What Is Trad ?????????

Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List

This thread has been locked

Messages 601 - 620 of total 1124 in this topic

<< First | < Previous | Show All | Next > | Last >>

Dingus McGee

Social climber

Laramie

Apr 15, 2013 - 10:18am PT

Tarbuster,

in a nutshell: Almost whenever you minimize a variable, you can find a standard to measure from that shows how it leads to maximization when measured in another way.

e.g. Trad uses a minimun or none of bolts. this leads to less or very low safety or none.

sport uses bolts (profusely?) leading to more safety and it maximizes the Chickenshitness of our group. The measure of Chickenshitness was posted earlier by rgold. Doing such is all in the tricks of applied statistics.

Or if your bent is of the Eastern mindset: In every yang there is some yin.

Tarbuster

climber

right here, right now

Topic Author's Reply - Apr 15, 2013 - 10:25am PT

I'm going to have to reread your last two posts a few times because I'm just not that clear on where you're going. Apologies.

I'm going out for a walk on my skis!
I'll talk with you guys a little later.

Please feel free to elaborate further Dingus.

Dingus McGee

Social climber

Laramie

Apr 15, 2013 - 10:25am PT

Tarbuster,

in effect I am challenging your view of adventure, you and the trad group seem to think our sport efforts lack adventure. I have suggested attention deficit as to why some trads find no adventure in sport. And that is a rational supposition?

Remember in an earlier post I posted genetics plays a big role in how we act. It seems that might be applicable here.

Also I find the trad view and lack of a measure for minimization of enviromental impact to be quite artificial. Here is why: There is no assessment as to the weighting of what is really costly activity leading to irreparable environmental changes. Suppose I think it is gasoline. In the long run the country is likely to pay far more than the $3.50/gal we pay per gallon of fuel to straighten up the havoc its use generates. Again gym climbing takes less gasoline. Now who drives more, sport climbers or trad climbers. To use only the fecklesss measure of bolts for a standard of environmental degradation is living with you head buried in the sand. You trad naives drive just as much or more than us sport. All our climbs are in one area for weeks. I have merely been holding up sign posts to show what you miss when making brash judgement. Maybe look at the big Picture?

Tarbuster

climber

right here, right now

Topic Author's Reply - Apr 15, 2013 - 10:30am PT

Thank you Dingus, I'll get back to you later. I'm still going to need more elaboration on your prior two longer posts.
But you are off to a good start in clarifying.

Patrick: please reread my post from 05:34am
Cheers fellas.

StahlBro

Trad climber

San Diego, CA

Apr 15, 2013 - 12:26pm PT

Well said Ed

mouse from merced

Trad climber

The finger of fate, my friends, is fickle.

Apr 15, 2013 - 12:38pm PT

we purposely tread
very lightly around Ed
he's trad--he said tread

and not trod. It's odd
when all's said, depend on Ed.
It's all in that head.

This discussion seems like it's far, far too serious, if I may be so bold. :)

rgold

Trad climber

Poughkeepsie, NY

Apr 15, 2013 - 12:52pm PT

I agree with Ed, and I wrote my own take on the intrinsic role of risk in trad climbing in the fixed piton thread, see http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.php?topic_id=2107529&msg=2108159#msg2108159.

But I think the point Dingus wants to make is that sport climbing replaces "risk-based adventure" with "performance-based adventure," the point being that the fundamental source of adventure is uncertainty. Having drained the risk out of the enterprise, sport climbing provides opportunities for raising the difficulty level so high that the question of whether, even with a lot of work, one can perform at the requisite level becomes the source of challenge. In particular, even after working out all the moves, assembling the individual marginal segments into a successful redpoint can be enormously challenging, with great uncertainty attached to it. From the combination of the hard preparatory work and, in spite of it, the considerable uncertainty of success, comes the adventure of sport climbing, if I may be allowed to presume Dingus' argument.

I think one finds the concept of performance-based adventure in Gill's original bouldering grades, in which B3 denoted "often tried by experts but rarely successfully repeated," and surely performance-based adventure lies at the heart of bouldering as well as sport climbing.

I think I've made it clear I personally have room in my heart (if not in my decomposing tendons) for both genres. My major objection is that the adherents of one approach have a way of deciding they have the right to alter or appropriate rock for their preferred variant of the activity. Although there are excesses on both sides (Ken Nichols invariably comes to mind), and ambiguous terrain which both camps might plausibly claim as their own, I think the bulk of the transgressions are committed by those who are only too willing to drill.

Here's a pretty good example, from MP, of bolters appropriating what certainly looks trad terrain to me:

Dingus McGee

Social climber

Laramie

Apr 15, 2013 - 01:52pm PT

Ed,

But while on route, I have no risk of failing

,

This statement makes little sense of sport when compared to trad. Risk of failing??

If trad only had death as the risk for failing we would see more carnage. I think your assessment of risk is an ill comparison or please explain more.

