Forums: Climbing Information: Regional Discussions:
chipping acceptable in this area??
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Regional Discussions

Premier Sponsor:

 


kazu


Oct 15, 2012, 12:01 AM
Post #1 of 83 (12986 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2009
Posts: 4

chipping acceptable in this area??  (North_America: United_States: California: San_Bernardino_County: Frustration_Creek)
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

This area has seen a significant development these days. Yesterday, I climbed a new line on the upper falls that traverses the lip above the roof on the main face. Itís a great exposed line probably within 11+-12- range. But unfortunately this route was extremely manufactured. I really appreciate the developers of the area but Iím not sure if this kind of chipping is appropriate here. This place is not a man-made quarryÖ


kennoyce


Oct 15, 2012, 7:10 AM
Post #2 of 83 (12918 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2001
Posts: 1338

Re: [kazu] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

kazu wrote:
This area has seen a significant development these days. Yesterday, I climbed a new line on the upper falls that traverses the lip above the roof on the main face. Itís a great exposed line probably within 11+-12- range. But unfortunately this route was extremely manufactured. I really appreciate the developers of the area but Iím not sure if this kind of chipping is appropriate here. This place is not a man-made quarryÖ

No, it's not acceptable there. The route that you are talking about is now being affectionately called "Castration" by many of us locals. A little background on it, it was originally bolted by Louie Anderson several years ago and was thought to be about 5.14b. It was an open project, but nobody ever redpointed it, so a couple of weeks ago, Louie deided that he would rather have it be an easier route so that it would actually get climbed. He went back up and both chipped it and glued some additional holds onto it. I haven't climbed it yet, but Louie rated it 5.12a.

As someone who is doing some of that new development up at frustration creek, I am sadened that this happened, but at least all of the other developers that I know up there are also saddened by this act. While I do appreciate all of the work that Louie has done for the climbing community, I think that he has spent too much time at the quarry and really needs to think about what he is doing when he develops other areas.


Edited to add: I have no knowledge that the route would have gone at 5.14b. Louie says that it wouldn't have gone at all and was too blank, but I guess now we'll never know.


(This post was edited by kennoyce on Oct 22, 2012, 7:52 AM)


marc801


Oct 15, 2012, 7:32 AM
Post #3 of 83 (12910 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806

Re: [kennoyce] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

kennoyce wrote:
kazu wrote:
This area has seen a significant development these days. Yesterday, I climbed a new line on the upper falls that traverses the lip above the roof on the main face. Itís a great exposed line probably within 11+-12- range. But unfortunately this route was extremely manufactured. I really appreciate the developers of the area but Iím not sure if this kind of chipping is appropriate here. This place is not a man-made quarryÖ

No, it's not acceptable there.
Or any place else. Chipping is never, ever acceptable or appropriate - anywhere. If anyone is doing that kind of manufacturing, they need to go back inside.


kennoyce


Oct 15, 2012, 8:23 AM
Post #4 of 83 (12894 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2001
Posts: 1338

Re: [marc801] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

marc801 wrote:
kennoyce wrote:
kazu wrote:
This area has seen a significant development these days. Yesterday, I climbed a new line on the upper falls that traverses the lip above the roof on the main face. Itís a great exposed line probably within 11+-12- range. But unfortunately this route was extremely manufactured. I really appreciate the developers of the area but Iím not sure if this kind of chipping is appropriate here. This place is not a man-made quarryÖ

No, it's not acceptable there.
Or any place else. Chipping is never, ever acceptable or appropriate - anywhere. If anyone is doing that kind of manufacturing, they need to go back inside.

It would probably help if you knew a little bit more about the local climbing areas here. The chipper is the main developer of a quarry that has a couple of hundred routes at it. Being a quarry, Technically all of the holds are man made, but a couple of the developers (mostely Gary Henning and Louie Anderson) have also done quite a bit of manufacturing further than what the quarying did.

Generally I agree with you that Chipping is never acceptable or appropriate, but in the case of the quarry, chipping has allowed the existance of routes that would never have been climbed at any grade on rock that has already been altered from it's natural state by human hands. In my mind, this is kind of a grey area, but on natural rock it's very black and white. The problem comes when these chippers decide that all rock should be treated like a quarry.

For an Idea of what I'm talking about check out The Fun Factory. All of the routes there are completely manufactured, pretty much none of them would have ever been climbed at any grade due to poor rock quality and a completely blank slightly overhanging face. Now the area offers around a dozen fun moderate routes on rock that was already "chipped" and defaced by man.


marc801


Oct 15, 2012, 9:39 AM
Post #5 of 83 (12841 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806

Re: [kennoyce] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

kennoyce wrote:
marc801 wrote:
kennoyce wrote:
kazu wrote:
I really appreciate the developers of the area but Iím not sure if this kind of chipping is appropriate here. This place is not a man-made quarryÖ

No, it's not acceptable there.
Or any place else. Chipping is never, ever acceptable or appropriate - anywhere. If anyone is doing that kind of manufacturing, they need to go back inside.

It would probably help if you knew a little bit more about the local climbing areas here. The chipper is the main developer of a quarry that has a couple of hundred routes at it. Being a quarry, Technically all of the holds are man made, but a couple of the developers (mostely Gary Henning and Louie Anderson) have also done quite a bit of manufacturing further than what the quarying did.

Generally I agree with you that Chipping is never acceptable or appropriate, but in the case of the quarry, chipping has allowed the existance of routes that would never have been climbed at any grade on rock that has already been altered from it's natural state by human hands. In my mind, this is kind of a grey area, but on natural rock it's very black and white.
No, I'm not familiar with the area, but actually, I agree with you - quarries being a bit of a grey area where chipping could be acceptable. My objection occurs when it moves out of quarries onto natural faces.

kennoyce wrote:
The problem comes when these chippers decide that all rock should be treated like a quarry.
Precisely. The problem is compounded when newer or less informed climbers don't make that distinction and wonder about it on an internet forum. At least the OP was asking the right questions.


gratefuljoe


Oct 15, 2012, 10:16 AM
Post #6 of 83 (12808 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 22, 2005
Posts: 27

Re: [kazu] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Louie Anderson has been chipping for years not just at Riverside Rock Quarry, look at apple valley,Williamson Rock, Keller peak,devils punchbowl and his new work at mount baldy and possible jtree. this in not new news just a new climbed that has been robed for all future and stronger climbers to get the FA. the sad thing is he has a cult like following with the younger climbers so they think this is acceptable to chip or glue lines that are over there climbing grade. he has given us a lot of good line over the years but chipping natural rock should be punishable by a good old fashion ass kicking just a thought.


kennoyce


Oct 15, 2012, 10:36 AM
Post #7 of 83 (12785 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2001
Posts: 1338

Re: [gratefuljoe] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

gratefuljoe wrote:
Louie Anderson has been chipping for years not just at Riverside Rock Quarry, look at apple valley,Williamson Rock, Keller peak,devils punchbowl and his new work at mount baldy and possible jtree. this in not new news just a new climbed that has been robed for all future and stronger climbers to get the FA. the sad thing is he has a cult like following with the younger climbers so they think this is acceptable to chip or glue lines that are over there climbing grade. he has given us a lot of good line over the years but chipping natural rock should be punishable by a good old fashion ass kicking just a thought.

I couldn't agree with you more.


USnavy


Oct 15, 2012, 2:57 PM
Post #8 of 83 (12664 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 5, 2007
Posts: 2667

Re: [marc801] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

marc801 wrote:
kennoyce wrote:
kazu wrote:
This area has seen a significant development these days. Yesterday, I climbed a new line on the upper falls that traverses the lip above the roof on the main face. Itís a great exposed line probably within 11+-12- range. But unfortunately this route was extremely manufactured. I really appreciate the developers of the area but Iím not sure if this kind of chipping is appropriate here. This place is not a man-made quarryÖ

No, it's not acceptable there.
Or any place else. Chipping is never, ever acceptable or appropriate - anywhere.
I am not so sure about that. Aid climbing is for all practical purposes chipping. Pounding pins into the rock and reinforcing hook placements would count as chipping IMO. Granted, the motivation is different, but the effect is still the same - damaged rock. I have encountered tons of manufactured hook placements on El Cap and there are pin scars on every route on El Cap. But yes, chipping holds on a free climb is silly.


marc801


Oct 15, 2012, 3:32 PM
Post #9 of 83 (12645 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806

Re: [USnavy] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

USnavy wrote:
I am not so sure about that. Aid climbing is for all practical purposes chipping. Pounding pins into the rock and reinforcing hook placements would count as chipping IMO. Granted, the motivation is different, but the effect is still the same - damaged rock. I have encountered tons of manufactured hook placements on El Cap and there are pin scars on every route on El Cap. But yes, chipping holds on a free climb is silly.
I think we were speaking in the context of free climbs. And let's not get in to the whole issue of climbs that are now free because they were aided at one time (Serenity Crack being the classic poster child).


kazu


Oct 15, 2012, 5:02 PM
Post #10 of 83 (12610 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2009
Posts: 4

Re: [kazu] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Kennoyce- thanks for the info about the route.

The issue I wanted to raise here was not actually ďchippingĒ, but an extreme manufacturing of a route. If the chipping was done in a small scale just to fill up a blank section, it might have been understandable if not acceptable. At least I wouldnít have raised an issue. What I was talking about is something like creation of an entire route from nothing like putting holds in a climbing gym. It was complete transformation of the natural wall and I had a very odd feeling when I was on the route, even though the climb was fun.


papapetro


Oct 15, 2012, 10:06 PM
Post #12 of 83 (12505 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 13, 2012
Posts: 14

Re: [kazu] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

A lot of creativity goes into manufacturing routes. Michelangelo chizzed out a 20 foot piece of marble and I don't believe it has ever seen an accent ( the crux is leaving the pinch). A good climb is just that. I cannot judge an artist on his medium.


