Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
bob d'antonio
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2006 - 08:39pm PT
|
This sh#t has been hashed over maybe 5 to ten thousand times on the internet.
Mean little to nothing to me.
There are much bigger issues to deal with...than ground up or not.
Who gives a flying f*#k????
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2006 - 08:43pm PT
|
You do ......
|
|
atchafalaya
Trad climber
California
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2006 - 09:08pm PT
|
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...
|
|
Bldrjac
Ice climber
Boulder
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2006 - 09:19pm PT
|
Actually I think it's time to reinitiate the forgotten practice of crag traverses. With all these stupid grid bolted sport routes so close together we should go sideways. New route names, new ratings, more glory!!.....I don't go up anymore..just sideways.
Jack
|
|
goatboy smellz
climber
boulder county
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2006 - 09:29pm PT
|
I know they have that in the Gunks, a full traverse of the Trapps, 67 pitches & about 9,000 feet long.
Maybe we should start hula hooping the Flatirons.
Has anyone traversed Redgarden?
Damn, I'm feeling inspired now.
|
|
KP Ariza
climber
SCC
|
|
|
Nov 21, 2006 - 10:28pm PT
|
Where do old whales(climbers)go to die(cry)?.....Boneyard=Supertopo Forum-
|
|
Mungeclimber
Trad climber
one pass away from the big ditch
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2006 - 12:01am PT
|
So who on supertaco stirs the most sh#t without being an obvious JuanDe type trolling effect?
i.e seems like a fair question and the thread gets big due to controversy or perceived controversy?
just curious
Wes going to Pinns this weekdend. Sat or Sun. not sure. email me if you want to change plans from the Valley.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2006 - 12:25am PT
|
I was looking at the stats from the 2005 ANAM (sorry Werner...) and if you ask what fraction of accidents from 1951 to 2004 had the "contributory cause" "placed no/inadequate protection" you find it's around 11%. 16% of the "conributory cause" was "exceeding abilities."
If you look at the "immediate cause" for an accident, 6% were due to "exceeding abilities."
Of course, not all of the protection contribution was due to runout routes... so the cause of accidents for runout routes is no more than 11%.
When we're talking about making routes safe, it would seem that learning how to judge one's own abilities is probably a better place to work than retro-bolting routes considered "unsafe." The psychological issues involved with runout routes would seem to me to be the perception of inexperienced climbers rather than an actual assessment of risk.
Just how many people have died attempting the Bachar-Yerian? How many people have been injured? How many people have done it?
People safely climb the B-Y. I don't see why the climb has to be brought down to the level of any climber. It is a test piece for a number or reasons. You do not have to go up and climb it if you are not ready to do it safely. There are a lot of other climbs to do... and many ways of working up to it.
I do agree though, in the future all of the routes will be rebolted and/or re-equipped precisely because the generation that pioneered the routes will be gone and a new generation, unaware of the pioneering efforts surmounting the difficulties and pushing the limits, will simply believe that their way is the only way...
Fortunately I won't be around to angst over it...
|
|
Mimi
climber
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2006 - 12:44am PT
|
Thanks Ed for such a clear and concise summation. Keep the faith, many of us aren't that ancient yet, despite what some of these young punks attest. I don't see consensus retrobolting of bold classics happening anytime soon.
And with or without bolts, climbing is dangerous, period. Why is this so hard for some people to grasp?
|
|
atchafalaya
Trad climber
California
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2006 - 12:44am PT
|
f*#k it, I quit...
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2006 - 11:26am PT
|
By all accounts that I have read and heard, the BASE jumpers decided to flout the NPS rules (confident that they knew the "true way") and were essentially banned from YNP. There are BASE jumper old dads out there who lurk on this forum which can give their POV.
I am resigned to the fact that the climbing will outlive me and that my own particular POV on FAs is transient. I will not be around to set an example... or to teach young climbers, right from wrong, or recount the FA and FFA stories. For that we have Falcon Guides, I guess. So at some point when climbers are reequiping some route I helped put up in the distant future, and cursing that I used "anchor bolts" rather than "five-piece" I'm sure that they will also question my judgement as to the "proper" placement of the protection to ensure optimum safety.