Ed,

at the Vedauwoo Fest I seen you on toprope with Specter Man. Seems like a no risk to me, could you report on how much adventure you experienced?

Dingus McGee

Social climber

Laramie

Apr 15, 2013 - 02:07pm PT

rgold,

for the most part your analysis of performance adventure is right on with the way I think.

In general sport climbs occupy the terrain that trads never condsidered --sedimentary rock for its face climbing values. I cannot quite agree with you about the drill issues unless it is where some deviant sport climber drilled along cracks already in gear use. My turf interest is not with cracks and it seems modern trad gear works quite well on this turf.

rgold,

reread your piece and noticed the word,"transgressions" so yes you have it correct.

Yes, those that drill tested gear cracks are affiliated with us sport climbers but their focus[no,no]concern is not where our concern lies. Yes they are lumped with us but they do not show up at our walls.

Dingus McGee

Social climber

Laramie

Apr 15, 2013 - 02:52pm PT

Ed,

some people clean a route because they would like to do it again and in less time. We make marks on whatever we touch, and for even what we don't its existence pattern is quite ephemeral. Communication is the essence of what humans do and you are in this with us. Don't tell us what you do and you can think you are narrowing your footprint.

Dingus McGee

Social climber

Laramie

Apr 15, 2013 - 03:06pm PT

Ed,

is a dictionary quote all you can offer on this? Just tell me how much more risky trad is than sport by example. I'll bet you (your way of doing trad) that you don't venture any higher above you last trad piece than I venture above some bolts on sport climb where I might fall and bang into to something. It is your naivete in this I see? Not all bolts create a safe fall, I have slammed into many walls falling on bolts.

Risks? mostly likely you bring the right gear to get the job done safely in your mind, otherwise you would not go. Sure you may think lightning can get you but there are foggerites where I sport. As I said, if trad were far more risky we would see far more carnage. You guys might have once been soldiers but trad climbing is in no way as risky as battlefield duty.

rgold

Trad climber

Poughkeepsie, NY

Apr 15, 2013 - 03:25pm PT

Ed, given that "an exciting or remarkable experience" is one of the Merriam-Webster definitions of adventure, I think my use of "performance-based adventure" is not out of line.

The Oxford on-line dictionary says

an unusual and exciting, typically hazardous, experience or activity:
her recent adventures in Italy

a daring and exciting activity calling for enterprise and enthusiasm:
she traveled the world in search of adventure.

Examples from the Oxford learner's dictionary:

When you're a child, life is one big adventure.

Popper described science as the greatest adventure in the world.

Thus, although physical risk is "typically" a component of adventure, the absence of physical risk does not disqualify an activity from being adventurous, as the dictionary examples amply illustrate.

I actually think my definition, which essentially requires very substantial efforts and an uncertain outcome for adventure, is entirely reasonable and not outside the realm of lexicographic validity. Moreover, there are other "risks" besides the physical ones that are part of the adventure in trad climbing. Although I don't feel very qualified to speak about this, there are psychological risks involved in very high-level performances; there is the phenomenon of "clutching," and I've personally heard and read accounts of redpoints in which the climber described having to overcome the fear of not performing all the moves correctly.

None of this means that a particular individual might not be drawn to one type of adventure and immune to the charms of the other. But I am willing to grant sport climbing in general and Dingus in particular their own sense of adventure, and I'm not persuaded the word is being misused in the process.

Dingus, I think you are using risk in a way that is not the point for trad climbing. (I'm also pretty sure you know better.) Trad climbers are interested, at least to some extent, in using their skills, both mental, physical, and technological, to minimize the intrinsic risks of the environment. The fact that they are generally successful at it doesn't mean the risks aren't there, and it certainly doesn't meant that the risks aren't an essential part of the experience. But it does mean, as Ed asserts, that the risks have to be present.

The risk of getting hit by lightning is not something any climber I know likes even a little; it sometimes occurs as part of being outdoors, but no one I know goes looking for a lightening experience.

Ironically, it seems possible that the aura of safety surrounding sport climbing, and the attending casualness associated with safety procedures, has made it riskier than trad climbing (but not in a way that would be of interest to any climbers, trad or sport). We keep reading about people getting dropped while being lowered...

Mark Force

Trad climber

Cave Creek, AZ

Apr 15, 2013 - 03:56pm PT

What Ed said!

"It's not an adventure until something goes wrong."
~Yvon Chouinard

"Oh, fun, we're going on an expotition*!"

*expedition
~Piglet to Pooh as they're taking off for a little "adventure."

Trad climbing certainly isn't necessarily adventure climbing, though it can be!

The concept of sport climbing being a form of adventure seems a little silly.

These days as an old guy with wife, kids, and grandkids to look after, I don't have the right to stick my neck out too much. Went unroped soloing most of the day before the wedding because it wouldn't have been right IMO to continue that particular adventure after I had responsibilities besides myself.

