Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2014 - 02:49pm PT
|
Ed wrote: but I maintain that we know what the "best style" is, and even though we might not choose this style, it remains a fixed point.
Only in the minds of those that can't see the other ways.
|
|
yanqui
climber
Balcarce, Argentina
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2014 - 02:50pm PT
|
I guess my point was, if the route is a rappel bolted sport route, the first ascent "style" isn't important. It's not the measure of value for a sport route. In fact, unless the route is 5.15 or has some historic value, I think most people could care less who got the first ascent.
On the other hand, I would personally say the best first ascent style is doing a route and leaving absolutely no trace. No spray, no grades, no topos, no reports. Just climb and leave the route completly virgin for the next to come along. And when someone comes and repeats the route 10 or 20 years later and claims the first, smile to yourself knowing the truth. Bouldering and some kinds of trad are conducive to this kind of first ascent. Obviously this style of first ascent is not conducive to establishing good quality sport routes, which are also great to have around.
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2014 - 03:16pm PT
|
Oddly, being accused of a physicist's precision is interesting, because that initial statement is really very broad, and intuitive, but it captures the essence of climbing first ascents that all of us have experienced.
I'm not granting "precision," Ed. I don't believe that physics is nearly as precise as most physicists think it is.
I'm saying "objectivity," and I'm saying that you don't have even that in your definition. This is, interestingly enough, something that you now seem to admit. You are now calling it "broad and intuitive."
Now you seem to back away from objectivity and replace it with something like inter-subjectivity, but then you treat "inter-subjective" as though that gets you everything you want from "objective."
But even that doesn't "capture the essence of climbing first ascents that all of us have experienced." That statement wildly begs the question!
The first ascent of K2 was a wildly different experience, with wildly different goals and standards (even regarding agreed-upon "best style") than the first ascent of Half Dome or El Cap. The first ascent of a really hard boulder problem has a wildly different target in every respect than the first ascent of Cerro Torre.
And you ARE getting pushed into recognizing the many intangibles I referenced earlier. These are intangibles that your definition entirely ignores, yet they are indeed definitive.
Again, if you start by defining "climbing" (good luck), you'll have an easier task of defining "best style." At present you have the cart before the horse imho.
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2014 - 04:19pm PT
|
"Best" is a hypothetical ideal. For climbing it would have to be free solo. Clearly a rope is a compromise.
Your ideal Ed, could be read as accounting for that, but it's unclear. Otherwise doing an fa of a free route in the manner you describe, but with a rope, is shall we say, less than best, and every other incremental step away from that ideal, somewhat less than best, but hopefully, as best as can be, in a given circumstance.
But this really is about the 'quality' of the first ascent. It may say nothing about subsequent ascents. Sometimes the manner of the first ascent is to the detriment of subsequent ascents. Free solo FA's could be viewed that way.
But dicey ascents of sparsely protected routes, ascents that force ascentionists to climb in the style of the fa, provide as uniform as possible an experience for every ascent team. The Bachar Yeran is not for everyone, but having done it carries a certain meaning.
Is that better than making a fun route safe in the first place? I don't know. And I think it's situational
Modern pro has made many sorts of routes less sketch than was the first ascent. Sometimes they make it a different climb altogether.
In the first Phoenix rock guidebook, Jim Waugh listed first ascents, first free ascents, and "best" ascent. I really liked that.
think what climbing might have been had we waited for our craft to have so advanced that Lynne's FFA of the Nose would have been the FA
I think we would have been poorer for it. It was the thousands of ascents before, on aid that made that ascent stand out, even though it's not really a free ascent because it was done on Jardine's chipped (ie aid) holds. Still by Ed's definition I think it counts as " best" at least as of '94, or whenever it was.
Grug, I think Ed knew Exactly what to expect when he started this thread!!
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2014 - 04:20pm PT
|
actually Bob, I don't think of it as totally black and white, and I am accepting of other styles...
I'm just saying that Vitaliy M.'s story of a great day is at least a romantic example of "best style"
it isn't from some dogma, and I don't think it is a peculiar cultural position, either, unless that is a human culture in general.
an on sight solo first ascent is a really pure form of "best style" but not necessary
I'm not backing away from it...
objective, subjective, I think in this discussion our esthetic certainly is an important factor.
why is "leave no trace" an objective style? I don't think it is even though I think it is important
why is minimizing aid an objective style? I don't think it is, but one has to wonder what we derive from the experience of climbing if we overcome all of our physical limitations with a technological solution. Why is one technology acceptable (e.g. chalk, sticky rubber, high tech clothing) and others not acceptable (e.g. bolt ladders, etc) and what about the "in between stuff" like hang dogging (definitely aid), bolting from hooks (definitely aid), rap bolting, previewing, rehearsing...
I've been climbing 40 years and certainly while some of these questions are old, the climbing had to develop long enough to put these issues into perspective.
The "California Rules" are derived from the realization by Frost and Robbins and others that you could just bolt your way up something. So there was no risk, no way you wouldn't succeed in doing a first ascent if you used all the means at your disposal to do it.
Harding's retort as a question "what's the difference between a $100 a night hooker and a $300 a night hooker" has an interesting inferred answer, you pay more and have a better time? (I don't know... but it isn't just about the relative morality I suspect).
But we did have to get to the point when this issue formed. Before those walls were attempted and done we couldn't even formulate a style.
And climbing is still changing in many ways, but the styles of doing first ascents have become very mature, with very little new in the past decade. Maybe I've missed something (but I think not).
