Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
johnkelley
climber
Anchorage Alaska
|
|
|
Sep 21, 2013 - 06:44pm PT
|
If you want to see a modern ground up runout test piece check out the Kelley/Beyer on the South Buttress of Mt. Moran. 20 or so bolts in the first 14 pitches with many 5.11 pitches and a pitch of 5.12, and one move of A0 followed by 4,000' of low 5th class. It's unrepeated of coarse.
|
|
rmuir
Social climber
From the Time Before the Rocks Cooled.
|
|
|
Sep 21, 2013 - 07:49pm PT
|
The surest way to prove you can't hold up your end of a debate? Start personalizing it.
Man, Hedge. I sense a pattern. If you have nothing to contribute, you let aggression lead you by the nose.
--------------------------------------------
Hey, Ricky. I trust you've had time to cull through this thread? (Or at least had some to the junior partners construct a summary for you. )
As one of the coolest heads I've ever known on the "unforgiving end", do you support adding protection to historic run-outs to make them more accessible and, therefore, more popular? Would you condone--as some here do--the placement of additional bolts without consulting with the FA party? ...in some type of libertarian hegemony?
I, for one, need you to unpack the sentence:
Reduction of the principle of maintaining the sanctity of the first ascent to the absurd.
|
|
m_jones
Trad climber
Carson City, NV
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2013 - 01:08am PT
|
We were so lucky to have someone like Kevin (and co. In the Valley) and Vern (and co. In the meadows) for establishing so many very cool long routes. These routes are what we longed and worked hard to climb. The drilling involved kind of made us feel guilty for just being able to go do the routes. Stoners, Space Babble, Black Primo, Freewheelin’, Quicksilver, Mother Earth, Crusifix, Toads, Heart of Stone, Piece, to name some of the extraordinary gifts we got to just enjoy.
To say we were 5.13 climbers flitting around on 5.9 death routes would be overstating the reality by more than a little. All of us at that time (mid 70s early 80s) were making the rounds of the 5.11 crack climbs of the day and it was something very different to go face climbing for a change. We called Glacier Point apron slab climbing. Middle and Fairview were face climbing. We knew that runout climbs like Quicksilver were 5.11 climbers 5.9 routes. Because you had to have 5.11 route finding skills to stay on the 5.9 climbing and runout 5.9 felt very much like protected 5.11. I remember Black Primo seeming much tamer than Quicksilver as it was much better protected. Route finding is very different than move finding.
So is or should there be a “law” of the FA?
Maybe not a law but just maybe a little respect for the effort and route finding talent of those who went first and had the vision to give us these remarkable climbs.
Don’t expect consistency here just random thoughts of what I’d like to see if I were king.
(and through the eyes of someone working through the grades again)
For the most part respect and don’t alter the routes as they were created.
Replacing sketchy 35 year old bolts - very very good.
Rap bolting a route that was led ground up 35 years ago is pretty weak.
I mean there are so many good climbers these days that can hike these grades.
Adding bolts to a route ground up from stances not used on the first ascent, not as weak, but I think the local active crew should decide to allow or condemn.
Adding bolts on a runout route where the first ascent party tells you correct mistakes they made - what are you waiting for? Get up there If you truly have the gumption to make it better.
Don’t mess with B/Y - EVER - I was always too scared to go for that one but it should stand just because it is always good to have a reminder that there are somethings you are just too afraid to lead!
Free solo onsight first ascents are badass but if someone wants to establish a route ground up in the same area go for it. Who knows where they went anyway.
Provide good maps to the new well protected face climbs going up in the meadows so more can find them and maybe get enough mileage to be confidant on the scarier test pieces. Or just enjoy a nice walk to moderate well protected routes for a great day moving over stone.
New well protected routes fairly close to the old test pieces are ok but not too close.
I am sure someone here can define what is too close.