USnavy


Oct 16, 2012, 3:07 AM
Post #13 of 83 (12472 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 5, 2007
Posts: 2667

Re: [] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (6 ratings)  
Can't Post

Not that I necessarily agree with chipping, but I have never really understood why it can piss some people off so much. What is the deal with it? Is it an issue of modifying the rock itself? Because if so, bolting modifies the rock, as does cleaning the route and an number of other things. If it is an issue of climbing on manufactured holds, how is that much different from the gym? Is it an aesthetics thing? Does chipped routes look bad? If so, one could argue that bolts and chalked up holds look a lot worse. Is climbing on manufactured holds in a gym okay because it is indoors? How is that relevant? Is it an ego thing? Do climbers think that if you are not "good enough" to climb the route at its current grade, you shouldent climb it at all? If so, couldent one argue that if you are not good enough to climb a route on trad you shouldent climb it at all (i.e. sport routes shouldent exist)?


(This post was edited by USnavy on Oct 16, 2012, 3:10 AM)


socalclimber


Oct 16, 2012, 3:59 AM
Post #14 of 83 (12463 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 27, 2001
Posts: 2437

Re: [kazu] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

kazu wrote:
This area has seen a significant development these days. Yesterday, I climbed a new line on the upper falls that traverses the lip above the roof on the main face. Itís a great exposed line probably within 11+-12- range. But unfortunately this route was extremely manufactured. I really appreciate the developers of the area but Iím not sure if this kind of chipping is appropriate here. This place is not a man-made quarryÖ

"Gluie" Anderson has a very long and very sordid history in the climbing community regarding exactly the behavior you speak of. No, it's not acceptable.

Big wall climbing is a whole other venture.


(This post was edited by socalclimber on Oct 16, 2012, 4:06 AM)


socalbolter


Oct 21, 2012, 11:04 AM
Post #15 of 83 (12278 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 26, 2002
Posts: 796

Re: [socalclimber] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (6 ratings)  
Can't Post

Just got back from climbing in Yosemite and saw an email from a friend pointing me to this thread. I'm not really active on this site anymore and may have missed it otherwise.

What I did to establish this line (Groove Dynamics - 12a) was certainly heavy-handed, and I knew when it was done that some would respond this way. The truth is that this was always the intention for this particular route. The Upper Tier at Frustration is full of chipped holds and glue (from the hands of multiple people). The crag has had a history of this type of activity from it's first bolts. Does that make it right? I guess that's a question you have to answer individually for yourself, but it is certainly consistent with other development in the area.

As for the post upthread about me chipping at other areas: of the areas listed in that post I have only chipped here and at the Quarry. Some areas have a pre-existing tolerance of this type of action and others do not. I respect that line. The extreme chipping, etc. at Baldy is not my work - in fact I have placed no bolts there at all.

When we first began bolting at Frustration in the early 90's there was no one climbing there at all. A massive amount of work has been done to turn the area into a climbing resource and I'm happy to see it getting the attention it deserves. That said, I was very surprised when I returned this year after having not been there for some time and saw perma-draws on virtually every bolt on the Upper Tier. Every possible link-up and variation seems to have been bolted and I cannot think of a crag anywhere in the world that I have seen more grid-bolted. Seeing this transformation allowed the justifictaion (in my mind) for what I did on this new route. For those climbing on the Upper Tier, there is a huge jump in difficulty from climbing Deulsions to just about any of the harder lines. My goal for this route was to create another, slightly harder transitional warm-up for those wanting to project the harder lines. I think this new line fills that void nicely.

- Louie


newrivermike


Oct 22, 2012, 7:20 AM
Post #16 of 83 (12155 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Feb 23, 2010
Posts: 36

Re: [socalbolter] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

Seems like nature had provided a 5.14b and the 'harder lines' would have provided nice warm-ups for it. I can't believe this shit is still happening in 2012, a time when a 5.14b gets climbed everyday. Louie, your justifications are pathetic. Stop chipping.


socalbolter


Oct 22, 2012, 7:37 AM
Post #17 of 83 (12146 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 26, 2002
Posts: 796

Re: [newrivermike] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (5 ratings)  
Can't Post

I did not clarify something in my original post, so I will do that here:

As I said, this line was bolted by me with this in mind. Not sure who decided that it would have gone at 14b naturally. Prior to my placing the bolts it was looked at by a number of 13+ and 14 climbers and deemed too blank to climb.

To now say that it was possible at 14b is simply not true.


kennoyce


Oct 22, 2012, 7:47 AM
Post #18 of 83 (12141 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2001
Posts: 1338

Re: [socalbolter] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

socalbolter wrote:
I did not clarify something in my original post, so I will do that here:

As I said, this line was bolted by me with this in mind. Not sure who decided that it would have gone at 14b naturally. Prior to my placing the bolts it was looked at by a number of 13+ and 14 climbers and deemed too blank to climb.

To now say that it was possible at 14b is simply not true.

As the person who said it would have gone at 14b let me just clarify that I personally have no idea if it would have gone at 14b or at all. I was just told by someone (I honestly don't even remember who told me) that some people thought it would go at around .14b.

Again, I appreciate all of the work that Louie has done over the years, I understand that chipping has happened at Frustration Creek in the past, but I think it would be nice if we could just leave natural rock natural regardless of what has been done in an area previously.


marc801


Oct 22, 2012, 8:26 AM
Post #19 of 83 (12115 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806

Re: [socalbolter] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

socalbolter wrote:
As I said, this line was bolted by me with this in mind. Not sure who decided that it would have gone at 14b naturally. Prior to my placing the bolts it was looked at by a number of 13+ and 14 climbers and deemed too blank to climb.

To now say that it was possible at 14b is simply not true.
And had that kind of attitude persisted before 5.13 (or 5.12, or 5.11) was established, there wouldn't be those harder routes because they would have been chipped to bring them down to a 5.12 level. The point is to chip a route into existence because "it can never be free climbed otherwise" has been proven to be blatantly incorrect logic numerous times in numerous areas.


ianmeister89


Oct 22, 2012, 11:20 AM
Post #20 of 83 (12057 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 18, 2009
Posts: 140

Re: [marc801] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

marc801 wrote:
"it can never be free climbed otherwise" has been proven to be blatantly incorrect logic numerous times in numerous areas.


True, But in the case of this particular route, This portion of the wall was literally devoid of holds. If you don't like it, don't climb it.


hasbeen


Oct 22, 2012, 11:51 AM
Post #21 of 83 (12043 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 16, 2003
Posts: 543

Re: [marc801] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

And had that kind of attitude persisted before 5.13 (or 5.12, or 5.11) was established, there wouldn't be those harder routes because they would have been chipped to bring them down to a 5.12 level. The point is to chip a route into existence because "it can never be free climbed otherwise" has been proven to be blatantly incorrect logic numerous times in numerous areas.

Most of these areas (not all) the question is not about making the route climbable at a given grade but making it climbable at all. The Quarry, Frustration, and many of the SoCal areas were simply unclimbable at any grade, not because of lack of holds but because the rock wasn't solid enough to begin with. There are egregious examples of chipping that have occurred but, mostly, these guys have been making crags out of junk that would have never been climbed at all--not due to lack of ability and/or vision but because of gravity. The rock was simply junk. Anyone who's had the pleasure of establishing routes on suspect rocks knows what I mean and most people, faced with this challenge, simple go away. If it wasn't for Louie and Jack (who gets similar backlash) there would be almost nothing to climb in Southern California. If you don't like the areas they've spent countless hours (and dollars) working to develop, climb somewhere else.


kennoyce


Oct 22, 2012, 12:48 PM
Post #22 of 83 (12025 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2001
Posts: 1338

Re: [hasbeen] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

hasbeen wrote:
And had that kind of attitude persisted before 5.13 (or 5.12, or 5.11) was established, there wouldn't be those harder routes because they would have been chipped to bring them down to a 5.12 level. The point is to chip a route into existence because "it can never be free climbed otherwise" has been proven to be blatantly incorrect logic numerous times in numerous areas.

Most of these areas (not all) the question is not about making the route climbable at a given grade but making it climbable at all. The Quarry, Frustration, and many of the SoCal areas were simply unclimbable at any grade, not because of lack of holds but because the rock wasn't solid enough to begin with. There are egregious examples of chipping that have occurred but, mostly, these guys have been making crags out of junk that would have never been climbed at all--not due to lack of ability and/or vision but because of gravity. The rock was simply junk. Anyone who's had the pleasure of establishing routes on suspect rocks knows what I mean and most people, faced with this challenge, simple go away. If it wasn't for Louie and Jack (who gets similar backlash) there would be almost nothing to climb in Southern California. If you don't like the areas they've spent countless hours (and dollars) working to develop, climb somewhere else.


This isn't what we are talking about at all. When we are talking about glueing holds on to the wall we're not talking about reinforcing existing holds, we're talking about literally picking a rock up off the ground that was never a part of the route, and gluing it onto the blank face. When we're talking about chipping, we're not talking about cleaning loose rock off the face, we're talking about drilling new holds into the rock that were never there to begin with.

As I have said several times in this thread, I appreciate the work that Louie has done, but that shouldn't give him the right to manufacture routes on a natural cliff face.

