|
|
|
|
climbingcowboy
Jun 28, 2003, 5:16 AM
Post #301 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2002
Posts: 1201
|
Hasbeen,
Perhaps I came across pissed but I get that way with stuff i worked hard on. I did meet you up at Gibarlter you were riding your bike if I recall correctly. I've climbed 10s at alot of differt areas and not all of ours are 10s . The climbing isnt that hard. There are little pebbles that come off now and then, but not usally a hold. The holds are thin but its lowangle, and as far as runout theres not a bolt every 5 feet but its not runout. I've climbed runout routes before and I know you have to and you cant honestly say that their runout. Most bolts are 10-15 feet apart some are a little farther, but on easier ground. The rock quality used to be pretty bad when we first put in the lines but once they got climbed more they cleaned up they diffently arn't "unerving fagile rock".
In reply to: As for stealing your routes, well, I didn't take credit for them, nor did I assure anyone that the joke names given were accurate. But since I couldn't find you guys, it was that or list a dozen "unknowns" that were all next to each other
But how is anyone to know that they were "joke names", why not have unknowns then when I contact you, you would have the correct names. Like I stated earlier one route is one thing but a whole wall? come on. My brothers name wasnt in the phonebook, we were out there all the time, why not just leave a note at the rock or at the note board on the way in? I do appreciate the fact that at least the place is in a book so maybe we'll get more climbers out there and more routes will get put in. Infact we're adding three more pretty soon would you PM me your email so I can send you the info?
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Jun 28, 2003, 5:18 AM
Post #302 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
In reply to: I advocate eliminating unecessary death/serious injury fall potential
I am still trying to figure out what it is that your proposing. Specifics not generalizations. What does unnecessary mean to you? How would you suggest fixing these routes?
You say you don't advocate placing a bolt every ten feet? Even at ten feet you could take a twenty footer and deck. Are you saying that every 20 feet would be good? 40 footer and deck.
As far as I can tell you are looking for an ideal that has no basis in reality.
Another point I have been wondering about is how do you deal with the 5.6 downclimbs?
|
|
|
|
|
kalcario
Jun 28, 2003, 5:36 AM
Post #303 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 25, 2002
Posts: 1601
|
*Whoa, partner, do I know you?
It's interesting how stories get spread around the climbing world. I can't recall ever meeting you, though I meet a lot of people so it's possilbe,*
get used to it, I've got people I've never met or heard of coming at me on this site for everything from soup to nuts, some of these fools have bright futures as gossip columnists...
|
|
|
|
|
climbingcowboy
Jun 28, 2003, 6:05 AM
Post #304 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2002
Posts: 1201
|
In reply to: *Whoa, partner, do I know you? It's interesting how stories get spread around the climbing world. I can't recall ever meeting you, though I meet a lot of people so it's possilbe,* get used to it, I've got people I've never met or heard of coming at me on this site for everything from soup to nuts, some of these fools have bright futures as gossip columnists...
Ya I'm a fool, My brother wasnt even there it was me and my friend Paul (highclimber4life)
|
|
|
|
|
socialclimber
Jun 28, 2003, 9:53 AM
Post #305 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 18, 2001
Posts: 1163
|
The FA might not own the rock but it's my opinion that he owns the line he put up. I think of it as intellectual property. Someone put time and effort into the line and I see it no differently to putting time and effort into an original book, a song or computer program. The FA should be respected for the effort and the style in which he put the line up.
Maybe contacting the FA to ask about retro bolting is worth a shot. If a free solo line went up in 1969 maybe it's author isn't too worried if it's bolted in 2003.
Just to cover my arse, I'm not suggesting your retro bolting programme should fly in the face of locally accepted practice. Thats a whole different bun fight.
|
|
|
|
|
pywiak
Jun 28, 2003, 3:25 PM
Post #306 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 5, 2002
Posts: 105
|
Once again, let me weigh in to explain some things for those who just don't get it.
Routes belong to the community, not the FA'r. The community is more than your own small circle of climbing associates, or those who feel posessive about a particular area. I don't see where a climber is somehow expelled from the community just because they moved elsewhere. Based upon my tenure in the area, I consider myself a lifetime member of the "Local Tuolumne Community" even though I live more than a thousand miles away.
The "Local Tuolume Community" (whatever that is) has ALWAYS been conflicted and inconsistent in its application of standards for protection of routes. The personalities of the players involved plays a much greater role in the never-ending "bolt wars" than any so called "tradition" or "ethical stance". Hypocrisy is rampant and self-evident. For those who enjoy nitpicking my personal inconsistencies, I plead guilty. This discussion is not about me, nor should my past behavior be used to measure the validity of my arguments.