Now that I am climbing a couple times a week trying to repeat a bunch of my first ascents from long long ago on Donner summit, I was not quite sure what to think about my boldest first ascent efforts now having (lots of) bolts protecting them. I now kind of like the ability to lead them now with out death potential and my simple ego is satisfied that the guide book states that they were first led with out any bolts. I had top roped them a few times then led them to keep them interesting. Not perfect style but who knew that that would become the current accepted tactic for scary short climbs.
So there you have it, if I were king.
Inconsistent and conflicting to be sure.
Just calling it how I see it now that I am really enjoying getting out there again to climb.
Max Jones
|
|
Rhodo-Router
Gym climber
sawatch choss
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2013 - 01:59pm PT
|
Here's something to chew on:
Hedge et al. object to the '5.10 climbs for 5.12 climbers', or 5.9/5.11 as Max put it.
On the other side of this coin lie the thousands of 5.12 climbs for 5.10 climbers that get dogged out daily all over this country. Super safe, basically roped bouldering that allows for people to get in technically over their heads in a consequence-free way.
Do we really want to discount the mental aspect of our discipline such that traits like perseverance and boldness simply fade away?
Enough of this. I'm driving your way, Kolifornians. Holler if you want to climb something.
|
|
ruppell
climber
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2013 - 02:15pm PT
|
Rhodo
Do you think boldness is really fading away? Maybe it's just that it's not a common trait. Think of all the bold lines that are there and how many times they get climbed. Now or back in the day. Take Fairview for an example. Regular and Lucky Streaks get climbed all day everyday. Inverted gets done. Plastic exploding to Fairest hardly done. The other routes see little traffic(Kamps, Scavenger, Sorcerers) Not because their technically that much harder but rather because they are bolder. That being said I'd be willing to bet that they see more ascents every year today than in the past. Larger climbing demographic equals larger percentage of boldness to go around. The inverse is also true. So let the hangdoggers hang and let the bold climb.
|
|
Todd Eastman
climber
Bellingham, WA
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2013 - 02:37pm PT
|
Some routes may be beyond the comfortable realm of the weekend warrior that used to climb considerably more...
|
|
johnkelley
climber
Anchorage Alaska
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2013 - 04:30pm PT
|
Hedge get busy. Start your retro bolting campaign and see what happens. My guess is you won't do sh#t.
|
|
Fluid
Trad climber
San Diego, CA
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2013 - 05:51pm PT
|
I appreciate all the well-explained positions and historical anecdotes, I have enjoyed reading this thread, and greatly respect the climbing pioneers who have chimed in. I especially appreciate those approaching the topic with an open mind.
Concerning the terms “today’s climbers” and “advancing the sport”, I’m sure it’s true that the best climbers of today don’t look to these climbs to advance climbing, and they likely would have little trouble dispatching them. It’s rather Nietzschean to make their views the determining factor.
With each step taken on a climb there is risk, but not the same risk. It’s a great skill to judge the actual risk. A long fall on one bolt, with death if that bolt fails (an oft-encountered state on R climbs), has a risk difficult to determine. It’s why most have accepted upgrading to modern bolts, which helps, but doesn’t provide redundancy.
Nassim Taleb’s book The Black Swan is relevant. It’s very difficult to estimate the likelihood of rare events, so the thanksgiving turkey projects rosy prospects on Wed evening.
What we have are 5.9-5.10 climbs in beautiful accessible public locations made unavailable to typical 5.9-5.10 climbers, due to unacceptable risk (created by man, not rock), not lack of mental strength. For those who love climbing but have serious responsibility, improving ability doesn’t change risk tolerance, it’s hard to say at what climber level the risk gets low enough, and not everyone is able to climb at that level anyway. Not every climb needs to be accessible to low-risk climbers (and stop with the B-Y laziness, there’s no slope slippery enough), but it’s not clear high-risk climbers have the right to take away great climbs from them for all time (yes, yes, TM, I’m talking about you). Do you doubt there are many more of the weekend low-riskers (with or without testicles) than honnolds? You aren’t hearing a chorus from them because they respect you and are cowed. All the granite girls and granite boys multiply up.