Just an FYI, this past weekend I trundled 100's of pounds of loose rock off a route that I'm putting up at Frustration Creek, so I certainly understand the many hours that go into developing routes on junk rock.


marc801


Oct 22, 2012, 1:00 PM
Post #23 of 83 (12012 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806

Re: [hasbeen] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

hasbeen wrote:
And had that kind of attitude persisted before 5.13 (or 5.12, or 5.11) was established, there wouldn't be those harder routes because they would have been chipped to bring them down to a 5.12 level. The point is to chip a route into existence because "it can never be free climbed otherwise" has been proven to be blatantly incorrect logic numerous times in numerous areas.

Most of these areas (not all) the question is not about making the route climbable at a given grade but making it climbable at all. The Quarry, Frustration, and many of the SoCal areas were simply unclimbable at any grade, not because of lack of holds but because the rock wasn't solid enough to begin with. There are egregious examples of chipping that have occurred but, mostly, these guys have been making crags out of junk that would have never been climbed at all--not due to lack of ability and/or vision but because of gravity. The rock was simply junk. Anyone who's had the pleasure of establishing routes on suspect rocks knows what I mean and most people, faced with this challenge, simple go away. If it wasn't for Louie and Jack (who gets similar backlash) there would be almost nothing to climb in Southern California. If you don't like the areas they've spent countless hours (and dollars) working to develop, climb somewhere else.

Reread my earlier comments up thread. I'm not talking about these specific areas since I've never even seen them let alone climb there - as such I'm not qualified to comment.

However, the bigger concern is that new and/or clueless climbers aren't necessarily making that distinction and arriving at the idea that maybe chipping/manufacturing is basically OK. Look at the post from USNavy which demonstrates a total lack of understanding of our impact on rock - not understanding that it is a continuum and that some impacts (chalk) are relatively fleeting while others (chipping) permanently impact all future generations of climbers.


kazu


Oct 22, 2012, 2:27 PM
Post #24 of 83 (11978 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 22, 2009
Posts: 4

Re: [socalbolter] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

Hi Louie,
First of all, I greatly appreciate what youíve done for our climbing community as hundreds of local climbers do. Thank you.

What we are asking about chipping may not be a yes-or-no type of question. Cleaning rocks, installing bolts/permas, chalking up holds, all climbing activities more or less affect the nature of rock, hence the nature of climb. The question is how much we should try to minimize the human impact to the rocks. I donít think there is a universal answer for that, but decision has to be made upon the nature and history of the area. This said, in my personal opinion, what you did to this particular route in this particular area was a bit too much.


hugepedro


Oct 22, 2012, 3:02 PM
Post #25 of 83 (11954 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875

Re: chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

Chipping is weak and lame. If you CAN'T climb it you don't NEED to climb it. If nobody can climb it, then it doesn't need to be climbed. Simple.


gratefuljoe


Oct 22, 2012, 5:07 PM
Post #26 of 83 (5958 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 22, 2005
Posts: 27

Re: [kazu] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

 the things i look at is keeping places open for us to climb, the san bernardino national forest does not recognize climbing as a recreational sport and have been working on shutting down places like Holcomb valley, if they know that climbers are chipping rock to make it more climber friendly they will shut it all down, lets all agree to not chip or glue on national forest land, BLM land,or national parks so we can all keep climbing, after all we are setting are own rules so the Government wont make them for us. if you must chip or glue make sure you are doing for safety not to make something climb at a easier grade.


caughtinside


Oct 22, 2012, 5:30 PM
Post #27 of 83 (5951 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603

Re: [hugepedro] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

hugepedro wrote:
Chipping is weak and lame. If you CAN'T climb it you don't NEED to climb it. If nobody can climb it, then it doesn't need to be climbed. Simple.

Nothing needs to be climbed.


redlude97


Oct 22, 2012, 5:58 PM
Post #28 of 83 (5942 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990

Re: [hugepedro] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

hugepedro wrote:
Chipping is weak and lame. If you CAN'T climb it you don't NEED to climb it. If nobody can climb it, then it doesn't need to be climbed. Simple.
There are routes that require hundreds of lbs of rock to be trundled before being climbable. Is the weak and lame also? What about comfortizing holds?


hugepedro


Oct 22, 2012, 11:55 PM
Post #29 of 83 (5891 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875

Re: [redlude97] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (4 ratings)  
Can't Post

redlude97 wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
Chipping is weak and lame. If you CAN'T climb it you don't NEED to climb it. If nobody can climb it, then it doesn't need to be climbed. Simple.
There are routes that require hundreds of lbs of rock to be trundled before being climbable. Is the weak and lame also? What about comfortizing holds?

Do you think trundling and chipping are the same thing? No? Then why ask such a stupid fucking question?

Comfortizing is for pussies. Climbing isn't supposed to be comfortable.


hugepedro


Oct 22, 2012, 11:57 PM
Post #30 of 83 (5890 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875

Re: [caughtinside] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

caughtinside wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
Chipping is weak and lame. If you CAN'T climb it you don't NEED to climb it. If nobody can climb it, then it doesn't need to be climbed. Simple.

Nothing needs to be climbed.

Exactly, so don't be a dick and bring the rock down to your level.


dynosore


Oct 23, 2012, 6:54 AM
Post #31 of 83 (5872 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 29, 2004
Posts: 1768

Re: [kazu] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

I will never understand sport climbing "ethics". It's a mortal sin to chip a small hold, but blasting 4" deep holes and placing hundreds of permanent bolts is cool Unsure


redlude97


Oct 23, 2012, 9:47 AM
Post #32 of 83 (5839 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990

Re: [hugepedro] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

hugepedro wrote:
redlude97 wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
Chipping is weak and lame. If you CAN'T climb it you don't NEED to climb it. If nobody can climb it, then it doesn't need to be climbed. Simple.
There are routes that require hundreds of lbs of rock to be trundled before being climbable. Is the weak and lame also? What about comfortizing holds?

Do you think trundling and chipping are the same thing? No? Then why ask such a stupid fucking question?

Comfortizing is for pussies. Climbing isn't supposed to be comfortable.
No, but you seem to be polarizing an issue that isn't black and white. Not all trundling is acceptable, just like most chipping isn't acceptable. But where do you draw the line for chipping? Is breaking off a piece of loose rock that exposes a new hold chipping? Is aggressive cleaning chipping? I bet you've climbed on comfortized and chipped holds without even knowing it. Leaving razor sharp edges that form in certain rock types is bad form at many areas. I'm certainly not saying what happened on this route is acceptable because I havent seen it first hand, but to make black and white statements such as yours about many well respected developers around the world isnt helpful.


hugepedro


Oct 23, 2012, 11:10 AM
Post #33 of 83 (5817 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875

Re: [redlude97] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

redlude97 wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
redlude97 wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
Chipping is weak and lame. If you CAN'T climb it you don't NEED to climb it. If nobody can climb it, then it doesn't need to be climbed. Simple.
There are routes that require hundreds of lbs of rock to be trundled before being climbable. Is the weak and lame also? What about comfortizing holds?

Do you think trundling and chipping are the same thing? No? Then why ask such a stupid fucking question?

Comfortizing is for pussies. Climbing isn't supposed to be comfortable.
No, but you seem to be polarizing an issue that isn't black and white. Not all trundling is acceptable, just like most chipping isn't acceptable. But where do you draw the line for chipping? Is breaking off a piece of loose rock that exposes a new hold chipping? Is aggressive cleaning chipping? I bet you've climbed on comfortized and chipped holds without even knowing it. Leaving razor sharp edges that form in certain rock types is bad form at many areas. I'm certainly not saying what happened on this route is acceptable because I havent seen it first hand, but to make black and white statements such as yours about many well respected developers around the world isnt helpful.

So I point out that your question is stupid, and you proceed to ask even more stupid questions as though nobody as ever considered those things?

Let me make this simple for you. Bringing the rock down to a lower level of ability is for pussies. Doing so is stealing the route from other climbers.

I don't give a rats ass about how respected a developer is, if they bastardize a route like that they don't deserve respect. Helpful? What the fuck does that have to do with anything?


marc801


Oct 23, 2012, 11:17 AM
Post #34 of 83 (5813 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806

Re: [dynosore] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

dynosore wrote:
I will never understand sport climbing "ethics". It's a mortal sin to chip a small hold, but blasting 4" deep holes and placing hundreds of permanent bolts is cool Unsure
And I will never understand those who cannot see the inherent difference between those two actions. You do understand that bolts were used for protection on otherwise unprotectable rock long before sport climbing existed, yes?


johnwesely


Oct 23, 2012, 11:44 AM
Post #35 of 83 (5799 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 12, 2006
Posts: 5344

Re: [marc801] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

I don't understand how anyone could care the slightest about someone manufacturing routes at a quarry.


kennoyce


Oct 23, 2012, 11:56 AM
Post #36 of 83 (5789 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2001
Posts: 1338

Re: [johnwesely] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

johnwesely wrote:
I don't understand how anyone could care the slightest about someone manufacturing routes at a quarry.

Try re-reading the thread, we're not talking about manufacturing routes at a quarry.


johnwesely


Oct 23, 2012, 12:01 PM
Post #37 of 83 (5783 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 12, 2006
Posts: 5344

Re: [kennoyce] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

kennoyce wrote:
johnwesely wrote:
I don't understand how anyone could care the slightest about someone manufacturing routes at a quarry.

Try re-reading the thread, we're not talking about manufacturing routes at a quarry.

You are right. When people were referring to "the quarry" upthread, I thought they were saying frustration creek was a quarry.


caughtinside


Oct 23, 2012, 3:46 PM
Post #38 of 83 (5732 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603

Re: [hugepedro] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

hugepedro wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
Chipping is weak and lame. If you CAN'T climb it you don't NEED to climb it. If nobody can climb it, then it doesn't need to be climbed. Simple.

Nothing needs to be climbed.

Exactly, so don't be a dick and bring the rock down to your level.

