|
olderic
Nov 22, 2011, 2:47 PM
Post #101 of 118
(2765 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539
|
guangzhou wrote: Can you give me a professional in any field that meets the criteria you describe? I doubt it, but let's see what you come up with.
Any profession that produces something or offers a service. A grave digger is being paid to dig with a certain brand of shovel, wear certain clothes or plaster his picture all over the Internet while he is down in a hole.
A software engineer typically isn't paid by Microsoft or Google to use their products (although that can get fuzzy with professional discounts).
And on and on.
The very simple "fact" is that just climbing - not developing routes, not guiding, not taking photographs of it, not testing gear while doing it, not blogging about it - but just climbing - produces nothing tangible and people do not get paid to just do that.
|
|
|
|
|
olderic
Nov 22, 2011, 3:01 PM
Post #102 of 118
(2760 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539
|
marc801 wrote: What is it that you don't get about the fact that we've pointed out that people like Caldwell, Sharma, and Honnold are indeed getting paid to just climb?
Lets take Sharma for example. Lets say he happens to go climbing , maybe some pirate pictures show up of it - and he is wearing one LS shoe , 1 red chilli on the other foot, Eidlerid rope, Beal draws, Nike hat (on backwards - yo), Addidas t and Sickle pants - who exactly is is going to pay him? I'm sure those checks from Prana and Evolve will roll in like clockwork - because you know Chris is just being Chris and they just want him to be happy and climb - that's what he is good at after all.
The $1K hooker is still providing a service of use (debate that one) independent of her (fetching) attire.
One thing that you seem hung up on - and here I am just speaking for me - because I think Rob may well feel differently - is that it is a bad thing that all these well known climbers are making a go of it by pimping themselves out the way they do. I don't think it taints the climbing that they do - occasionally they may feel pressure to get something done for their sponsors and things may get fuzzy - but for the most part its fine. More power to them. It dose allow them the freedom and flexibility ton climb a lot more then the average joe.
|
|
|
|
|
fresh
Nov 22, 2011, 3:38 PM
Post #103 of 118
(2753 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2007
Posts: 1199
|
I agree with eric and rob here, no one is getting paid to climb. "pro" climbers are getting paid to represent the brand. guides are getting paid to teach and/or lead for their clients.
if my friend who's a carpenter went on a coke binge, flipped cars in harvard square, and publicly insulted dewalt and evolv, he could still perform his job and get paid once we post bail. so could rajon rondo. chris sharma could not.
sorry, but no one gets paid to climb. they're paid to be a public figure for the brand, or to teach.
(This post was edited by fresh on Nov 22, 2011, 3:39 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
SylviaSmile
Nov 22, 2011, 4:02 PM
Post #104 of 118
(2742 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 3, 2011
Posts: 983
|
redlude97 wrote: olderic wrote: Which actually says: Our ambassadors are more than just athletes; they are field testers for our gear and storytellers for our tribe. Patagonia ambassadors work closely with the design department to test, refine and validate our products in the harshest and most remote locations on the planet. And when unique, adventurous tales arise from that testing, we will share them with you through our catalogs and Web site. Sounds to me like they are product testers. And story tellers. But I guess the key is "self described" - gotcha. Better watch out for how Joe Kinder self describes.... I think the comparison to sports breaks down in too many ways. Most sports where there are "pro" involve a much more extensive formal competition environment. Along with typically a lot of spectators. Pure climbing usually doesn't go there although there are exceptions - early ascents of the Nose or the Eiger for example. But I have thought of a couple of situations where people do get paid for just doing their thing and they might be analogous. 1. The person who gets paid to just think - high priced think tanks, The old Bell Labs fellows for example. 2. Artists that get some support to just create with no constraints - more common in "gongshow"'s socialist European examples. Petty rare though - not a viable career path for most. Big mountain skiers/snowboarders don't compete and yet make their living mostly through endorsements/sponsorships. Does that mean they aren't "pro" either? Many of them consider themselves "pros"
Why can't climbing/climbers be categorized with other professional sports/athletes? Would Patagonia really pay their ambassadors unless they were at the top of the climbing sport, so to speak? I'm not seeing how you can call climbing anything else but a sport.
