|
johnr9q
Aug 22, 2006, 3:29 AM
Post #1 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 5, 2001
Posts: 120
|
I don't find the RC.com route data base to be very useful. Most people put info there that can be found in any guide book for the area. Is there another site people use to record data on routes they've done? Check out some of the info I've added to the data base to see the kind of info I think is helpful to others that are looking for info on a specific route. I found a site awhile back that was connected in some way to Joshua tree that was attempting to start a new routa data base and I sent the author an email asking him why they needed to start a site in competition with the one on RC.com ( I think RC.com's site has the potential to be very useful). Their response was RC.com's site wasn't adequate. Go figure.
|
|
|
|
|
salamanizer
Aug 22, 2006, 4:05 AM
Post #2 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 3, 2004
Posts: 879
|
I don't know? I've gone out of my way to climb stuff that's not in the Data Base just so I could have something to do when I'm bored and not climbing.
I like having some inside beta now and then. It can be disheartening to open a guidebook and the only info you get on a route is the name and rating. At the very least, the Routes Database opens up routes to people who would otherwise never try it because of lack of info (people tend to fear the unknown). This could serve as a great way in reducing traffic on heavily traveled routes. It's quite annoying/sad to watch six people waiting in line to start a route behind three other party's when an equally great route lies just fifty feet to their right or left. In some ways the Routes DB is better than a guidebook because you can email the person who posted the route and get specific info. Try tracking down a guidebook author and getting info from him/her. Chances are they've never heard of the route.
Keep up your great route beta in the Routes DB. Rally the troops to do the same. Your info in the DB has been helpful to me more than once and so has many other people's. Although your description of Fantasia I found to be a bit long winded :P
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Aug 22, 2006, 4:10 AM
Post #3 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
Hi John,
I don't think it gets updated too often for a couple reasons.
1. Limited usefulness. It can be helpful, but without a topo, you still gotta have the guidebook.
2. poorly organized. Seems to be alphabetical? It should probably be in order of the climb, from left to right, per section. Plus, you see people adding stuff all the time in the wrong section, and it makes a mess.
3. Core users. It seems like the bulk of the routes in the DB were added by a handful of users--most of whom no longer contribute. I think a lot of them were mods who got burnt by management at one point or another. Plus, now that the site is privately owned and is trying to make a profit, I think some people feel like it's silly to add content when they're not seeing any $$. As to why other people don't add routes, hard to say. I add a few here and there. I suspect it's because the site caters to beginning climbers, who probably don't have much to add...
|
|
|
|
|
carpenterdude
Aug 22, 2006, 4:11 AM
Post #4 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 10, 2006
Posts: 18
|
The route database at mountainproject.com has the best format of any site I've used thus far.This site has way better photo contributionsand user profiles however.
|
|
|
|
|
bretrwarner
Aug 22, 2006, 4:14 AM
Post #5 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 16, 2006
Posts: 8
|
I agree that this site could have more info on a lot of the places listed, but I have also learned about a lot of places I never would have known about if it weren't for this site. Several of those places are not in any guidebooks that I have found.
|
|
|
|
|
jmeizis
Aug 22, 2006, 4:15 AM
Post #6 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 25, 2006
Posts: 635
|
I think one of the positive aspects of the database is that it is free. Not everywhere I have climbed has a guidebook. Not every place I go do I want to pay (on average) about $25 if I am only going to be there a day. Good example. I went to Red Rocks for about 2 hours of climbing. I don't know how much the guidebook cost but it would have been pointless for me to buy the guidebook, yet I could never have found some routes to do without the help of the database. It also helped to find someone else climbing out there who verified I was in the right place. Another good example is the Northeastern US. To include every climb within a three hours drive would require I purchase about 5 or 6 guidebooks. Taking the previously stated average cost that's about $125 dollars. I do think some stewardship of the database is a good thing and some areas are better than others and the same can be said for descriptions. I have added some routes and information but there is always more to be done. Maybe that's something that should be looked into, a published world climbing atlas. That'd be pretty sweet. Probably a pipe dream though. :(
|
|
|
|
|
lewisiarediviva
Aug 22, 2006, 4:18 AM
Post #7 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2004
Posts: 527
|
I never have time to sit down at the computer while I'm packing up the gear. Then when I've packed- I'm ready to go! I'll figure out what I'm going to climb when I get their (no lines), if not on the way.
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Aug 22, 2006, 7:14 AM
Post #8 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
In reply to: Hi John, I don't think it gets updated too often for a couple reasons. 1. Limited usefulness. It can be helpful, but without a topo, you still gotta have the guidebook. 2. poorly organized. Seems to be alphabetical? It should probably be in order of the climb, from left to right, per section. Plus, you see people adding stuff all the time in the wrong section, and it makes a mess. 3. Core users. It seems like the bulk of the routes in the DB were added by a handful of users--most of whom no longer contribute. I think a lot of them were mods who got burnt by management at one point or another. Plus, now that the site is privately owned and is trying to make a profit, I think some people feel like it's silly to add content when they're not seeing any $$. As to why other people don't add routes, hard to say. I add a few here and there. I suspect it's because the site caters to beginning climbers, who probably don't have much to add...