How about I clean the choss off, climb the thing, and you stay off? Seems like everyone gets what they want that way.


hugepedro


Oct 23, 2012, 5:28 PM
Post #39 of 83 (5709 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875

Re: [caughtinside] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

caughtinside wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
Chipping is weak and lame. If you CAN'T climb it you don't NEED to climb it. If nobody can climb it, then it doesn't need to be climbed. Simple.

Nothing needs to be climbed.

Exactly, so don't be a dick and bring the rock down to your level.

How about I clean the choss off, climb the thing, and you stay off? Seems like everyone gets what they want that way.

How about just don't chip?


caughtinside


Oct 23, 2012, 8:43 PM
Post #40 of 83 (5683 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603

Re: [hugepedro] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

hugepedro wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
Chipping is weak and lame. If you CAN'T climb it you don't NEED to climb it. If nobody can climb it, then it doesn't need to be climbed. Simple.

Nothing needs to be climbed.

Exactly, so don't be a dick and bring the rock down to your level.

How about I clean the choss off, climb the thing, and you stay off? Seems like everyone gets what they want that way.

How about just don't chip?


What is your view on knocking off jugs and holds to make the climb better harder?


Partner cracklover


Oct 24, 2012, 10:01 AM
Post #41 of 83 (5635 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10161

Re: [redlude97] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

redlude97 wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
redlude97 wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
Chipping is weak and lame. If you CAN'T climb it you don't NEED to climb it. If nobody can climb it, then it doesn't need to be climbed. Simple.
There are routes that require hundreds of lbs of rock to be trundled before being climbable. Is the weak and lame also? What about comfortizing holds?

Do you think trundling and chipping are the same thing? No? Then why ask such a stupid fucking question?

Comfortizing is for pussies. Climbing isn't supposed to be comfortable.
No, but you seem to be polarizing an issue that isn't black and white.

Actually, I don't think he is.

I have a lot less experience bolting in general, and manufacturing developing sport routes in specific, but I've certainly done my share. I've trundled literally tons of rock, and cleaned with both nut tools hammers, and crow bars.

With that said, I think every serious route developer, even me, knows that there is a very obvious line between cleaning, yes, even aggressive cleaning, and chipping. Before you go inventing some borderline cases, let me just say that inventing a grey area does not mean that white is black, which is pretty much what you're saying.

In reply to:
Not all trundling is acceptable, just like most chipping isn't acceptable. But where do you draw the line for chipping? Is breaking off a piece of loose rock that exposes a new hold chipping? Is aggressive cleaning chipping? I bet you've climbed on comfortized and chipped holds without even knowing it. Leaving razor sharp edges that form in certain rock types is bad form at many areas. I'm certainly not saying what happened on this route is acceptable because I havent seen it first hand, but to make black and white statements such as yours about many well respected developers around the world isnt helpful.

OK, I'll bite, because I really don't think it's complicated:

- Cleaning stops at removing rock that the climber could reasonably be expected to pull or kick off accidentally.
- Comfortizing stops at running your hammer over razor edges and points to make them possible to touch.

Hmm... so drilling pockets and gluing pieces of rock on as holds - what a difficult grey area. Not so much!

GO


marc801


Oct 24, 2012, 10:38 AM
Post #42 of 83 (5621 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806

Re: [cracklover] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

cracklover wrote:
OK, I'll bite, because I really don't think it's complicated:

- Cleaning stops at removing rock that the climber could reasonably be expected to pull or kick off accidentally.
- Comfortizing stops at running your hammer over razor edges and points to make them possible to touch.

Hmm... so drilling pockets and gluing pieces of rock on as holds - what a difficult grey area. Not so much!

GO
Adding to the fray:
what about gluing a loose hold that will likely be pulled off - especially one that makes the route possible?


redlude97


Oct 24, 2012, 11:24 AM
Post #43 of 83 (5612 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990

Re: [cracklover] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

cracklover wrote:
redlude97 wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
redlude97 wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
Chipping is weak and lame. If you CAN'T climb it you don't NEED to climb it. If nobody can climb it, then it doesn't need to be climbed. Simple.
There are routes that require hundreds of lbs of rock to be trundled before being climbable. Is the weak and lame also? What about comfortizing holds?

Do you think trundling and chipping are the same thing? No? Then why ask such a stupid fucking question?

Comfortizing is for pussies. Climbing isn't supposed to be comfortable.
No, but you seem to be polarizing an issue that isn't black and white.

Actually, I don't think he is.

I have a lot less experience bolting in general, and manufacturing developing sport routes in specific, but I've certainly done my share. I've trundled literally tons of rock, and cleaned with both nut tools hammers, and crow bars.

With that said, I think every serious route developer, even me, knows that there is a very obvious line between cleaning, yes, even aggressive cleaning, and chipping. Before you go inventing some borderline cases, let me just say that inventing a grey area does not mean that white is black, which is pretty much what you're saying.

In reply to:
Not all trundling is acceptable, just like most chipping isn't acceptable. But where do you draw the line for chipping? Is breaking off a piece of loose rock that exposes a new hold chipping? Is aggressive cleaning chipping? I bet you've climbed on comfortized and chipped holds without even knowing it. Leaving razor sharp edges that form in certain rock types is bad form at many areas. I'm certainly not saying what happened on this route is acceptable because I havent seen it first hand, but to make black and white statements such as yours about many well respected developers around the world isnt helpful.

OK, I'll bite, because I really don't think it's complicated:

- Cleaning stops at removing rock that the climber could reasonably be expected to pull or kick off accidentally.
- Comfortizing stops at running your hammer over razor edges and points to make them possible to touch.

Hmm... so drilling pockets and gluing pieces of rock on as holds - what a difficult grey area. Not so much!

GO
What about reinforcing a hold with glue? How is that really that different than gluing a hold on? It happens quite frequently. According you HugePedro, if you hammer a sharp edge to make it useable with a hammer, you are a pussy. My only point is that many of these developers have vast amounts more experience than I do, and I'll leave it up to their judgement what is acceptable. To label them as pussies is beyond harsh IMO


jt512


Oct 24, 2012, 11:42 AM
Post #44 of 83 (5603 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 11, 2001
Posts: 21904

Re: [kennoyce] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

kennoyce wrote:
johnwesely wrote:
I don't understand how anyone could care the slightest about someone manufacturing routes at a quarry.

Try re-reading the thread, we're not talking about manufacturing routes at a quarry.

Frustration Creek is not a quarry. It's another minor Southern California sport crag. It's visited by nobody but a small number of sport climbers. The only "access issue" is the unprotected 5th class approach to the main wall. Like almost all crags in the region the rock quality is mediocre to poor, and substantial cleaning is needed to make climbing even possible. It's just another SoCal choss pile. Chip, drill, glue, comfortize, whatever.

Jay


marc801


Oct 24, 2012, 12:03 PM
Post #45 of 83 (5594 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806

Re: [redlude97] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

redlude97 wrote:
According you HugePedro, if you hammer a sharp edge to make it useable with a hammer, you are a pussy. My only point is that many of these developers have vast amounts more experience than I do, and I'll leave it up to their judgement what is acceptable. To label them as pussies is beyond harsh IMO
Maybe he's never climbed in a limestone area, where the sharp edges can easily slice to the bone, especially when you're hanging all your weight off of two fingers.


caughtinside


Oct 24, 2012, 12:13 PM
Post #46 of 83 (5588 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603

Re: [cracklover] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

cracklover wrote:

- Comfortizing stops at running your hammer over razor edges and points to make them possible to touch.

See? Pedro already thinks you are a chipper if you do that.

There are no absolutes on choss.


ObviousTroll


Oct 24, 2012, 12:36 PM
Post #47 of 83 (5575 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 29, 2012
Posts: 90

Re: [caughtinside] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

caughtinside wrote:
cracklover wrote:

- Comfortizing stops at running your hammer over razor edges and points to make them possible to touch.

See? Pedro already thinks you are a chipper if you do that.

There are no absolutes on choss.

lol you just keep making yourself look pro chipping every post. It's like you ignore peoples logic, just to stand by a principal. But you make it difficult because your principal is ultimately about the same as the rest of us.


Partner cracklover


Oct 24, 2012, 12:45 PM
Post #48 of 83 (5566 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10161

Re: [caughtinside] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

caughtinside wrote:
cracklover wrote:

- Comfortizing stops at running your hammer over razor edges and points to make them possible to touch.

See? Pedro already thinks you are a chipper if you do that.

Actually, I don't think he said I was a chipper, but a pussy:

hugepedro wrote:
Comfortizing is for pussies. Climbing isn't supposed to be comfortable.

So he thinks I'm a pussy? Big deal, I can live with that. I already know I'm a pussy 'cause I get scared when I'm runout over small gear, and I think that ice is for drinks.

GO


Partner cracklover


Oct 24, 2012, 1:50 PM
Post #49 of 83 (5547 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10161

Re: [redlude97] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

redlude97 wrote:
What about reinforcing a hold with glue? How is that really that different than gluing a hold on?

You honestly don't see the difference? One is creating something that's not there, the other is preserving something that is.

Wish I could find that picture of the crag with all the bolted on gym holds. Then you could explain how that's just the same as cleaning choss, right? LOL

GO


Partner cracklover


Oct 24, 2012, 1:56 PM
Post #50 of 83 (5543 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10161

Re: [marc801] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

marc801 wrote:
redlude97 wrote:
According you HugePedro, if you hammer a sharp edge to make it useable with a hammer, you are a pussy. My only point is that many of these developers have vast amounts more experience than I do, and I'll leave it up to their judgement what is acceptable. To label them as pussies is beyond harsh IMO
Maybe he's never climbed in a limestone area, where the sharp edges can easily slice to the bone, especially when you're hanging all your weight off of two fingers.