So, it's expotitions for me these days...unless something goes wrong.

Yeah, there can be way too many rules. How about two - don't dink around too much and don't eff it up for the people that come after you.

Jaybro

Social climber

Wolf City, Wyoming

Apr 15, 2013 - 03:56pm PT

Dingus, you're making theassumption that a bolt is safer than a cam (or other piece) I ain't buying it. In the last fifty years of climbing I have had a number of bolt failures, I have never had a piece itself fail. Not talking about bad placements. It seems the argument could be made that "trad" climbing is more safety oriented than sport, because the safety units are inherently, more reliable.

Now, about that strawmanning......

MH2

climber

Apr 15, 2013 - 04:03pm PT

A re-cap of my introduction to climbing

There was a sign-up notice on a bulletin board at school, put there by the Outing Club, that there would be a trip to go rock climbing at Quincy Quarries in Boston. I signed up, imagining that we would be scrambling around on talus. At the quarry they tied a rope around my waist and sent me straight up, or so it seemed (Friction Face, 5.0). It was terrific (= inspired terror). That piece of rock was 30 feet high and my imagination could take that and scale it up to Matterhorn airiness, the biggest piece of rock I was aware of at the time. When I eventually started leading climbs, I often scared myself with the thought of climbing up, finding no place to protect, and being unable to climb back down.

Despite a lot of off-putting forecasts, my imagination never got the chance to say I-told-you-so, but I think that it contributed greatly to the hold that climbing has had on me. Nowadays, my imagination has much less scope for scaring me because there is much more information about climbs, and because I learned a few things on my own.

Which is to say: I agree with Goldstone that there can be plenty of adventure without necessarily getting hurt.

JEleazarian

Trad climber

Fresno CA

Apr 15, 2013 - 04:17pm PT

If nothing else, the discussion on this thread confirms that "trad" and "sport" are different games using the same medium. To me, adventure always requires uncertainty. I can have that uncertainty from pure difficulty, with no realistic possibility of injury. I can also have that uncertainty from less pure difficulty, but a higher possibility of injury.

While both create personal uncertainty for me, overcoming the risk of a longer leader fall creates more of a sense of reward than overcoming pure difficulty, probably because I started out on boulders, and viewed the resulting great technical difficulty as mere practice for "real" (i.e. roped) climbing. That's clearly a personal value judgment, with no universal application.

Pratt's climbing -- where he climbed routes as hard as anyone else dared to do then with perfect protection, but often had minimal protection (e.g. Twilight Zone) deeply affected me, and still does to this day. A lead into unknown territory with unknown protection is simply a different game from one with pre-placed, plentiful protection.

All that means is that we cannot compare only the difficulty rating of a first ascent done it traditional style, with a first ascent of a sport route with pre-placed pro. That would be like comparing times on a track in a bicycle race with times on the same track in a motorcycle race. They use the same medium (track, in this case), but they fundamentally differ. It does not make one "better" than the other.

John

Dingus McGee

Social climber

Laramie

Apr 15, 2013 - 04:31pm PT

Jaybro,

when gear often pulls out(fails) it is often before it reaches its material breaking strength so that might explain the account of no inherent gear failures. The camelot group had a 3 sigma of some 3500 lbs on the material which is less than the 25 Kn of the basic bolt hanger design.

But to my point: In sport we have no choice but to venture to the next bolt and hope it is clippable etc. In trad we can read ahead and place several pieces so to cross that tight hands zone with no stopping, but often knowing well we could afford to put in a piece before the going gets easy yet maybe then having to hang.

Whether Ed or I are doing trad or bolted climbs when the going gets tough we want another piece sooner than we would when the climbing is easier. But in either case we consider the risk of falling onto something and getting injured. Just because the climb was (sport) bolted it is not very prudent to assume that falls on these bolts have no consequences. We both seem to act rational when these situations arise by acessing the risk as good we can and then trying the best choice.

added: Rgold,

trad climbers have no monopoly on this form of adventure--seeking reduction in risk. They build it into their venture with good gear, good weather, backups and cell phones while the sport try to build it into their media.

But how do we measure risks? the helmet reduces head injury severeness for rock fall impact. Would any trad climber be rational seeking a higher risk for head injury? No, they try to reduce risk. With all the modern gear they cannot argue that the risks are the same as if they were outside adventuring just wearing the emperor's new clothes. But yes to your point earlier they have a more diversified array of risks to access, which makes for perhaps more adventure. It seems some of this is a rather matter of fact ways of doing things.

Jaybro: For your pieces of gear you knew the history, and for the bolts you didn't. To My point, would you trust (non tight) friends that were in cracks for years and used by everyone? No way to check how much they had walked. Bolts have a very high reliability(loadings) per placement compared to gear. Gear pulling out must be counted as a failures too along with material failures when we base the quality on a placement.

But by your accessment of bolts we can say sport climbers are at more risk than trad which is contrary to what most have said.