1. agreed. even a good description is usually pretty useless, especially for a beginner with poor routefinding skills.
2. you can order them from left to right. go to the section, click edit section and then order routes. the system is really user friendly after they changed it (youve had to manually enter route 'values' before, its just drag and drop now). ppl make mistakes, thats why you have area managers; to keep mess to a minimum. well, at least theoretically.
3. i dont mind adding content as long as others have free access to it. and i will continue to contribute as long as it remains that way. if they make money off adds and/or volunteer payments, its ok with me.
|
|
|
|
|
rock_junkie
Aug 22, 2006, 7:25 AM
Post #9 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2004
Posts: 172
|
mountain project
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Aug 22, 2006, 10:47 AM
Post #10 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
I don't add stuff because of the low volume of scottish users.
However, i do think that it would be better if there was space to, say, add a topo photo, or a wee map, for an example of an easy place to make a topo, check out my bouldering guide to ravinscraig, on http://www.scottishclimbs.com which took minutes to make.
I'm not saying that sc is perfect, as there can be no links between photos and routes, but the topo photo thing is definitly usfull!
-Magnus
Sorry about lack of grammer/sense, serious tiredness hampers my writing ability.
|
|
|
|
|
mheyman
Aug 22, 2006, 12:32 PM
Post #11 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 25, 2002
Posts: 607
|
In reply to: I have also learned about a lot of places I never would have known about if it weren't for this site. Several of those places are not in any guidebooks that I have found.
Works both ways though. I could show you eastern listings with exagerated quality such that someone might make a trip to them and be highly disapionted.
|
|
|
|
|
svilnit
Aug 22, 2006, 12:50 PM
Post #12 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 582
|
I can't really speak for other locations, but the listings for Maryland are weak.. For me, it makes more sense to pay the $25 for the guidebook as I can't even find climbs I do all the time in the data base.
|
|
|
|
|
nthusiastj
Aug 22, 2006, 1:03 PM
Post #13 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 3, 2002
Posts: 1994
|
Once again http://www.mountainproject.com. If you haven't checked it out yet, DO IT. It's well on it's way to being the most comprehensive online route database. FYI it's the old ClimbingBoulder.com.
|
|
|
|
|
svilnit
Aug 22, 2006, 1:10 PM
Post #14 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 19, 2002
Posts: 582
|
That is a very nice site. That home page loads about 9275923797 times quicker than the RC.com page.
Unfortunately though... not one route in MD
|
|
|
|
|
chossmonkey
Aug 22, 2006, 2:21 PM
Post #15 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 28414
|
In reply to: I don't find the RC.com route data base to be very useful. Most people put info there that can be found in any guide book for the area.
Yeah, descriptions like this one:
Difficulty: 5.10b
Protection: first pitch: two sets of double bolts w/slings and natural pro
Description: We only did the first pitch and belayed at the second set of bolts (Double bolts shown on the 2006 Reid topo) Couldn't see an obvious belay above that or identify where the route went above so we bailed. Does anyone have info on where to go above?
Updated By: johnr9q
Updated On: Aug 21 2006
Climbed By:
:P
:lol:
I use the RDB to post new routes and routes that aren't in current guide books. I've also been known to add routes that are already in a guidebooks too, especially when the guidebook description sucks.
Unless there is a guidebook or major rock feature it is pretty hard to get any sort of reference to a starting point. As long as you have a good starting point, written descriptions can be adequate.
I don't think the RDB was intended in anyway to replace guidebooks, only to supplement them. It is pretty stupid when people only put the same info that is in the current guidebook. I would argue that giving complete beta is a little excessive though.
I think part of the reason people don't add routes much anymore is because they took away the ranking score. Adding routes would increase the score, a different from of number chasing I suppose. I know of whole areas copied out of a guidebook, a bad guidebook at that. I can't say for sure if that was the motivation, but it seems a likely source.
|
|
|
|
|
gunksgoer
Aug 22, 2006, 2:36 PM
Post #16 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 1290
|
I think people dont use and contribute to the routes database for a couple reasons:
1. The current format doesnt allow good orgonization. I think that the page for a typical crag could could be just as helpfull as a guidebook, but the way things are set up now routes cant be ordered well. What guidebooks have over an rc.com area page is that they can have nicely setup maps and overviews of an area (displaying where specific boulders and cliffs are), and climbs can be ordered according to where they are on the cliff/boulder, instead of what letter the name starts with. The way around this can be to draw a topo and submit it as a picture in the area, but thats a pain (especially for a larger area).