Or, more likely, he's only ever climbed on them after they were dulled a little, and doesn't realize what they were like beforehand.

GO


jbone


Oct 24, 2012, 2:17 PM
Post #51 of 83 (5003 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 29, 2002
Posts: 463

Re: [cracklover] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

We need a flowchart that when you get to a hold that becomes loose it reverts you back to removing holds that would fall off or be dangerous. IMO gluing any rock is removing the natural element to a sequence.


redlude97


Oct 24, 2012, 3:32 PM
Post #52 of 83 (4985 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990

Re: [cracklover] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

cracklover wrote:
redlude97 wrote:
What about reinforcing a hold with glue? How is that really that different than gluing a hold on?

You honestly don't see the difference? One is creating something that's not there, the other is preserving something that is.

Wish I could find that picture of the crag with all the bolted on gym holds. Then you could explain how that's just the same as cleaning choss, right? LOL

GO
I didn't say there wasn't a difference, but if the argument for not chipping is that rock climbing is about using what the rock provides, and not bringing the route down to your level, then gluing wouldn't meet that, because:
1. The hold broke becuase that was what the rock wanted. Gluing or reinforcing would not be using what the rock gave you because clearly it was going to break off.

2. If the hold broke off, then it just made the climb harder. Just because it made a 5.9 into a 5.14 doesn't change the fact that maybe someday someone could climb it without that crucial hold.

Developers make these decisions all the time, and massive chipping and manufacturing is obviously over the line and I don't think anyone here is really disagreeing with that. But to say that all routes should only be on the basis that they should use what the rock provides, then many famous and historical climbs wouldn't meet that definition. My point is that the view that chipping, as defined by HugePedro is the line, and there is no gray is just not the way it works. No amount of gray makes black white, as you mentioned, but to say there is only black and white is also incorrect. That gray area in route development is accteptable to the majority of climbers, except for the ones that lie on both fringes.


caughtinside


Oct 24, 2012, 5:09 PM
Post #53 of 83 (4966 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603

Re: [ObviousTroll] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ObviousTroll wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
cracklover wrote:

- Comfortizing stops at running your hammer over razor edges and points to make them possible to touch.

See? Pedro already thinks you are a chipper if you do that.

There are no absolutes on choss.

lol you just keep making yourself look pro chipping every post. It's like you ignore peoples logic, just to stand by a principal. But you make it difficult because your principal is ultimately about the same as the rest of us.

I haven't stood by a principal since the mid 90s. I rotated the window squirter on the back of my bitchin volvo wagon so it would shoot water outward and I could squirt kids on bikes.


hugepedro


Oct 24, 2012, 5:44 PM
Post #54 of 83 (4959 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875

Re: [cracklover] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

cracklover wrote:
marc801 wrote:
redlude97 wrote:
According you HugePedro, if you hammer a sharp edge to make it useable with a hammer, you are a pussy. My only point is that many of these developers have vast amounts more experience than I do, and I'll leave it up to their judgement what is acceptable. To label them as pussies is beyond harsh IMO
Maybe he's never climbed in a limestone area, where the sharp edges can easily slice to the bone, especially when you're hanging all your weight off of two fingers.

Or, more likely, he's only ever climbed on them after they were dulled a little, and doesn't realize what they were like beforehand.

GO

Not so. I know when rock's been worked or not, and spent plenty of time on sport limestone. I know you pussies would prefer this not be the case so you could more readily rationalize your pussiness.

Of course I'm being a prick here, to make a point. Where is the boundary between altering a hold so that you are comfortable using it, and chipping? Aren't both altering the rock to your level rather than taking the route that is there to be climbed on the rock's terms?

If a hold has a sharp edge, you have a choice, don't you? You can decide that you can use it by holding it in a manner that avoids contact with the edge. If you're not strong enough to do that, or you don't think it's possible, you can decide not to risk it. There are other climbers strong enough and ballsy enough to use holds that you aren't willing to use, don't you think? I guarantee there are, and they will just think that's part of the challenge of the route.

There are plenty of holds that aren't sharp but would still rip your finger off if you fell on them. Is it ok to chisel them out to remove that danger? Let's just turn them into nice, comfy pockets, eh? Where does that sit in the context of comfortizing/chipping?

I think trundling/cleaning are one thing, that's just making a route available to climb. Once you start fucking with altering holds I think it's much harder to justify how you are not altering the nature of the route for a purpose other than making the route available to climb. IMO, that's going somewhere we really shouldn't want this sport to go. You should just stay in the gym, or get your mom to belay you on top rope instead of leading anything, if you can't handle an uncomfortable hold.

Yeah, I know, it's sport climbing, blah, blah, blah.

You're still pussies.


ObviousTroll


Oct 24, 2012, 7:22 PM
Post #55 of 83 (4941 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 29, 2012
Posts: 90

Re: [caughtinside] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

caughtinside wrote:
ObviousTroll wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
cracklover wrote:

- Comfortizing stops at running your hammer over razor edges and points to make them possible to touch.

See? Pedro already thinks you are a chipper if you do that.

There are no absolutes on choss.

lol you just keep making yourself look pro chipping every post. It's like you ignore peoples logic, just to stand by a principal. But you make it difficult because your principal is ultimately about the same as the rest of us.

I haven't stood by a principal since the mid 90s. I rotated the window squirter on the back of my bitchin volvo wagon so it would shoot water outward and I could squirt kids on bikes.

This must count for your .3 of your 8.3 posts per day.


dynosore


Oct 25, 2012, 7:32 AM
Post #56 of 83 (4883 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 29, 2004
Posts: 1768

Re: [marc801] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

marc801 wrote:
dynosore wrote:
I will never understand sport climbing "ethics". It's a mortal sin to chip a small hold, but blasting 4" deep holes and placing hundreds of permanent bolts is cool Unsure
And I will never understand those who cannot see the inherent difference between those two actions. You do understand that bolts were used for protection on otherwise unprotectable rock long before sport climbing existed, yes?

Plenty of sport climbs ARE protectable, but it would involve small gear and run outs. So, blast in a bunch of bolts and bring it down to your level. How is this different than chipping a hold? Hangdogging a route into submission then claiming the redpoint so you can spray about your 5.1x is better ethics? Sport climbing is all about pushing the grade by using bolts to do a climb you couldn't otherwise do, so why not chip a hold or two?


Partner cracklover


Oct 25, 2012, 8:21 AM
Post #57 of 83 (4865 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10161

Re: [hugepedro] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Your post is so stupid it's not really worth a response, but what the hell, I'll go ahead and point out your blatant hypocrisy:

hugepedro wrote:
If you're not strong enough to work around [razor-sharp sections of rock], or you don't think it's possible, you can decide not to risk it. There are other climbers strong enough and ballsy enough to use holds that you aren't willing to use, don't you think? I guarantee there are, and they will just think that's part of the challenge of the route.

<snip>

I think trundling/cleaning are one thing, that's just making a route available to climb.

LOL

So really, you should just work around the death blocks, or find another route.

Be honest now, have you ever done development on limestone in areas that get these? If not, you're just talking out your ass.

GO


caughtinside


Oct 25, 2012, 8:26 AM
Post #58 of 83 (4863 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603

Re: [ObviousTroll] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ObviousTroll wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
ObviousTroll wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
cracklover wrote:

- Comfortizing stops at running your hammer over razor edges and points to make them possible to touch.

See? Pedro already thinks you are a chipper if you do that.

There are no absolutes on choss.

lol you just keep making yourself look pro chipping every post. It's like you ignore peoples logic, just to stand by a principal. But you make it difficult because your principal is ultimately about the same as the rest of us.

I haven't stood by a principal since the mid 90s. I rotated the window squirter on the back of my bitchin volvo wagon so it would shoot water outward and I could squirt kids on bikes.

This must count for your .3 of your 8.3 posts per day.

Numbers aren't your strong suit either, are they? That one counted for 1.0 post. A little more than 3x the credit you'd give it. I think I learned about averages from a teacher in elementary school. No principal involved there.


caughtinside


Oct 25, 2012, 8:27 AM
Post #59 of 83 (4862 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603

Re: [cracklover] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

cracklover wrote:
Your post is so stupid it's not really worth a response, but what the hell, I'll go ahead and point out your blatant hypocrisy:

hugepedro wrote:
If you're not strong enough to work around [razor-sharp sections of rock], or you don't think it's possible, you can decide not to risk it. There are other climbers strong enough and ballsy enough to use holds that you aren't willing to use, don't you think? I guarantee there are, and they will just think that's part of the challenge of the route.

<snip>

I think trundling/cleaning are one thing, that's just making a route available to climb.

LOL

So really, you should just work around the death blocks, or find another route.

Be honest now, have you ever done development on limestone in areas that get these? If not, you're just talking out your ass.

GO

I think it's pretty obvious.


hugepedro


Oct 25, 2012, 9:45 AM
Post #60 of 83 (4835 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875

Re: [cracklover] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

cracklover wrote:
Your post is so stupid it's not really worth a response, but what the hell, I'll go ahead and point out your blatant hypocrisy:

hugepedro wrote:
If you're not strong enough to work around [razor-sharp sections of rock], or you don't think it's possible, you can decide not to risk it. There are other climbers strong enough and ballsy enough to use holds that you aren't willing to use, don't you think? I guarantee there are, and they will just think that's part of the challenge of the route.

<snip>

I think trundling/cleaning are one thing, that's just making a route available to climb.

LOL

So really, you should just work around the death blocks, or find another route.

Be honest now, have you ever done development on limestone in areas that get these? If not, you're just talking out your ass.

GO

Where did I suggest that anyone should "work around death blocks" or find another route? Nobody is debating whether trundling is acceptable. Please try to keep up here.