I declared "open season" on my Tuolumne routes for two purposes: 1) to reduce unnecessary hazards to subsequent ascentionists; and 2) to provide an outlet for those who are willing to back up their desire for safer climbing experiences with the hard work involved. This ought to satisfy both sides: those who feel you need the FAr's permission, and those who don't. It should also provide some measure of "status quo" for other routes if the "retro" crowd work on my routes first. Unlike many other FAr's, I've detached my ego from these "climbing expressions" and it doesn't bother me if someone adds protection bolts where THEY think they ought to go. All I ask is that people take responsibility for their efforts and inform the community at large of what they have done. This applies to both the addition and removal of bolts.
Unfortunately, it is the bolt-choppers who seem to get their egos in a big twist and feel compelled to act in secrecy and anonymity. Let's shine a light on things and bring it out in the open. Take credit (or blame) for your actions.
Where were the "Defenders of the Faith" when "Fool's Gold" on the west face of DAFF Dome was retrobolted? It originally had no bolts whatsoever, making it a ridiculously foolish venture. I hope nobody gets too upset if I add another bolt above the break at the top where the guide shows it jogging left. The original line went straight up with another dicey thin move.
Finally a couple of parting shots:
BVB - "Unsafe climbing is stupid". I stand by the statement. What you consider crowning achievements in climbing history, I consider monuments to folly. That's a discussion for another thread. Don't get me started on "Headpointing".
RonAmick - Friend, you are truly a manly man, and the chicks dig you. If I ever got in a tangle, I'd rather have you at my back than in my face. I'll save the bolts for the stone, not your forehead.
Dingus - Be careful of using me or my routes as an example to support your arguments (at least without checking with me first). Any inconsistencies will rest upon you, not me. There's usually more to the story that's being left out. I look forward to further friendly discussions and perhaps an opportunity to share a rope some day.
|
|
|
|
|
boltdude
Jun 28, 2003, 4:05 PM
Post #307 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 30, 2002
Posts: 685
|
pywiack,
I agree that the "Tuolumne climbing community" is anyone who has climbed in Tuolumne whether they live in Lee Vining, New York, or Japan. I wasn't trying to say that the current locals have any particular "rights," just that they shouldn't be left out of discussions because they don't have a computer and work in the grill and climb all summer.
There are a number of other retrobolts that have not been chopped, and even the rap-bolted line of bolts below Hobbit Book, with about 4 bolts acting as trail markers up 3rd class at the bottom, is over 10 years old.
It would actually be interesting, and informative, to see whether anyone would bring out the hand drill and retrobolt any of your routes.
But, the main thing on my mind is to avoid is a chopping war that the NPS finds out about and uses to curtail climbing.
So, that means asking the current local community, and, if we're honest with ourselves, that means asking the likely bolt chopper type folks. That should be done by anyone who plans to retrobolt any of your routes. If there's an inflated ego that will get aggressive with chopping, it needs to be deflated before another chopping war gets going.
In the interest of maintaining the peace, or at least keeping any conflict below the land managers' radar screen, if anyone actually intends to start hand drilling away on any of pywiack's routes, please contact me and I'll point the way towards several folks who you ought to talk to before doing anything. I'll be out of computer range for another week or two starting in an hour, but I check the ASCA message machine (number is on www.safeclimbing.org). Or look in the Tuol. grill parking lot for a green toyota 4x4 with plates "RCKNSNO" (my girlfriend's truck). I managed to make peace with one of the choppers who stood in my face for 30 minutes chewing me out the first time I talked with him, so let's calm nerves down ahead of time for once, instead of after bolts have been chopped.
Greg
|
|
|
|
|
bvb
Jun 29, 2003, 12:03 AM
Post #308 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2003
Posts: 954
|
ok alan, just to make sure i'm clear on your meaning: you now consider efforts such as WB's solo of the Bonatti Pillar, or for another example, the FA of the West Ridge of Everest, or closer to home Croft's 1987 (or was it 88?) solo of Astroman, as meaningless "monuments to folly?"
please response.
|
|
|
|
|
pywiak
Jun 29, 2003, 1:26 PM
Post #309 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 5, 2002
Posts: 105
|
BubbaV:
There are notable differences between "objective" and "subjective" hazards and their associated risks for any climb. That's fodder for another thread.
An important aspect of climbing is the exercise of judgement by the players. The validity of many decisions is often determined by the outcome, not the measure of risk at the time. Pulling off a successful ascent in the face of extreme hazard is treated with historical adulation, while failure leaves grieving friends and family (or at a minimum, needless pain and suffering).
