The ranges Learner gives can account for the different styles of climbing. For example, a solid, well-rounded intermediate climber would be able to tackle fairly hairy 5.9 (R-ish, off-width, a bit loose, etc), and quickly redpoint a 5.11b sport route. The categories he listed really aren't a bad rule-of-thumb for one's rock climbing performance level.

You asked earlier if Fred Becky was a beginner. No, he's not. He's a former badass hardman that is now climbing at a beginner/intermediate level because he's old. And that's OK; He's got a wealth of knowledge and experience, has made great contributions to climbing with his many FA's. None of this is intended to be offensive or ruffle feathers.

I guess my beef with this thread is that there seems to be a faction of people who play down the fact that rock climbing is an athletic pursuit, an "adventure sport", and one's ability to overcome difficulty (whether it be a 50 foot sport route or a 1500ft dangerous alpine climb) is how you progress in the sport. IMO, "advanced" or "expert" status is not a title you keep for life. Just because you've logged lots of milage and ticked a couple difficult climbs back in the day doesn't mean your overall climbing ability is at an advanced or expert level today. The difficulty of free climbing you can cope with today defines your climbing level (And I'm referring to difficulty in the holistic sense - including objective danger and commitment).

BTW, I'm a totally mediocre climber. And if I'm still climbing the same grades 20 years from now I'll still be a mediocre climber in spite of all that milage and experience. There's no point in sugar-coating it. There's also nothing wrong with enjoying rock climbing at whatever level of difficulty you're at.

So, What constitutes a BEGINNER. ..... So really though is it your numbers or your time of experience ?

However, I maintain that in my original reply I was referring exclusively to categories of performance level. This is what "how hard you climb" means.

We have perfectly good terms to describe "how hard you climb"!
Words like 5.8, 5.11c.....Why would you take widely understood, useful language like that and replace it with only 4 categories?

To add onto this question, when are you able to actually function as a climber and not as a completely n00b?

Basically, I know I'm not ready to ask to climb with other people as I can barely do 5.8 at the gym and I've never led (the routes at the gym are all 5.9 or above for lead). At what level is it not awkward to attempt to join others on climbing outings? Is there typically a grade you climb or skills you have?

(Basically, I don't have any experienced climber friends - my boyfriend and I are learning together but at some point we'd like to make the leap outside but aren't quite certain what skill level we should be at before attempting to find other climbing partners)

To add onto this question, when are you able to actually function as a climber and not as a completely n00b?

Basically, I know I'm not ready to ask to climb with other people as I can barely do 5.8 at the gym and I've never led (the routes at the gym are all 5.9 or above for lead). At what level is it not awkward to attempt to join others on climbing outings? Is there typically a grade you climb or skills you have?
)

I consider your status as a climber to be an indicator of, and determined by, your climbing level. It is a label for how hard you climb. If you climb...

5.8 and lower = BEGINNER
5.9-5.11b = INTERMEDIATE
5.11c-5.13b = ADVANCED
5.13c on up = EXPERT

In other words, it is a level at which you are at. If you climbed 5.10's from day 1, you were never at the beginner level. You climbed a higher level than that since the day you started.

Hahaha Falze.

A true climbing expert would really have such a massive list.. i don't even think the likes of Lynn hill could be considered.

- Expert in training concepts (including musculoskeletal system and all things of that nature like movement etc)

- Expert in implementing the above knowledge so that it allows them to climb at the peak of their own human limit. That would include any style of climbing and rock.

- Expert in training concepts to prevent or rehabilitate injury's.

- Expert in nutrition.

- Expert in mental discipline's, psychology etc (for fear management).

- Expert in all climbing related gear.

- Expert in rock reading (not that theirs a class for it) for the likes of avoiding death breaking holds in free solo.

- Expert in keeping the significant other half happy as one chases selfish ambition.

Probably more to add... but no matter, since 99% of us cant even tick off more than 2 of those above.

climbing "Level" is really evaluated on a per person basis taking into consideration their

A) Climbing Skill
B) Knowledge of Safety and how to stay safe
C) Knowledge of their gear ( this ties into(no pun intended)B)
D) Knowledge of their personal limits

and about a billion other things.

Yeah, I know. I havent read anything yet that said I need it or need to have an english degree to climb though. Basicaly In a forum I try to type as if speaking. The funny thing is the point gets to the point regardless.

I watch,listen,and talk. I don't really give two craps about a persons "grade level" to determine if they would be a good partner. I watch them belay, if they have a good belay habit and form that I can trust, I will climb with them . I listen to how they talk about themselves if they are too full of themselves then they just might not be great match as a consistent partner. I talk with other climbers to learn and do more listening. Talking to communicate and see if maybe they like minded, which will make hiking and driving an added venture to go climb. This thread has been fun, lot of good info coming out of it.

Yet you keep responding, so it must.