You conveniently left out the part of my post where I clearly distinguished between trundling and modifying holds. You know, the part that makes your accusation of hypocrisy just silly? Logical reasoning FAIL. Here's a hint for you, if you want to prove hypocrisy on my part, you have to prove that trundling and modifying holds are the same thing. GO

No, I haven't developed limestone. If you think that nullifies any climber's argument about chipping, then you just lost this argument.


Partner cracklover


Oct 25, 2012, 9:51 AM
Post #61 of 83 (4831 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10161

Re: [hugepedro] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

hugepedro wrote:
cracklover wrote:
Your post is so stupid it's not really worth a response, but what the hell, I'll go ahead and point out your blatant hypocrisy:

hugepedro wrote:
If you're not strong enough to work around [razor-sharp sections of rock], or you don't think it's possible, you can decide not to risk it. There are other climbers strong enough and ballsy enough to use holds that you aren't willing to use, don't you think? I guarantee there are, and they will just think that's part of the challenge of the route.

<snip>

I think trundling/cleaning are one thing, that's just making a route available to climb.

LOL

So really, you should just work around the death blocks, or find another route.

Be honest now, have you ever done development on limestone in areas that get these? If not, you're just talking out your ass.

GO

Where did I suggest that anyone should "work around death blocks" or find another route? Nobody is debating whether trundling is acceptable. Please try to keep up here.

You conveniently left out the part of my post where I clearly distinguished between trundling and modifying holds. You know, the part that makes your accusation of hypocrisy just silly? Logical reasoning FAIL. Here's a hint for you, if you want to prove hypocrisy on my part, you have to prove that trundling and modifying holds are the same thing. GO

No, I haven't developed limestone. If you think that nullifies any climber's argument about chipping, then you just lost this argument.

Where did you suggest anyone should work around death blocks? You didn't. That's your hypocrisy. You do know what the word means, right?

As for me having lost the argument, you couldn't be more wrong. Rather, you just proved my point, that you're a hypocrite using your own ignorance as a shield.

The fact is that comfortizing some holds does exactly what you approve of: "just making a route available to climb". You just don't realize it. But if you can't justify comfortizing, then you can't justify cleaning loose choss, since by your own argument, a climber should be able to climb around the choss, or leave it for a better/stronger climber.

The one is no more "making the route available to climb" than the other.

GO


(This post was edited by cracklover on Oct 25, 2012, 9:56 AM)


ObviousTroll


Oct 25, 2012, 9:57 AM
Post #62 of 83 (4828 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 29, 2012
Posts: 90

Re: [caughtinside] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

caughtinside wrote:
ObviousTroll wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
ObviousTroll wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
cracklover wrote:

- Comfortizing stops at running your hammer over razor edges and points to make them possible to touch.

See? Pedro already thinks you are a chipper if you do that.

There are no absolutes on choss.

lol you just keep making yourself look pro chipping every post. It's like you ignore peoples logic, just to stand by a principal. But you make it difficult because your principal is ultimately about the same as the rest of us.

I haven't stood by a principal since the mid 90s. I rotated the window squirter on the back of my bitchin volvo wagon so it would shoot water outward and I could squirt kids on bikes.

This must count for your .3 of your 8.3 posts per day.

Numbers aren't your strong suit either, are they? That one counted for 1.0 post.
A little more than 3x the credit you'd give it. I think I learned about averages from a teacher in elementary school. No principal involved there.

I'll bet you hear that wooshing sound over your head quite a bit.


IsayAutumn


Oct 25, 2012, 10:30 AM
Post #63 of 83 (4808 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 8, 2008
Posts: 355

Re: [ObviousTroll] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

This thread just keeps getting better and better. Pussies, chippers, hypocrites, and trolls. Just the kind of menagerie that makes it hard to put down a lame horse like RC.com.


hugepedro


Oct 25, 2012, 11:13 AM
Post #64 of 83 (4794 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875

Re: [cracklover] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

cracklover wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
cracklover wrote:
Your post is so stupid it's not really worth a response, but what the hell, I'll go ahead and point out your blatant hypocrisy:

hugepedro wrote:
If you're not strong enough to work around [razor-sharp sections of rock], or you don't think it's possible, you can decide not to risk it. There are other climbers strong enough and ballsy enough to use holds that you aren't willing to use, don't you think? I guarantee there are, and they will just think that's part of the challenge of the route.

<snip>

I think trundling/cleaning are one thing, that's just making a route available to climb.

LOL

So really, you should just work around the death blocks, or find another route.

Be honest now, have you ever done development on limestone in areas that get these? If not, you're just talking out your ass.

GO

Where did I suggest that anyone should "work around death blocks" or find another route? Nobody is debating whether trundling is acceptable. Please try to keep up here.

You conveniently left out the part of my post where I clearly distinguished between trundling and modifying holds. You know, the part that makes your accusation of hypocrisy just silly? Logical reasoning FAIL. Here's a hint for you, if you want to prove hypocrisy on my part, you have to prove that trundling and modifying holds are the same thing. GO

No, I haven't developed limestone. If you think that nullifies any climber's argument about chipping, then you just lost this argument.

Where did you suggest anyone should work around death blocks? You didn't. That's your hypocrisy. You do know what the word means, right?

As for me having lost the argument, you couldn't be more wrong. Rather, you just proved my point, that you're a hypocrite using your own ignorance as a shield.

The fact is that comfortizing some holds does exactly what you approve of: "just making a route available to climb". You just don't realize it. But if you can't justify comfortizing, then you can't justify cleaning loose choss, since by your own argument, a climber should be able to climb around the choss, or leave it for a better/stronger climber.

The one is no more "making the route available to climb" than the other.

GO

You seem to be having a great deal of difficulty reading. I pointed out precisely what you missed and you still ignored it.


caughtinside


Oct 25, 2012, 11:24 AM
Post #68 of 83 (4776 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603

Re: [ObviousTroll] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ObviousTroll wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
ObviousTroll wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
ObviousTroll wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
cracklover wrote:

- Comfortizing stops at running your hammer over razor edges and points to make them possible to touch.

See? Pedro already thinks you are a chipper if you do that.

There are no absolutes on choss.

lol you just keep making yourself look pro chipping every post. It's like you ignore peoples logic, just to stand by a principal. But you make it difficult because your principal is ultimately about the same as the rest of us.

I haven't stood by a principal since the mid 90s. I rotated the window squirter on the back of my bitchin volvo wagon so it would shoot water outward and I could squirt kids on bikes.

This must count for your .3 of your 8.3 posts per day.

Numbers aren't your strong suit either, are they? That one counted for 1.0 post.
A little more than 3x the credit you'd give it. I think I learned about averages from a teacher in elementary school. No principal involved there.

I'll bet you hear that wooshing sound over your head quite a bit.

Not so much a whooshing... as a scraping noise. It's the same noise I hear when I run the side of my hammer over a razor sharp edge on a pocket.


redlude97


Oct 25, 2012, 11:31 AM
Post #69 of 83 (4771 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990

Re: [hugepedro] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

hugepedro wrote:
cracklover wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
cracklover wrote:
Your post is so stupid it's not really worth a response, but what the hell, I'll go ahead and point out your blatant hypocrisy:

hugepedro wrote:
If you're not strong enough to work around [razor-sharp sections of rock], or you don't think it's possible, you can decide not to risk it. There are other climbers strong enough and ballsy enough to use holds that you aren't willing to use, don't you think? I guarantee there are, and they will just think that's part of the challenge of the route.

<snip>

I think trundling/cleaning are one thing, that's just making a route available to climb.

LOL

So really, you should just work around the death blocks, or find another route.

Be honest now, have you ever done development on limestone in areas that get these? If not, you're just talking out your ass.

GO

Where did I suggest that anyone should "work around death blocks" or find another route? Nobody is debating whether trundling is acceptable. Please try to keep up here.

You conveniently left out the part of my post where I clearly distinguished between trundling and modifying holds. You know, the part that makes your accusation of hypocrisy just silly? Logical reasoning FAIL. Here's a hint for you, if you want to prove hypocrisy on my part, you have to prove that trundling and modifying holds are the same thing. GO

No, I haven't developed limestone. If you think that nullifies any climber's argument about chipping, then you just lost this argument.

Where did you suggest anyone should work around death blocks? You didn't. That's your hypocrisy. You do know what the word means, right?

As for me having lost the argument, you couldn't be more wrong. Rather, you just proved my point, that you're a hypocrite using your own ignorance as a shield.

The fact is that comfortizing some holds does exactly what you approve of: "just making a route available to climb". You just don't realize it. But if you can't justify comfortizing, then you can't justify cleaning loose choss, since by your own argument, a climber should be able to climb around the choss, or leave it for a better/stronger climber.

The one is no more "making the route available to climb" than the other.

GO

You seem to be having a great deal of difficulty reading. I pointed out precisely what you missed and you still ignored it.
Maybe you can follow this logic if we spell it out for you.
Your statement: People should not chip.
Reason 1: People should use what the rock provides
Reason 2: People should not bring a climb down to their level.

Fine, that sounds somewhat reasonable.

If you apply your logic now to trundling however,

1. Trundling alters the rock, you are not using what the rock provides. Much of the time, trundling removes rocks in various states of attachment.

2. Stronger climbers can climb around choss or loose rock. This happens all the time on alpine routes when cleaning just isn't necessary or feasible.

The only logical conclusion that can come about from your reasoning for chipping is that trundling should also not be done.