The decision to free-solo a route is almost always a bet where you wager a precious gift of God (your life) against a fleeting moment of selfish gratification. This is an decidedly unwise (i.e. STUPID, FOOLISH, UNNECESSARY) gamble. Thus my broad statement: "Unsafe climbing is stupid". Your life is not your own to squander as you see fit - you will be called to give an account before your Creator. Fortunately, God is merciful, and he has a plan to reconcile His sinful children (mankind) to His holiness through the atoning sacrifice of His son Jesus. This reconciliation is a gift that must be accepted by on an individual basis (one per customer please), but it comes at the cost of submitting yourself to God and His will and purposes for your life. This submission is uniformly fatal to one's selfish nature, so it is rejected by many people. The benefits are immeasurable and eternal, unlike the satisfactions of a successful free-solo, which are like dry grass in a burning field.
I am no longer impressed by the free-soloing (or "head-pointing") achievements of anyone, including myself. They represent obliviousness to the eternal consequences of the activity. I have compassion and pity for those who indulge in such risky behaviour, and I will continue to declare it for what it is: UNWISE FOOLISHNESS.
|
|
|
|
|
nickb
Jun 29, 2003, 4:41 PM
Post #310 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2002
Posts: 72
|
Just feel like throwing in my 2c. In climbing, as with all activities, we engage in a cost /benefit analysis. As individuals we look at a path and decide if the potential rewards of traveling this path are worth the risk. Many rewards come into play with climbing. The feeling of well being, (endorphins), stature within the community, camaraderie and many others. When a person solo's or completes a route that is very dangerous, the risks are very high and thus the rewards should be very great. Most of us who have been climbing for a long time have made the decision that the risks/rewards of dangerous routes and soloing are not worth it. I bring this mindset to my view of retrobolting old routes. I have never rebolted or retrobolted a route.
I see climbing routes as no more than vertical trails. When the trail is first established it is usually rough hewn putting in a route ground up is hard work and expensive. So you use as few bolts as you can to achieve the ascent. If you are very skilled and the route is easy for you, very few or no bolts are used. If that stretch of trail is say 5.8 and has no protection then it its closed to all but the very skilled and bold. If the route is nothing exceptional than perhaps it will fade into obscurity. If the trail is a good one, more people want to travel the route. Most of those people want to travel a safe route and sometimes improvements are made. Safety and length of fall are not always connected. If the route is dangerous and many people would like to travel that path then perhaps a community should open up some of these routes to reasonable retrobolting, making them safe for the average leader who can climb a crux one full grade above the rating of the route. Those who want to keep an obscure 5.9 free solo route the way it is are doing so for ego reasons and perhaps thats not the best legacy for some of these routes.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jun 29, 2003, 6:29 PM
Post #311 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Dingus - Be careful of using me or my routes as an example to support your arguments (at least without checking with me first). Any inconsistencies will rest upon you, not me.
Right on pywiak! IU can shoulder the additional responsbility.
In reply to: There's usually more to the story that's being left out. I look forward to further friendly discussions and perhaps an opportunity to share a rope some day.
Exactly. I wasn't calling you out in my other post. I was genuinely curious. Camped firmly in the middle of the road on all this, I could live with some of those routes retrobolted. I could live without em.
And I would be honored to tie a knot in the same rope as you dude.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Jun 29, 2003, 7:11 PM
Post #312 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
Pywiak
Climbing has inherent risks associated with it, but so does stepping off a curb or getting out of bed. It seems to me that all of your arguments against free-soloing would apply equally to climbing in general.
I consider doing a route well within your abilities without a rope to be much safer than doing even a moderately run-out route (the large majority of routes outside of sport climbing) with a rope.
You feel that Bachar, Croft, Potter etc. do what they do for "a fleeting moment of selfish gratification." What they do is a fine example of what the human spirit is all about. They do not do it for public adulation or monetary compensation. I think they do it because they like to expand the realm of the possible in order to enjoy the most of what life has to offer.
As far as "headpointing" I have never purposefully practiced that, yet there are many routes that over the years I climbed over and over because I liked them to the point that a rope became superfluous. At that point it is not about self-gratification, it is about being able to flow over the rock with less noise and distractions. The benefits of this are immeasurable and eternal and are the closest I have ever come to personally experiencing "God"
It seems presumptuous of you to assume that "God" considers this to be sinful or selfish.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jun 29, 2003, 7:25 PM
Post #313 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: It seems presumptuous of you to assume that "God" considers this to be sinful or selfish.