Thanks for the cross-reference, Rick A. Certainly seems to be the same old same old.
|
|
Fluid
Trad climber
San Diego, CA
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2013 - 06:03pm PT
|
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2013 - 06:35pm PT
|
This thread is hilarious...same old pissing match from the old ones.
Quite sad in a way.
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2013 - 06:54pm PT
|
Ron wrote: Cuz the ArchAngel thing didnt go the way you wanted.
Ron...the bolts are still there and are going to stay there.
Your total lack of understanding the history of Arch Angel is amazing.
The sport ascent was way more honest than the supposed trad ascent.
|
|
Roger Breedlove
climber
Cleveland Heights, Ohio
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2013 - 08:05pm PT
|
Concerning the terms “today’s climbers” and “advancing the sport”, I’m sure it’s true that the best climbers of today don’t look to these climbs to advance climbing, and they likely would have little trouble dispatching them. It’s rather Nietzschean to make their views the determining factor.
Kudos for the Nietzchean reference, Fluid. I love it.
Bob, it is same-old-same-old, but it won't go away. There really are strong differences of opinion about all aspects of bolted routes. At a minimum these rehashes allow new participants to get a more complete understanding of the issues, not they necessarily agree. I certainly have come to understand that the style that we chose in the early 70s is not within the mainstream of accepted climbing styles practiced today, and have understand that we took up valuable rock to express our chosen style that some folks don't like.
That does not mean, to me, that is so obvious what current climbers should do about it. The issue is between current climbers, strung out all along the vectors of couldn't-care-less, let-it-be, give-me-saft-climbing, to jerking chains. But just as in politics and marriage, having a conversation or listening on one, helps the process move along.
|
|
johnkelley
climber
Anchorage Alaska
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2013 - 08:17pm PT
|
How is adding bolts to old routes going to advance the sport? How will anything good come out of it? Why do some old climbers feel the need to alter their old climbs to make them more popular? Why is Hedge such a horses ass?
|
|
johnkelley
climber
Anchorage Alaska
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2013 - 08:27pm PT
|
It wasn't my analogy but I get the point. Sorry if it's to complicated for you.
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2013 - 08:43pm PT
|
Roger...the 70's were just that, nothing more, no better than the 80's, 90's and so on. Each generation brings something new to the table.
The really sad part is seeing older climbers act like Ron.
PS...the 70's climbers broke many a rule/law in climbing. I know, I was there. :-)
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2013 - 09:24pm PT
|
Ron..you don't know what my take is. I climb rocks...it is fun, it is not my life, never was. You and your type cling so hard to something that really never existed because you look at climbing in a romantic way, not in a factual way.
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2013 - 09:26pm PT
|
Chim-Chim wrote: Hedge , you said you had the "consesus" aka majority. I'm simply refuting your statement.
With what proof?
|
|
TGT
Social climber
So Cal
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2013 - 09:27pm PT
|
There's a corollary to this argument that existed in the early seventies at Tahquitz at least.
At the time the luminaries were eliminating aid on routes at a furious pace. Some of the perpetrators have participated in this thread. Many of those lines were readily accessible to the lesser lights at a moderate grade and with only a few points of aid.
The prevailing ethic at the time was that once a line went free it was no longer fair game for the slings.
If it went free and clean no longer appropriate for hammer and piton.
Everyone played by those rules or were ostracized, or even worse ridiculed.
As a result skills took an order of magnitude leap out of necessity and "clean" became the prevailing order of the day.
Following the retrobolters logic, those points of aid should have been left fixed to allow passage for those who's skills didn't rise to the task at hand and etriers should still be standard equipment at the crags..
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Sep 22, 2013 - 09:33pm PT
|
TGT wrote: At the time the luminaries were eliminating aid on routes at a furious pace.
Using aid gear left in place.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!