If you say trundling is ok, then you are a hypocrite your own statements


hugepedro


Oct 25, 2012, 12:15 PM
Post #70 of 83 (4747 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875

Re: [redlude97] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

redlude97 wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
cracklover wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
cracklover wrote:
Your post is so stupid it's not really worth a response, but what the hell, I'll go ahead and point out your blatant hypocrisy:

hugepedro wrote:
If you're not strong enough to work around [razor-sharp sections of rock], or you don't think it's possible, you can decide not to risk it. There are other climbers strong enough and ballsy enough to use holds that you aren't willing to use, don't you think? I guarantee there are, and they will just think that's part of the challenge of the route.

<snip>

I think trundling/cleaning are one thing, that's just making a route available to climb.

LOL

So really, you should just work around the death blocks, or find another route.

Be honest now, have you ever done development on limestone in areas that get these? If not, you're just talking out your ass.

GO

Where did I suggest that anyone should "work around death blocks" or find another route? Nobody is debating whether trundling is acceptable. Please try to keep up here.

You conveniently left out the part of my post where I clearly distinguished between trundling and modifying holds. You know, the part that makes your accusation of hypocrisy just silly? Logical reasoning FAIL. Here's a hint for you, if you want to prove hypocrisy on my part, you have to prove that trundling and modifying holds are the same thing. GO

No, I haven't developed limestone. If you think that nullifies any climber's argument about chipping, then you just lost this argument.

Where did you suggest anyone should work around death blocks? You didn't. That's your hypocrisy. You do know what the word means, right?

As for me having lost the argument, you couldn't be more wrong. Rather, you just proved my point, that you're a hypocrite using your own ignorance as a shield.

The fact is that comfortizing some holds does exactly what you approve of: "just making a route available to climb". You just don't realize it. But if you can't justify comfortizing, then you can't justify cleaning loose choss, since by your own argument, a climber should be able to climb around the choss, or leave it for a better/stronger climber.

The one is no more "making the route available to climb" than the other.

GO

You seem to be having a great deal of difficulty reading. I pointed out precisely what you missed and you still ignored it.
Maybe you can follow this logic if we spell it out for you.
Your statement: People should not chip.
Reason 1: People should use what the rock provides
Reason 2: People should not bring a climb down to their level.

Fine, that sounds somewhat reasonable.

If you apply your logic now to trundling however,

1. Trundling alters the rock, you are not using what the rock provides. Much of the time, trundling removes rocks in various states of attachment.

2. Stronger climbers can climb around choss or loose rock. This happens all the time on alpine routes when cleaning just isn't necessary or feasible.

The only logical conclusion that can come about from your reasoning for chipping is that trundling should also not be done.

If you say trundling is ok, then you are a hypocrite your own statements

Ok, let me spell this out, because apparently it's too nuanced for you pussies.

The difference between trundling and chipping/comfortizing is that trundling does not alter the means by which we climbers move over the rock. The holds we use to move over the rock are core to what we do, so altering them is conceptually WAY different than trundling. Conceptually, trundling is more similar to building a trail to the crag than it is to chipping.

As I've already pointed out, some people will climb on holds that aren't comfortized and just consider that part of the challenge. So clearly, that is not essential to making the route "available".

I know you spurtards put convenience above just about everything, but don't kid yourself that you aren't making the route easier when you comfortize a hold. What you're doing is just a milder form of chipping. I also recognize this is normal practice for you pussies, and honestly, I don't care whether or not you do it. Just don't have any illusions that you aren't a pussy for doing so.


redlude97


Oct 25, 2012, 12:40 PM
Post #71 of 83 (4730 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990

Re: [hugepedro] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

hugepedro wrote:
redlude97 wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
cracklover wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
cracklover wrote:
Your post is so stupid it's not really worth a response, but what the hell, I'll go ahead and point out your blatant hypocrisy:

hugepedro wrote:
If you're not strong enough to work around [razor-sharp sections of rock], or you don't think it's possible, you can decide not to risk it. There are other climbers strong enough and ballsy enough to use holds that you aren't willing to use, don't you think? I guarantee there are, and they will just think that's part of the challenge of the route.

<snip>

I think trundling/cleaning are one thing, that's just making a route available to climb.

LOL

So really, you should just work around the death blocks, or find another route.

Be honest now, have you ever done development on limestone in areas that get these? If not, you're just talking out your ass.

GO

Where did I suggest that anyone should "work around death blocks" or find another route? Nobody is debating whether trundling is acceptable. Please try to keep up here.

You conveniently left out the part of my post where I clearly distinguished between trundling and modifying holds. You know, the part that makes your accusation of hypocrisy just silly? Logical reasoning FAIL. Here's a hint for you, if you want to prove hypocrisy on my part, you have to prove that trundling and modifying holds are the same thing. GO

No, I haven't developed limestone. If you think that nullifies any climber's argument about chipping, then you just lost this argument.

Where did you suggest anyone should work around death blocks? You didn't. That's your hypocrisy. You do know what the word means, right?

As for me having lost the argument, you couldn't be more wrong. Rather, you just proved my point, that you're a hypocrite using your own ignorance as a shield.

The fact is that comfortizing some holds does exactly what you approve of: "just making a route available to climb". You just don't realize it. But if you can't justify comfortizing, then you can't justify cleaning loose choss, since by your own argument, a climber should be able to climb around the choss, or leave it for a better/stronger climber.

The one is no more "making the route available to climb" than the other.

GO

You seem to be having a great deal of difficulty reading. I pointed out precisely what you missed and you still ignored it.
Maybe you can follow this logic if we spell it out for you.
Your statement: People should not chip.
Reason 1: People should use what the rock provides
Reason 2: People should not bring a climb down to their level.

Fine, that sounds somewhat reasonable.

If you apply your logic now to trundling however,

1. Trundling alters the rock, you are not using what the rock provides. Much of the time, trundling removes rocks in various states of attachment.

2. Stronger climbers can climb around choss or loose rock. This happens all the time on alpine routes when cleaning just isn't necessary or feasible.

The only logical conclusion that can come about from your reasoning for chipping is that trundling should also not be done.

If you say trundling is ok, then you are a hypocrite your own statements

Ok, let me spell this out, because apparently it's too nuanced for you pussies.

The difference between trundling and chipping/comfortizing is that trundling does not alter the means by which we climbers move over the rock. The holds we use to move over the rock are core to what we do, so altering them is conceptually WAY different than trundling. Conceptually, trundling is more similar to building a trail to the crag than it is to chipping.

As I've already pointed out, some people will climb on holds that aren't comfortized and just consider that part of the challenge. So clearly, that is not essential to making the route "available".

I know you spurtards put convenience above just about everything, but don't kid yourself that you aren't making the route easier when you comfortize a hold. What you're doing is just a milder form of chipping. I also recognize this is normal practice for you pussies, and honestly, I don't care whether or not you do it. Just don't have any illusions that you aren't a pussy for doing so.
How is trundling not altering fundamentally how we move over the rock? Why does a route have to go through a section that needs to be trundled? Why can't a stronger climber go around a death block? If you trundle a loose flake and a hold is formed where the flake broke off isn't that essentially chipping?Let's be clear here. No one is claiming that trundling is acceptable in every situation, and no one is claiming that chipping is acceptable in every(or even most) situations, but there are cases where both are acceptable. Otherwise, if you have a black and white definition you end up being a hypocrite.


dagibbs


Oct 25, 2012, 12:45 PM
Post #72 of 83 (4727 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 30, 2007
Posts: 921

Re: [hugepedro] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

hugepedro wrote:
Ok, let me spell this out, because apparently it's too nuanced for you pussies.

The difference between trundling and chipping/comfortizing is that trundling does not alter the means by which we climbers move over the rock. The holds we use to move over the rock are core to what we do, so altering them is conceptually WAY different than trundling. Conceptually, trundling is more similar to building a trail to the crag than it is to chipping.

Actually, trundling does change the rock you climb on. It makes available hand holds and foot holds that would have been obscured/blocked by the un-trundled rock.

Where I feel that trundling is different from comfortizing holds, or chipping holds is that trundling is a safety issue. With large loose chunks of rock, the climb is not just dangerous for the climber, but also far more dangerous for the belayer, and anyone else in the potential fall zone.

(I think there can be a similar argument in favour of bolts being acceptable as a safety reason for modifying the rock as opposed to comfortizing or chipping holds to make progress easier/more comfortable.)


Partner cracklover


Oct 25, 2012, 1:37 PM
Post #73 of 83 (4708 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10161

Re: [hugepedro] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Good god you're clueless. I thought you just didn't know anything about sharp limestone. Turns out you know nothing about cleaning *any* routes.

hugepedro wrote:
The difference between trundling and chipping/comfortizing is that trundling does not alter the means by which we climbers move over the rock.

You couldn't be more wrong. It's a rare sport route, and pretty much no sport route on choss, in which at least a few holds, and sometimes many sequences, aren't changed via the cleaning off the crap. In fact, it's not even worth getting more than a rough idea where the route will go until it's somewhat cleaned. And definitely not a good idea to bolt until you've cleaned it pretty well. There are areas where most of the face is buried under choss!

So, obviously, you simply haven't the slightest idea what you're talking about. But that's okay, keep digging...

In reply to:
The holds we use to move over the rock are core to what we do, so altering them is conceptually WAY different than trundling. Conceptually, trundling is more similar to building a trail to the crag than it is to chipping.

Hahahaha! That's a good one.

In reply to:
As I've already pointed out, some people will climb on holds that aren't comfortized and just consider that part of the challenge.

You can keep repeating this as though it were true, but you've already admitted your ignorance about such holds. The fact that you haven't felt these edges that would cut through tape and flesh together, and disallow any route through them, does not mean they don't exist. It just means you didn't feel them before they were comfortized for your convenience, or you simply don't climb in those areas.