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Nov 22, 2011, 4:36 PM
Post #105 of 118
(2726 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
fresh wrote: I agree with eric and rob here, no one is getting paid to climb. "pro" climbers are getting paid to represent the brand. guides are getting paid to teach and/or lead for their clients. if my friend who's a carpenter went on a coke binge, flipped cars in harvard square, and publicly insulted dewalt and evolv, he could still perform his job and get paid once we post bail. so could rajon rondo. chris sharma could not. sorry, but no one gets paid to climb. they're paid to be a public figure for the brand, or to teach.
|
|
|
|
|
olderic
Nov 22, 2011, 4:44 PM
Post #106 of 118
(2723 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539
|
SylviaSmile wrote: Why can't climbing/climbers be categorized with other professional sports/athletes? Would Patagonia really pay their ambassadors unless they were at the top of the climbing sport, so to speak? I'm not seeing how you can call climbing anything else but a sport.
oooh - goodie - another tangent. Define sport. Does it need to involve competition with ell defined rules? Does it need to be physical (is chess a sport?, poker?).
There typically is an attempt to lump climbing in with other "x-treme" sports - often the boarding ones. But most of them have a basis in competition.
|
|
|
|
|
rangerrob
Nov 22, 2011, 4:54 PM
Post #107 of 118
(2716 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 8, 2003
Posts: 641
|
Sylvia, until obese middle aged American men sit around on their couches all Sunday eating potato chips and drinking beer watching Chris Sharma climb on televesion, climbers will not be categorized with "professioanl" athletes. Pro athletes are only "pro" because some people will pay to watch them do what they do.
I suppose if a climber were to make money by having someone film him or her and then sell that film, they may sneak in there as a pro athlete.
That being said, I now have two followers of my ridiculous idiom. It's a growing movement, and will assimilate all of you!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
csproul
Nov 22, 2011, 5:03 PM
Post #108 of 118
(2712 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 1769
|
rangerrob wrote: ... I suppose if a climber were to make money by having someone film him or her and then sell that film, they may sneak in there as a pro athlete... 
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Nov 22, 2011, 5:09 PM
Post #109 of 118
(2708 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
rangerrob wrote: Sylvia, until obese middle aged American men sit around on their couches all Sunday eating potato chips and drinking beer watching Chris Sharma climb on televesion, climbers will not be categorized with "professioanl" athletes. Pro athletes are only "pro" because some people will pay to watch them do what they do.
Ironically, the only people who seem to hold that opinion are fat middle-aged American men.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
SylviaSmile
Nov 22, 2011, 7:30 PM
Post #110 of 118
(2688 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 3, 2011
Posts: 983
|
olderic wrote: SylviaSmile wrote: Why can't climbing/climbers be categorized with other professional sports/athletes? Would Patagonia really pay their ambassadors unless they were at the top of the climbing sport, so to speak? I'm not seeing how you can call climbing anything else but a sport. oooh - goodie - another tangent. Define sport. Does it need to involve competition with ell defined rules? Does it need to be physical (is chess a sport?, poker?). There typically is an attempt to lump climbing in with other "x-treme" sports - often the boarding ones. But most of them have a basis in competition.
My definition of "sport" (and this is just out of my head) is a physical endeavor with a measurable goal. An athlete is one who participates in a sport on a regular basis. When I was on the swim team in high school, for instance, I considered myself an athlete whether or not I participated in competitions. My goal was to get a faster time in a particular event, and I could measure my progress without having to go to a swim meet (though, in that case, the time would not be considered "official"). As it happened, I did go to swim meets. I never advanced enough in the sport, however, that anyone would have paid me to wear their brand of swimsuit. If I had done so, I would have been considered a professional athlete and given up my eligibility to compete on a college level.