So yes, things change... what is more interesting to me, at least, is to wonder what could have been done had the likes of our best climbers today tackled climbing problems that we did in "less than best style" in the past, in particular, if we had only insisted in FFA as the definition of a first ascent.
I know that is hypothetical, by hypotheticals as fiction are a way of exploring a question. And they do inform us on style.
When determining a FA would be impossible using the "best style" and choose a less than best style, are we properly taking into account the future climbers that may actually be able to do it in the best style, and maybe we should defer to them the FA.
Just a question.
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2014 - 05:07pm PT
|
Ed wrote: When determining a FA would be impossible using the "best style" and choose a less than best style, are we properly taking into account the future climbers that may actually be able to do it in the best style, and maybe we should defer to them the FA.
Well time has told us no...head-pointing, pre-placed and excessive top-roping are all accepted in trad climbing now.
Things change, climbing has evolve and in my mind really not risking limb or life for.
|
|
Rudbud
Gym climber
Grover Beach, CA
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2014 - 05:23pm PT
|
When determining a FA would be impossible using the "best style" and choose a less than best style, are we properly taking into account the future climbers that may actually be able to do it in the best style, and maybe we should defer to them the FA.
Just a question.
Good question ED. But what's "best style"? I'm having a hard time figuring it out from everything I've read so far. Until I'm sure on what "best style" is I cant see my self deferring.
Would an X on the end of a rating make it best style?
Ed you got me hook line and sinker, nice troll.
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2014 - 05:31pm PT
|
When determining a FA would be impossible using the "best style" and choose a less than best style, are we properly taking into account the future climbers that may actually be able to do it in the best style, and maybe we should defer to them the FA.
As long as one does not change the rock and its environs one can do exactly as one pleases, afterwards quietly going home. No claimed FA, no problem. The whole issue evaporates.
How can we have such huge arguments about something that can be done 100 different ways. Mind you with 12,000 other similar climbs within a fifteen minute walk.
Our heads have to be seriously out of whack.
|
|
Ksolem
Trad climber
Monrovia, California
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2014 - 05:34pm PT
|
Lower angle, stances available when viewed from below, perhaps an opportunity for protection when viewed from below
Bachar "stance drilled" Pick Pocket, Owens River Gorge.
|
|
Rudbud
Gym climber
Grover Beach, CA
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2014 - 05:40pm PT
|
Serious question here?
I'm heading out to do some top rope soloing and I need to put some bolts in to hang my rope so I can climb. This climb has never been done so it would be an FA and possibly a FFA if it goes free for me if I'm strong enough.
Can I clam an FA or a FAA even though it was a top rope?
Should I just defer and just go climb in a gym?
I really want to climb outside but it might be to hard for me, and with in the next 50 years some one could just come along and on sight solo it possibly. And there will only be 2 bolts left when I'm done unless I decide to rap bolt it too.
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2014 - 05:48pm PT
|
Just boulder up on it till you don't feel comfortable going higher. Down climb. Keep trying it.
It is great fun and you can very clearly see you are learning. Go lead some other roped climbs. Even on those you will be able to sense you have learned something.
|
|
Rudbud
Gym climber
Grover Beach, CA
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2014 - 05:51pm PT
|
As long as one does not change the rock and its environs one can do exactly as one pleases, afterwards quietly going home. No claimed FA, no problem. The whole issue evaporates.
Jstan: have you ever clipped a bolt before? Or have you ever placed one?
|
|
Rudbud
Gym climber
Grover Beach, CA
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2014 - 06:03pm PT
|
As long as one does not change the rock and its environs one can do exactly as one pleases, afterwards quietly going home. No claimed FA, no problem. The whole issue evaporates.
I may have read this wrong, because the issue sure would evaporate.
But when I go climbing I seem to clip a lot of bolts.
So I'm trying to figure out what's going on here?
Are bolted climb's of any kind not ok?
I'm confused.
|
|
StahlBro
Trad climber
San Diego, CA
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2014 - 06:07pm PT
|
Walk up to something you know nothing about, climb it, leave no trace
|
|
jstan
climber
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2014 - 06:10pm PT
|
I'm actually trying to help.
Watch that NGS documentary on Stress I recommended. Then use it to establish exactly what it is
you seek from climbing. Expect doing this to be difficult. Everyone is different and you are no
exception. Climbing can be pretty dangerous. If you are taking risks, you owe it to yourself to know
why you are doing it.
|
|
Rudbud
Gym climber
Grover Beach, CA
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2014 - 06:23pm PT
|
I'm actually trying to help.
Watch that NGS documentary on Stress I recommended. Then use it to establish exactly what it is
you seek from climbing. Expect doing this to be difficult. Everyone is different and you are no
exception. Climbing can be pretty dangerous. If you are taking risks, you owe it to yourself to know
why you are doing it.
ok, I see.
Then use it to establish exactly what it is
you seek from climbing
I have been asking myself the question lately, why do I climb?
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2014 - 06:37pm PT
|
You don't already know? Then you're not really a climber.
|
|
StahlBro
Trad climber
San Diego, CA
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2014 - 06:42pm PT
|
^^^^^
yep
|
|
Rudbud
Gym climber
Grover Beach, CA
|
|
|
Jun 20, 2014 - 07:32pm PT
|
You don't already know? Then you're not really a climber.
Donini, coming from you that means a lot. And that's exactly what I needed to hear. The more climbers I meet or people who consider them selves climbers the less I would ever want to be one. So I'm really glad I was never one to begin with.
Jstan: Just checked out that documentary. I had actually seen it before..
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!