GO


Partner cracklover


Oct 25, 2012, 1:49 PM
Post #74 of 83 (4700 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10161

Re: [redlude97] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

redlude97 wrote:
No one is claiming that trundling is acceptable in every situation, and no one is claiming that chipping is acceptable in every(or even most) situations, but there are cases where both are acceptable. Otherwise, if you have a black and white definition you end up being a hypocrite.

As to this notion that in cleaning and bolting sport routes, well sometimes you trundle and sometimes you don't, and sometimes you chip and drill holds, and sometimes you don't - I think that's silly.

If you are informed of reality (unlike our friend pedro here), it actually *is* pretty black and white. On sport routes, fairly extensive cleaning is expected. And while most routes do not require comfortizing, when it's necessary for the route to go, that's expected too. As for loose holds, it's at the discretion of the person cleaning the route whether to reinforce or not. If it's a key hold, probably best to do so. If it's not, and might come off, probably best to clean it.

Everything else is grey or black.

GO


hugepedro


Oct 25, 2012, 6:31 PM
Post #75 of 83 (4674 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875

Re: [cracklover] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

cracklover wrote:
It's a rare sport route, and pretty much no sport route on choss, in which at least a few holds, and sometimes many sequences, aren't changed via the cleaning off the crap. In fact, it's not even worth getting more than a rough idea where the route will go until it's somewhat cleaned. And definitely not a good idea to bolt until you've cleaned it pretty well. There are areas where most of the face is buried under choss!
Oh really? Golly gee! Thanks for telling me! All these years I thought it was just the route fairy magically doing all that stuff! You need to bring a stronger game than this when you argue with me, sonny boy.

Cleaning reveals the route. What you do after that to the available holds on the potential route is whatís being discussed here. How dumb do you have to be to not understand that distinction? If you donít understand that you might as well manufacture away, no holds barred. Hell, maybe that is what you do, I donít know.

And yes, when you alter holds you are doing something that is fundamentally different than cleaning.


cracklover wrote:
In reply to:
As I've already pointed out, some people will climb on holds that aren't comfortized and just consider that part of the challenge.

You can keep repeating this as though it were true, but you've already admitted your ignorance about such holds. The fact that you haven't felt these edges that would cut through tape and flesh together, and disallow any route through them, does not mean they don't exist. It just means you didn't feel them before they were comfortized for your convenience, or you simply don't climb in those areas.

Again, you seem to be having difficulty reading. Iíve not admitted ignorance of such holds, nor have I made any claim they donít exist. They do, in fact exist. Try making an argument against what Iíve actually said, please.

Disallow any route through them? Donít flatter yourself, as though if you canít do it nobody else could. Iím not making the claim that there is zero hold that canít be used without comfortizing, but there are plenty of comfortized holds that could have been used had the razor edge been left there. On most of them it just takes better technique. And if you think that the 13 year olds climbing 5.14 today, or climbers 20 years from now, couldnít climb your routes if you didnít knock off the edges, and that you havenít made the route easier, you truly are an arrogant fool.

I also gave an example of another kind of scary hold, the kind that isnít sharp but would grab your finger and rip it off if you fell on it. Forget a severe cut to the bone, youíre losing a fricken finger. We have TONS of such mono and 2 finger pocket holds here in New Mexico on our basalt, which is the rock that most of our sport routes are on. Itís not unusual that there are more than 1 such amputation holds on a single route. What would you do in that situation, chisel it out? Thatís not what we do out here, because we arenít pussies.

Just face it, when you comfortize itís about making the route climbable, itís about making it nice for you and other gym-born weak-asses because youíre scared.


caughtinside


Oct 25, 2012, 7:29 PM
Post #76 of 83 (2312 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603

Re: [hugepedro] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (3 ratings)  
Can't Post

LOL. You've never put up a sport route in New Mexico. You also appear ignorant of the history of sport climbing there.

But your ability to call people the same name over and over is impressive. A well honed debate skill.


jbone


Oct 25, 2012, 7:57 PM
Post #77 of 83 (2301 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 29, 2002
Posts: 463

Re: [caughtinside] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

I have developed limestone. From experience, you will learn to regret ever leaving your mark on any route. Not realizing that now is only a testament to your own experience.

Allow the holds to comfortize through routine ascents rather than using a tool to speed through the process. If your route sucks it will stay sharp cause no-one wants to climb it. If its too good to put down then it will comfortize as people yard and stand on them as footholds.

If your psych and motivation push you to develop lines contrary to these simple principles then maybe you are not really ready to contribute at this level.


hugepedro


Oct 25, 2012, 7:58 PM
Post #78 of 83 (2300 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875

Re: [caughtinside] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

caughtinside wrote:
LOL. You've never put up a sport route in New Mexico. You also appear ignorant of the history of sport climbing there.

But your ability to call people the same name over and over is impressive. A well honed debate skill.

Suuuure.

I'll point out that there is absolutely nothing in your comment that counters anything I've said. The last resort of a losing argument, try to discredit your opponent instead of win the argument on fact or logic.

It's gettin weak in here.


hugepedro


Oct 25, 2012, 8:22 PM
Post #79 of 83 (2292 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875

Re: [jbone] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (5 ratings)  
Can't Post

jbone wrote:
I have developed limestone. From experience, you will learn to regret ever leaving your mark on any route. Not realizing that now is only a testament to your own experience.

Allow the holds to comfortize through routine ascents rather than using a tool to speed through the process. If your route sucks it will stay sharp cause no-one wants to climb it. If its too good to put down then it will comfortize as people yard and stand on them as footholds.

If your psych and motivation push you to develop lines contrary to these simple principles then maybe you are not really ready to contribute at this level.

Now we're talkin!

See, these guys develop in their little insular worlds. Without the moderating factor of climbing outside what they know, they let their egos drive them to be "THE DEVELOPER" that climbers who don't know better worship, and thus they rationalize weak ethics.

I get that the ethic they understand is normal in high traffic sport areas, but they are mistaken if they think this is THE ethic. There are LOTS of sport areas and routes that do not follow this low standard that they espouse.


papapetro


Oct 25, 2012, 10:58 PM
Post #80 of 83 (2272 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 13, 2012
Posts: 14

Re: [hugepedro] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (5 ratings)  
Can't Post

Peter, I've climbed some awesome lines in limestone that were totally Bosched out. None of them were sub-11. Where was it that you climbed your 11.a project on the "climbstone". The VRG doesn't even start until 11.b. The climb that the OP is referring to is something you will never even have to consider attempting. The people developing these climbs are on a different level than you. Climb at Mt. Charelston and tell the people warming up on your projects that they are pussies. I'm sure you'll find outside of your venues that you are the pussy.

Shut up and pull hard you pussy.


caughtinside


Oct 26, 2012, 8:49 AM
Post #81 of 83 (2242 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603

Re: [hugepedro] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (5 ratings)  
Can't Post

hugepedro wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
LOL. You've never put up a sport route in New Mexico. You also appear ignorant of the history of sport climbing there.

But your ability to call people the same name over and over is impressive. A well honed debate skill.

Suuuure.

I'll point out that there is absolutely nothing in your comment that counters anything I've said. The last resort of a losing argument, try to discredit your opponent instead of win the argument on fact or logic.

It's gettin weak in here.

I don't need to discredit you, you never had much credit to begin with. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. You just have near zero basis for yours.

We are discussing what goes on it putting up sport routes on chossy stone. You have put up zero sport routes.

What is mostly impressive is your stalwart ability to continue to argue as if you know what you are talking about. I use the word 'argue' loosely, as it mostly comes down to namecalling. Not even creative or inventive namecalling.

No, not all crags are developed the same. Some of that is because they are done by different people, and some of that is because each crag is different in stone and angle. Which is a good thing. You might call them different situations, and your actions in different situations might be different. Huge suprise there.

I forget what other points you think you made up there because they've mostly been addressed in some form or another in this thread and I'm not really interested in re debating them with someone who is ignorant of the process.


IsayAutumn


Oct 26, 2012, 11:41 AM
Post #82 of 83 (2212 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 8, 2008
Posts: 355

Re: [caughtinside] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

caughtinside wrote:
hugepedro wrote:
caughtinside wrote:
LOL. You've never put up a sport route in New Mexico. You also appear ignorant of the history of sport climbing there.

But your ability to call people the same name over and over is impressive. A well honed debate skill.

Suuuure.

I'll point out that there is absolutely nothing in your comment that counters anything I've said. The last resort of a losing argument, try to discredit your opponent instead of win the argument on fact or logic.

It's gettin weak in here.

I don't need to discredit you, you never had much credit to begin with. Everyone is entitled to an opinion. You just have near zero basis for yours.

We are discussing what goes on it putting up sport routes on chossy stone. You have put up zero sport routes.

What is mostly impressive is your stalwart ability to continue to argue as if you know what you are talking about. I use the word 'argue' loosely, as it mostly comes down to namecalling. Not even creative or inventive namecalling.

No, not all crags are developed the same. Some of that is because they are done by different people, and some of that is because each crag is different in stone and angle. Which is a good thing. You might call them different situations, and your actions in different situations might be different. Huge suprise there.

I forget what other points you think you made up there because they've mostly been addressed in some form or another in this thread and I'm not really interested in re debating them with someone who is ignorant of the process.

This is becoming a beat down. Was a good run, though.


gratefuljoe


Oct 26, 2012, 11:56 AM
Post #83 of 83 (2204 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 22, 2005
Posts: 27

Re: [hugepedro] chipping acceptable in this area?? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

I chopped a shit load of bolts in Cimarron, New Mexico that some ass put next to good crack lines were they your bolts? or was that one of MR. Jackson's climbs
In reply to:


Forums : Climbing Information : Regional Discussions

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook