the sad part about that is that they more than likely they did less damage to the rock by doing the upper pitches top down than ground up) fine...the sun will rise and tomorrow you can go climb in any style you choose.
Isn't life great?
|
|
philo
Trad climber
boulder, co.
|
|
Before my tumble into proletariat mediocrity I was an ethical purist along the mind set described by Jim Erickson's concepts of tainting. From my moral highgound I was outspokenly disdainfull of anyone standing on any less of an ethical pedestal. Carefull all the fall from on high can leave quite a mark. As the eras changed the climbing community had seen the future of iron-mongery and collectively embraced and advocated the more environmentally sensitive practice of "clean and free" climbing. In light of the current controversy the irony that it was DR who helped instigate that paradigm shift has not been lost on a great many ST grey beards.
But times and tactics and yes ethics change whether we like it or not.
Most of the aspirants of those earlier days were vehemently anti bolting of any kind and espoused the standard that if it needed a bolt it shouldn't be done until someone better could do it properly. But bolting came to be excepted as a way to open otherwise unassailable stone. Even drilling from hooks once seriously frowned on became OK. Eventually power drills, rap bolting and a full lexicon of other past taints became the norms of the day. Right or wrong didn't matter to the now generation it was what they did. It was only when rampant grid bolting became too prevelant that the larger community of climbers spoke up in concern for the environment. Just as they recently have regarding the compaction of soil, trampling of ground vegetation and stashing of rotting pads that popular bouldering sites have experienced. My point is that it has been environmental concerns that have motivated change in the collective climbing 'scene' not style, ethics or morals. Most all of the 'stylistic' changes that have occured in climbing over the years have been met with great resistance including cheats like chalk, sticky rubber shoes and camming units. But look where we are today. Everyone chooses their ethics and style of ascent. It really is their business. But when the environment starts degrading it is time for the larger community to speak up.
My personal thoughts about "growing up" are that it is likely a great route. But that most of us would have been more pleased and impressed by a fully ground up ascent. Be that as it may my chief concern is still conservation of the medium and protection of the environment. Sean and Doug's approach may be a frightening precedent in the minds of many. But it will likely prove to have been the most sensitive least damaging approach to establishing a route such as this. That in my fetid mind carries a lot of weight. There is a whole lot of stone out their and the future will bring what it does regardless of how hard we drag our heels. I am not promoting top down rap bolting I am advocating for carefull use of the land. We have enough eyesores of ego and arrogance. Hopefully future generations will be inspired to be the best stewards of the resource while crafting new adventures.
With all due respect Phil Broscovak
|
|
survival
Big Wall climber
A Token of My Extreme
|
|
I must have been sleepin' or trippin' or something.
I don't recall much of any outcry against sticky rubber or cams for that matter. Clean, versatile, removable...what's to hate?
Philo, your thought about falling off a pedestal, I like that.
Los Lobos says: The trouble with being in low places, is that you always have to look up. The trouble with being in high places, is that when you fall it's a long way down....
|
|
Doug Robinson
Trad climber
Santa Cruz
|
|
Hey Sean – Welcome. And thanks for reminding us to have fun. Need more of that here. And for the reminder that this is a big world with bigger problems to chew on.
There’s a bit of shifting going on. I hear listening. Fattrad"s first post this morning had more questions than answers. Cool!
And my most humble thanks for this zinger from Delhi Dog: true understanding and positive action comes from opening up the heart.
As to routes next to Snake Dike, they’re already there, on both sides. Left to right:
• Dome Polishers, 5.9**R (Tucker Tech, Steve Ortner 1988)
• The Deuceldike 5.9*R (Charles Cole, Rusty Reno, John Middendorf 4-85)
• Snake Dike
• Eye in the Sky 5.10b*R (Mark Spencer, Shirley Spencer, Dan Abbot and David Abbot 4-85)
• Snake Dance 5.9+*R (Claude Fiddler, Bob Jones 1973)
Each of them earned quality stars. Yep, good rock up there. Each was put up from the ground. All bolts drilled on stance and a fair bit of natural pro in small corners too. I once swung over to Eye in the Sky while filming on Snake Dike and saw some fine rock I’d like to climb.
So the answer to your question is, nobody needed to rap bolt to put up mouth-watering routes next to the Snake Dike. We’d all agree they were done in the best possible style.
I know that doesn’t answer the other half of your question, the baiting part. But some of my point is that your straw dogs are whimpering up the wrong tree. Questions like that, the hypothetical ones, always make me uncomfortable because they aren’t very real. I like climbing because it’s so real, about our heartful selves responding to the flinty terrain before us. Facing up to what we find. I tend to respond better to true questions posed by the real stone.
Would I climb a 5.9/5.10 route that goes all the way up the South Face? You bet! Walking the base of the wall, if I’d found such a line --even the beginnings of one -- I would have jumped on it and drilled it ground-up. Probably run it out a bit too. I like it sporty, and drilling is plain hard work.
But it seems there isn’t any such line. Once you turn the corner from the Snake Dike wall onto the South Face, every line so far is at least 5.11+R. And once you go to the right of Cataclysmic Megasheer everything so far is an rated-X death route, according to the few climbers who’ve actually been on them. It seems that you can’t even drill from hooks up there. I won’t repeat the rest of the rationale, but I think you can see the reality of the stone closing in toward what Sean decided and I helped do.
|
|
k-man
Gym climber
SCruz
|
|
Echo: Retrobolting is the true scourge. I think that is where the line has to be drawn.
|
|
philo
Trad climber
boulder, co.
|
|
Nothing to hate Survival they were just considered cheats.
And it didn't take long for the masses to accept them either.
And DaftRat why won't you get it through your head that there was NO movie or media pagentry. Just a substantial new route.
Unlike the deliberate media circus Potter managed for all of 45 feet of Utah state icon. Yes they got good pics but so did the other routes in the mag spread is that so bad. As usual you latch on like a Pit Bull to any desireable chunk of misinformation and shake away. Just like your continued assertion that we should put boots on the ground in Muslim countries just like Teddy did in Morocco. Except he never did other than in Hollywood. Wet dream on and wag the dog boy. Oh and good luck making the hike for your chop fest. Oh yeah I forgot you can call in air support.
Sorry I couldn't help myself.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
One of the all time great threads discussing this controversial subject matter, a special thanks goes to all those who made it so. Thanks to Bob D' for keeping it on track.
And special thanks go to DR, Sean and wildone for your sober responses. DR you are a special person indeed.
Although I'm not to hot for rapping down something to rap bolt (just feels weird to me), just my own personal feelings.
I've actually supported and encouraged Ron Kauk when he first wanted to do this in Yosemite despite the rest of the gang hating him for that. I told him that of anyone to introduce rap bolting it would be him as he has the strength and soul to be able to thwart the oncoming tidal wave of everything that goes along with going against the grain in the last baston church of traditional climbing in Yosemite.
It was very painful for me to see friends hating each other over this for I truly loved them all.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!