What were you saying about Bachar?
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
bvb
Jun 29, 2003, 7:29 PM
Post #314 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2003
Posts: 954
|
alan, i would add that tobin was a devout to his god, and an inverterate risk taker who was smuggling bibles into bulgaria when he wasn't soloing at josh or suicide.
based on your post, i conclude that you have a personal interpretation of christian theology that has led you to the belief that soloing is an insult to god's gift -- life.
tobin was the son of a preacher and a lifelong christian. you came to christ relatively late in life, and have radically different views on risk and soloing that tobin had.
so....i submit that you have fitted your theology to sustain your opinions on soloing. christ moves through people in different ways. don't make the mistake of judging the actions of a "risk taker" in climbing based on what is clearly your own, very personal interpretation of god's will in your life. many devout christians take enormous risks in thier sports (the plethotra of big wave surfers who are christains comes to mind) and beleive that their actions are a celebration of god in their lives.
you and i have been good friends for over 30 years, so don't take this wrong....but you've always had strong opinions, and i think you are mistaking what is simply another of your opinions for something that is far more meaningful.
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Jun 29, 2003, 7:38 PM
Post #315 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
In reply to: In reply to: It seems presumptuous of you to assume that "God" considers this to be sinful or selfish. What were you saying about Bachar? DMT
Sorry but that apparently went over my head, could you elaborate?
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jun 29, 2003, 8:20 PM
Post #316 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Sorry but that apparently went over my head, could you elaborate?
Sure. You took pywiak to task for presuming to speak the mind of god. But earlier in the same post you presumed to speak the mind of Bachar, Croft, et al. No big deal, I'd put reassuring smiley faces in there if I were the kind.
On a more serious note, if I wanted to hear the thoughts of notable free soloists, people who by virtue of having walked the walk have license to talk the talk as well, pywiak would certainly be on the short list. Credibility and blunt honesty - he seems to cut to the chase, eh?
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Jun 29, 2003, 8:43 PM
Post #317 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
Hey Dingus,
In reply to: You feel that Bachar, Croft, Potter etc. do what they do for "a fleeting moment of selfish gratification." What they do is a fine example of what the human spirit is all about. They do not do it for public adulation or monetary compensation. I think they do it because they like to expand the realm of the possible in order to enjoy the most of what life has to offer.
I have known Bachar for eighteen years, not a "good" friend but I have spent enough time with him to speak to his motivations.
I have known Dean for 15 years and would call him a good friend.
I first met Croft about 15 years ago and know him the least well but still feel I can speak to his motivations as he is a very simple humble person. He was my neighbor for a while.
As far as Alan, I do respect his opinions about free-soloing, I just don't agree with them.
As for as myself I have been there and done that and still do in the mountains.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Jun 29, 2003, 10:41 PM
Post #318 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: As for as myself I have been there and done that and still do in the mountains.
Right on bro. That's what its all about. Cheers
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Jun 30, 2003, 2:30 AM
Post #319 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
Dingus,
I can be slow sometimes and most likely you are right. I said, you said, he said, can get confusing. Anywhichway those guy’s had a big influence on what I consider to be fun.
Cheers to you to Bro.
Pywiak: that was in no way intended to be a flame, I did the best I could to express my sentiments with the words I could come up with.
|
|
|
|
|
andy_lemon
Jun 30, 2003, 6:23 AM
Post #320 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2001
Posts: 3335
|
*Cough*
Alot of FA'er's are good climbers,
not all good climbers are good bolters.
If a route is led on gear for the FA,
it should be up to the FA'er to see that
the route is able to be safely led on gear...
If not, the FA'er should add a safety bolt.
*End Cough*
|
|
|
|
|
mreardon
Jun 30, 2003, 10:08 PM
Post #321 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 1337
|
In reply to: The decision to free-solo a route is almost always a bet where you wager a precious gift of God (your life) against a fleeting moment of selfish gratification. This is an decidedly unwise (i.e. STUPID, FOOLISH, UNNECESSARY) gamble. Your life is not your own to squander as you see fit - you will be called to give an account before your Creator. Fortunately, God is merciful, and he has a plan to reconcile His sinful children (mankind) to His holiness through the atoning sacrifice of His son Jesus. This reconciliation is a gift that must be accepted by on an individual basis (one per customer please), but it comes at the cost of submitting yourself to God and His will and purposes for your life… The benefits are immeasurable and eternal, unlike the satisfactions of a successful free-solo, which are like dry grass in a burning field. I am no longer impressed by the free-soloing (or "head-pointing") achievements of anyone, including myself. They represent obliviousness to the eternal consequences of the activity. I have compassion and pity for those who indulge in such risky behaviour, and I will continue to declare it for what it is: UNWISE FOOLISHNESS.