From what I now know, protecting the FA is a much more complex issue than just figuring out the right place for the bolts... or whether or not a bolt is better than a fixed pin, or just running it out. It has been stated again and again, by the FA team members on this forum, that they were not intending to put up "death routes," runout routes are not intentionally created, and certainly not to scare the armies of climbers yet to come and do them. The FA team, for the most part, is just climbing a line, going somewhere that no one else has gone before. It might occur to the FA team somewhere on the climb, that this would be a nice route for other people to do sometime... and they just then might think that more conventional protection would be nice. Of course, they may also be close to being out of bolts at that point too.
The nature of the sport has changed dramatically over the last couple of decades. Most climbers then where used to doing FAs and FFAs, especially at the top end of the climbing food chain. Most climbers today do not do FAs or FFAs.
You can complain all you want about the FA team, fact is that they actually did figure out how to climb the line, and they left the description of the climb for others to follow if they so choose. The authority of the FA is in the description of the climb. There are many FA teams that do not describe the climb, leaving the line for others to discover for themselves. Of course, no one knows how many climbs this represents, that's the point. Maybe someday the bolts and hangers of long neglected climbs will oxidize away, the cracks will refill with soil and be replanted, the flakes will exfoliate off, the lichen will inch its way back onto the faces and the moss will collect in the runoffs, and the ancient forgotten lost paths of long ago FA teams will be waiting for rediscovery.
It is my hope that at that time, the climbers of the re-FA will treat the climb with all due respect. I am wishing them a good time on their FA, just like the others who had gone before them, unknown to the ages.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2006 - 11:43am PT
|
The laws of nature bind us hand and foot, yet we think we are free to do as we please.
Yes, there are rules, and those that think there are no rules, will be kicked by that very nature they so called love so much.
|
|
Anastasia
Trad climber
Mammoth Lakes, CA
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2006 - 12:04pm PT
|
Ground up is not a rule, it is a "natural law."
(As a genre, natural law is the principle that some things are as they are, because that is how they are.)
If you didn't climb it from the ground up, you didn't climb it "period." It is extremely logical.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2006 - 12:11pm PT
|
You have the independent free will to do what you want.
Now go do it!
At the end of your life report back your results ......
|
|
Kevster
Trad climber
Evergreen, CO
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2006 - 12:15pm PT
|
As I see it climbers who put up a lot of rap bolted routes are fixated on the end result ( I.E. Another route in the guide for me), vs the process of climbing. While ground up is not always the safest way, it definately maximizes the adventure. I think that all routes should go in from the ground up simply to decrese our impact as climbers on the environment. It also forces climbers to really know the line before they alter it. Most important it would hopefully preserve some climbs for our future generations. There are lines I have checked out that I know I could climb, but could not bolt on lead. So who am I to lay claim to that rock and bring it down to my level by preplacing the bolts from above? Isn't that a form of stealing?
I think that everyone with a Bosch should ask what the difference is between gridbolting a cliff and spraypainting grafitti on El Cap. You could say that one "leaves something behind to be enjoyed by others", but I bet the artist is saying the same thing.
I am not saying that all bolting is wrong or evil, just that if everyone spent just a bit of time and reflection on the "rad new line" they just discovered they may realize that bolting it is not really increasing the beauty or useability of the land. Why not just top rope it? Why do we as climbers think it is our God given right to bolt whatever we want?
There are climbers today who are putting up 5.13 pitches on El Cap protected by 2 hand drilled bolts, and others who are leading 5.13 on bashies and other aid crap. How can we say that Bold climbing is dead? I bet that in the future there will be entire cliffs that will be stripped of bolts, because there will be a new generation ready to push difficulty with new tools that allow them to do so.
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
The West
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2006 - 12:23pm PT
|
Don't f*#k with existing routes. If the fa/ffa party is deceased you have no one to ask permission of, so, again don't f*#k with it. Make your own routes instead of piggybacking on a better climber.