Now, as I see it, climbing definitely fulfills the physical aspect of athleticism: climbers are some of the most physically amazing people anywhere. Whether it is goal-oriented may, I suppose, be open to question. What is the measure of climbing? Grades? I think a lot of people would like to say it is not the grades, or at least that the grades are secondary to a love of climbing for its own sake. It becomes a bit attenuated. But looking at, for instance, Sasha DiGiulian, it's possible to say she's the top female climber in the world (or one of the best) by looking at the grades or difficulty levels of the climbs she's completed. So I'd say, whereas it may or may not be the goal of the individual climber to climb a higher grade per se (or just because of the grade), I think it still qualifies climbing in general as having a measurable goal.
|
|
|
|
|
redlude97
Nov 22, 2011, 7:39 PM
Post #111 of 118
(2683 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990
|
fresh wrote: I agree with eric and rob here, no one is getting paid to climb. "pro" climbers are getting paid to represent the brand. guides are getting paid to teach and/or lead for their clients. if my friend who's a carpenter went on a coke binge, flipped cars in harvard square, and publicly insulted dewalt and evolv, he could still perform his job and get paid once we post bail. so could rajon rondo. chris sharma could not. sorry, but no one gets paid to climb. they're paid to be a public figure for the brand, or to teach.
|
|
|
|
|
SylviaSmile
Nov 22, 2011, 7:50 PM
Post #112 of 118
(2675 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 3, 2011
Posts: 983
|
jt512 wrote: rangerrob wrote: Sylvia, until obese middle aged American men sit around on their couches all Sunday eating potato chips and drinking beer watching Chris Sharma climb on televesion, climbers will not be categorized with "professioanl" athletes. Pro athletes are only "pro" because some people will pay to watch them do what they do. Ironically, the only people who seem to hold that opinion are fat middle-aged American men. Jay
I don't think "professional athlete" is synonymous with "televised athlete." Some athletes are televised but not professional, such as amateur golfers or figure skaters; and then some are professional but not televised, though this is definitely more rare. The point of paying an athlete an endorsement is to get the brand more popularity. Because of the varying levels of publicity, some professional athletes are paid way more than others: so a professional tennis player is going to get a lot more money in endorsements than a professional marathon runner. Climbing as a sport is low on the totem pole in terms of publicity, but there are still magazines, websites, videos, etc.
|
|
|
|
|
rangerrob
Nov 22, 2011, 8:23 PM
Post #113 of 118
(2659 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 8, 2003
Posts: 641
|
Well stated Sylvia. I may even consider altering my perspective :) Just maybe.
|
|
|
|
|
rossross
Nov 22, 2011, 9:43 PM
Post #114 of 118
(2638 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 29, 2007
Posts: 40
|
rangerrob wrote: I suppose if a climber were to make money by having someone film him or her and then sell that film, they may sneak in there as a pro athlete.
*face palm*
You obviously have been living under a rock for a long time. You are right, there is no such thing as a pro climber. All the climbing magazines, videos, websites, and individuals who consider themselves pro climbers are wrong... obviously.
Disclaimer, if you live in your parents basement or out of a vehicle you are not (necessarily) a pro climber.
I also abandon this thread as I fear it will give me a migrane.
|
|
|
|
|
rangerrob
Nov 23, 2011, 12:43 AM
Post #115 of 118
(2618 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 8, 2003
Posts: 641
|
Ross, you tend to hit your face with your palm a lot. You should get checked out. Maybe you have Tourettes.
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Nov 23, 2011, 1:16 AM
Post #116 of 118
(2613 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
rangerrob wrote: Ross, you tend to hit your face with your palm a lot. You should get checked out. Maybe you have Tourettes.
I think it's time to move on for me too.
I am headed to a photography forum where they are talking about professional photographers. They are arguing that they is no such thing as a professional photographer because a photographer who doesn't sell photos or licenses images is not getting paid to take photos.
The argument was sound, if a photographer takes a photo no-one ever sees, he would not get paid for that image, so he is not being paid for taking photos, he is selling photos.
(This post was edited by guangzhou on Nov 23, 2011, 1:20 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
rangerrob
Nov 24, 2011, 1:32 PM
Post #117 of 118
(2577 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 8, 2003
Posts: 641
|
Gonzo, don't worry. Even though I don't agree with you, I still love ya babe!
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Nov 25, 2011, 1:34 AM
Post #118 of 118
(2541 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
rangerrob wrote: Gonzo, don't worry. Even though I don't agree with you, I still love ya babe!
I feel the love.
|
|
|
|
|
|