“What may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them” (Romans 1:19). “They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy” (Luke 8:13).
Therefore only those that God calls can hear, so only a select few like yourself are worthy of going to heaven. Personally I didn’t get the Captain Rocket secret decoder hearing aid and must have missed the boat (so do all infants and those that the lovely Christians haven’t conquered, er I mean “visited”), therefore I’m going with the presumption that I have free will and the choice as to how I wish to live my life rather than shake in fear of the grand unknown. I choose to live with the understanding that each moment is precious, and should be lived to it’s fullest. This is the physical, emotional, and intellectual. Without free will, no one would have walked on the moon. Without free will no one would have stopped the book burnings. Without free will no one would have founded religion. Without free will we’d all be uneducated sheep living under the rule of singular kings and Popes and this bb would never be allowed to go from being a fun discussion about FA’s to religious panderings from yet another lost wannabe preacher.
If free will does not exist, then there is no reason to do anything further in life because no matter what you do, it’s predetermined how things will happen. You can only choose one grasshopper, not the blissful ignorance of both as you preach so far. Personally I’ll pass on drinking the Kool-Aid, but thanks for offering.
Instead of providing insight as to why you believe we’re foolish for living life, you’ve done nothing more than provide biased personal fears based on a false premise and thereby acted in a selfish manner far worse than any soloing climber ever can. Read your book again, and don’t skip the crib notes where God wishes us to live life fully. The benefits of a fruitful life are eternal, and the punishments to heretics who blasphemy the sheep through willful subjective ignorance get what they deserve as well. You’re nothing more than a “do as I say, not as I do” hypocritical bullshitter who uses subjective reasoning to poison the free will of others.
And people wonder why there are more than three billion Buddhists on this dustbowl.
|
|
|
|
|
bobd1953
Jul 2, 2003, 4:19 AM
Post #322 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941
|
In reply to: These are the ABC's of climbing. I can't beleive this thread was even created, much less that it's run on so long.
I agree and now we have deal with the god issue. I am out of this one for good.
|
|
|
|
|
bvb
Jul 2, 2003, 4:46 AM
Post #323 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 3, 2003
Posts: 954
|
eject! eject! eject!
|
|
|
|
|
hasbeen
Jul 2, 2003, 5:34 PM
Post #324 of 324
(16320 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 17, 2003
Posts: 543
|
In reply to: But how is anyone to know that they were "joke names", why not have unknowns then when I contact you, you would have the correct names. Like I stated earlier one route is one thing but a whole wall? come on. My brothers name wasnt in the phonebook, we were out there all the time, why not just leave a note at the rock or at the note board on the way in? I do appreciate the fact that at least the place is in a book so maybe we'll get more climbers out there and more routes will get put in. Infact we're adding three more pretty soon would you PM me your email so I can send you the info?
Leaving a note didn't occur to me. It really didn't look like anyone was out there all the time. There wasn't a speck of chalk and we even had to bushwhack to get to the routes.
They wouldn't really know about the names, except that they sound like joke names (all John-something: John Bigbooty, John Ya-Ya, John Smallberries, etc). My point, which Randy? concurred with, is that it's difficult to add an entire area of unknowns. Better to give people all the info you can to work with. The names, in the end, are usually forgotten in sport areas and everything get referred to as "the 10a next to the steep 10d..." and so on but to at least have some beginning reference points is helpful. But, however, I would have MUCH rather have the correct info--always! Believe me, I've named far more routes in my lifetime than I've ever wanted to. So many, in fact, that I've thrown out my routes to others to name at will. Wills Young probably names 50 of my boulder problems at Pine Mt (and some were pretty darn funny--Imaginary Milkmaid, where the hell did that come from?) I used to have customers just say anything at my video store when I was working on topos and pencil in names that sounded good. In the beginning, this seemed to matter to me a little but later it just became work so that people would have something to refer to.
Anyway, too bad we didn't have this site back then or it could have been so easily straightened out. Next update, I'll know where to find you. You can reach me at: mannyvarjak@hotmail.com I also try and use pics of first ascentionists whenever possible, so keep your best shots around. I'd imagine that few people understand the sacrifice that goes into route development better than I do, and I like to see those people get all the credit they can. A lot of time, effort, and money go into the process and it's always nice to see at least a little reward. No hurry on those shots. I'd imagine it's going to be a few years before the book goes out of print.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