2. You cant take the routes database with you.
3. Since user ratings have pretty much been killed, you dont get any real feedback for your contributions to the database. If users got something even as superficial as points when they added climbs, more people might be motivated to add stuff.
|
|
|
|
|
atg200
Aug 22, 2006, 2:39 PM
Post #17 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 4317
|
if you want maryland to be added to mountainproject, just get in touch with the site maintainers and ask to help get it started. aside from the much better interface and fast loading times, the main benefit on mountainproject is that new geographic regions are not added unless someone is willing to put in the work to get it started and organized. hence, the route information about utah on mountain project is well organized, not duplicated, and tends to be reasonably high quality. the utah section on the routes database here is a clusterf*ck of confusing geographical areas that overlap, duplicated routes and areas, very poor information, and just irrelevant junk.
i used to post both here and on mountain project/climbingboulder, but stopped posting here at all since long quality descriptions i wrote were overwritten by illiterate gumbies. that really pissed me off.
|
|
|
|
|
chossmonkey
Aug 22, 2006, 2:47 PM
Post #18 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 28414
|
In reply to: Once again http://www.mountainproject.com. If you haven't checked it out yet, DO IT. It's well on it's way to being the most comprehensive online route database. FYI it's the old ClimbingBoulder.com.
I was just checking that site out, looking at some of my old crags. I find it terribly ironic that I found many of my descriptions ripped from here on RC.com and put in there under other peoples names and routes entered multiple times under different names. :roll:
Other than that it did seem like a pretty nice site.
It just goes to show if you let morons enter route information you will end up with crappy route descriptions.
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Aug 22, 2006, 3:41 PM
Post #19 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
The mountainproject database is the best. It's still better with a guidebook in hand though. It's really tough to print off a list of routes from an area you've never been to and actually get on anything.
MP + Guidebook is a great combo.
This website is more fun. The forums on that site are the same whiney dramatic shit this site went through a few years ago. Now everyone is surly and mean, it makes for a good time.
|
|
|
|
|
johnr9q
Aug 22, 2006, 3:45 PM
Post #20 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 5, 2001
Posts: 120
|
Thanks for the great thots. You are right about my description of Fantasia. I was experimenting with an idea that didn't go anywhere. I need to get in there and redo that desc. As far as my desc on Sunshine on Drug Dome, again, you're right. I basically posted that info to get some feed back but it certainly isn't quality. I believe that most of the info posted on the data base should be info that can't be found in the guide books. I want everyone to purchase a guide book even if they only go to an area once that way we can keep the authors doing what they do. I find mountain project to be very useful for Colorado but not very comprehensive for California or elsewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
qtm
Aug 22, 2006, 7:06 PM
Post #21 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 8, 2004
Posts: 548
|
I don't use it because it doesn't work with Mozilla. Sections with no data get collapsed and the next section cascades into the empty one, so it's really hard to tell what goes where.
|
|
|
|
|
davidji
Aug 22, 2006, 7:23 PM
Post #22 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 30, 2003
Posts: 1776
|
I think the standards are too low for the route database.
When adding an area, section or climb, you should be required to give some information that helps you find or identify it, or give a reason why not (e.g. "access problems, get directions from a local").
Little that I've seen in the route database is useful if you don't have a guidebook, and plenty of stuff in there adds little value if you do have a guidebook.
|
|
|
|
|
dynoho
Aug 22, 2006, 8:00 PM
Post #23 of 35
(3106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 16, 2006
Posts: 285
|
I see many posts where people are going to a new area, looking for a crag, and don't checkout the database. The routes database is far from complete, but for general locations, it will point you in the right direction. Seldom will it be as useful as a guidebook, but as indicated, it is FREE. If and when you feel that it is lacking information for a specific area, you have nobody to blame except yourself. As users, we make the database as complete or not as the effort we put forth.
The only complaint I would accept on this matter is that the site is slow. Frequently, you can not even reach the main page, even with a broadband connection. The mountain project site was speedy, but for my location (California) it did not approach what is offered here.
-Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
cjsimpso
Nov 13, 2006, 8:51 PM
Post #24 of 35
(2203 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 5, 2006
Posts: 253
|
Since we have a brand new RC.com, why don't we, the users, take this chance to beef up the RDB?
If you've got the beta, take it upon yourself to put that info online to help your fellow climbers out.
I'll go ahead and update a bunch of my favorite areas this week if everyone else agrees to do the same.
|
|
|
|
|
anykineclimb
Nov 13, 2006, 9:03 PM
Post #25 of 35
(2180 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 30, 2003
Posts: 3593
|
When I head out, I try to make a point of taking topo pics to add to the RDB. I think thats a big thing lacking at the moment for lots of areas.
I'll also add what I can to areas that I've been to.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