Retrobolt any of my routes and I will come back from the grave to throttle you, no matter how atheistic my views may be at my passing.
you bin served. haha
|
|
Mimi
climber
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2006 - 12:28pm PT
|
Excellent kevster.
Too funny Jaybro.
Wes, call me old fashioned, but it really is annoying and disrespectful when someone takes shots at people simply because they're older. Do you treat people of different ethnic backgrounds similarly? These so-called "old dads" could climb circles around you today. Show some respect for your elders would ya!
And IMHO, I think you're simply off base with your idea of these menacing routes you're so fixated on being retrobolted. You're a dreamer thinking that would happen in 10-15 years.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2006 - 12:29pm PT
|
Just see, hehehe
There is "a law"
And fools think rules are made by people .........
|
|
Bldrjac
Ice climber
Boulder
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2006 - 12:50pm PT
|
I really think that at this moment in time there are really just two or maybe three categories of climbers.
Those who experience climbing and treat it as recreation and a type of exercise and who therefore view bolts as the latest means protection. They aren't interested in extending themselves psychologically and/or exposing themselves to risk. They also aren't interested in developing the skills necessary to control the risk factor: IE, getting stronger and better so that long run-outs don't seem quite so bad. We have a situation here in Colorado where a classic and respected ice climb (Ames Ice Hose)has had 3 bolts placed on it because someone deemed the first pitch "unnecessarily dangerous and run-out". This person is just not willing to develop the skills necessary to lead this climb and because they don't have alot of time to invest in getting better, well, they just bolted it.
The second type of climber is in climbing for the long run and views the rock and the mountain environment as sacred and part of a spiritual path. Bolts or any type of alteration in this environment is an afront to their philosophy because they see themselves as caretakers and so object to bolts and sport routes.
They really don't care how hard the climbing is or how run-out. They just wish to grow and become better people through learning about themselve through the climbing experience.
Then there is the third type who is a mixture of both. They view climbing as sacred and profound and enjoy the chasing of numbers and climbing hard and run-out routes but aren't so serious as to think of climbing as sacred. They just climb for the pure joy of it.
I see all types of climbers. People doing ground up first ascent in the desert, the south Platte, the Black Canyon and in Yosemite. IT's all good. We just have to maintain a balance and save some challenges for future generations of climbers. And by balance I mean that old routes which have been done in a groundup style should be left as a historical example of how climbs CAN be done. That everything doesn't have to be bolted and that bolts don't have to be every 6 or 10 feet apart in order for the route to have value. Speaking for myself I discovered years ago that bolting on rappel was just not interesting or held any value for me. That isn't part of why I climb. I would much rather go ground-up.
Anyway, just some views from behind the keyboard.
Jack
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Nov 22, 2006 - 12:58pm PT
|
Which means everyone that does the climb in the future should do it with the number of bolts the FA team happened to pack up the route?
If the FA team is still around, and you ask them, maybe they will give their permission, and maybe not.
However, in time the FA team looses some of it's authority, especially if the route is popular and many many people have done it. Then it is possible that even the FA team's permission will not override the authority of the established route. That is, enough people had done it in the style it was created that no change is the only acceptable option.
When the FA team is not available then no conversation is possible, and it becomes a negotiation between the retro-bolters and the preservationists as to what is acceptable and what is not.
The Nose route is classic, but its current engineered state is far from its original state. But even for that climb, some people have a hard time seeing the route for the bolts (so to speak).
It will never be the case that people following after the FA will be given carte blanche to remake the climb the way they think it should be... and it should never be the case.
Whining over the "danger" and "safety" is simply ridiculous. It truely is... because in the end, you either push your ass through the moves or you back off. IT'S UP TO YOU! Claiming that the FA team is responsible for your safety on a climb they described falls under the rubric of "utter nonsense."
In the end, follow the wise advice of Werner... just go out and climb, do whatever... and accept responsibility for your actions, all of your actions. That is what "trad" climbing is all about, if it is about anything, and that is what the old dads are saying, if you are listening.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!