|
kriso9tails
Jul 20, 2001, 5:12 PM
Post #26 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2001
Posts: 7772
|
needless death -- Some accidents are tragic but unavoidable. Others were completely avoidable, and thus they die needlessly.
No to flog a dead hoarse here. If this were Europe Kagunkie, I would completely agree, but it's not Europe that I'm talking about. They could arrest you for free soloing if they wanted to. And again, if everybody did it, or even just a large number of people, there would definitely be a dramatic in crease in
climbing related deaths and injuries. Crags would be either shut down or over regulated. Make decisions for yourself, fine, but make decisions for everyone else, not nice.
|
|
|
|
|
kagunkie
Jul 20, 2001, 5:25 PM
Post #27 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2000
Posts: 731
|
Quote:Make decisions for yourself, fine, but make decisions for everyone else, not nice.
I havnt been making any decisions for anyone other than myself and I like it that way. What I dont like is some kid half my age and with not even one tenth my climbing experience pushing his Oprahized attitudes on me. Get off my back.
Quote:Some accidents are tragic but unavoidable
Oh yea there is a way to avoid all climbing accidents. STAY OFF THE ROCK! They are ALL avoidable. If you want to be safe from everything get into a padded cell and stay there.
[ This Message was edited by: kagunkie on 2001-07-20 10:38 ]
|
|
|
|
|
kriso9tails
Jul 20, 2001, 5:54 PM
Post #28 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2001
Posts: 7772
|
This is going nowhere, so I'll agree to disagree.
|
|
|
|
|
jsm280
Jul 24, 2001, 10:26 PM
Post #29 of 108
(12361 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2001
Posts: 77
|
I don't wear my seatbelt because of the law, but the safety it provides for me.
I climb with ropes not to keep climbs open for others, but to keep myself alive.
With everything I do in this life I assume some risk, I DO NOT free solo for anyone other than myself and I know every risk and believe me when I say "I do not want to die" If I die I want to die with love.....
If I get stung on a climb I will keep my cool and down climb... or finish it if I am closer to that. If I grab a loose flake or a hold breaks I hope to have a good hold with my other hand/foot or both and catch myself. Once again I understand all risk and that is part of bieng mature.
If I do die and my family sues I will haunt them to their death. It is my decision and I should be held accountable.
I never brag about a free solo because I don't want the young biner carriers to think it's the next new X Game catogory..... Then those guys will be free soloing just because it means they are crazy/ over the edge/ pushing the limits.... Those are the guys who get things shut down.
Never climb where you may risk injury to someone else. Don't help the stupid be stupid.
|
|
|
|
|
climber1
Jul 25, 2001, 5:18 AM
Post #30 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 5, 2000
Posts: 484
|
it's not the fall, it's the landing
[ This Message was edited by: kriso9tails on 2001-07-25 11:12 ]
|
|
|
|
|
brenna
Jul 26, 2001, 11:29 PM
Post #31 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 24, 2001
Posts: 6
|
I never want to climb anything that would make it so I could never climb again. I associate free soloing with death for me- (same thing with A4+ - A5's) probably because I suck. But for me, just leading can be scary enough - I don't need the chance of death to be higher than it already is. I'd rather just redpoint.
ps. Key words in this post: For me
[ This Message was edited by: brenna on 2001-07-26 16:40 ]
|
|
|
|
|
talons05
Aug 28, 2001, 11:38 PM
Post #32 of 108
(12361 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 23, 2001
Posts: 1435
|
Soloing is not cool. Soloing will not make you a better climber. Soloing is not intelligent. Soloing will not make you live longer.
This is your brain:
This is your brain on FS:
Any Questions?
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Aug 28, 2001, 11:57 PM
Post #33 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
Make sure you tell that to Peter Croft when you see him. He's actually a very classy guy, and I don't think he would prsume that his ethics were absolute.
[ This Message was edited by: jds100 on 2001-08-28 23:07 ]
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Aug 29, 2001, 12:06 AM
Post #34 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
KrisO: I've never heard of a lawsuit against a climber who died, or who free soloed on public or private land. There are plenty of laws a climber MIGHT be breaking by climbing on a particular public or private land, but that would have nothing to do with free soloing.
And a climber who gets hurt, or a family of a dead climber, cannot sue a public or private landowner, either. The legal risks are assumed by the climber, the same as the legal risks are assumed by hunters on public and private lands.
|
|
|
|
|
talons05
Aug 29, 2001, 12:14 AM
Post #35 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 23, 2001
Posts: 1435
|
Are you a friend of Mr. Croft's? I'm sorry. Is it arrogance to realize the fallacy of believing that one has reached perfection and cannot make a mistake (which, in this case, equals death)?
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Aug 29, 2001, 12:38 AM
Post #36 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
It most certainly is arrogance to believe that; I agree. I don't think Peter Croft believes that (I refer to him from reading quite a bit of what he has written, a lot of which is on free-soloing because of his participation in it.) Maybe some of the dead free soloers did have that arrogance.
I just don't like the idea that there is an absolute ethic to which everyone must unquestioningly adhere.
Sort of contradictory to my own objection, though, is that I think it was selfish of Dan Osman to do what he did (I know he wasn't, at the time of his death, free-soloing, but what he was doing is just an extension of the same spectrum of activity). I think if a climber is free of obligations (family being the big one), then he or she can exercise more self-defined (selfish?) beliefs of "freedom". But it pretty much pisses me off that he was careless -relative to the normal standard of climbing safety checks- with the livelihood that helped support his daughter, and wife (or girlfriend?).
So, for me, it comes down to a question of responsible choice. I know I am responsible for and/or to other people, so I'm not going to be so careless about risking death or permanent disability. I'm not going to automatically say that all free-soloers are wrong for free-soloing, but if I know 'em, and they're being irresponsible with respect to their families, then they will hear it from me. (Actually, now that I think about it, I did jump some guy's s--- about it once.)
|
|
|
|
|
talons05
Aug 29, 2001, 12:47 AM
Post #37 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 23, 2001
Posts: 1435
|
Good point.
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Aug 29, 2001, 9:19 PM
Post #38 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
Scout: technically, if you're climbing -up or down- a route that is rated 5.something, you are free soloing. However, there is a wide variation from area to area in how routes are rated, especially the easy rattings. In my area of Missouri and Illinois, for example, there is an area with climbs rated, say 5.6, that MIGHT be 5.2 elsewhere in Missouri and Illinois. This particular area is almost below the radar for "serious" climbers, so there has been no real effort to coordinate ratings with other destinations. So, technically you are free soloing, but others might say you're scrambling over a grade 4 hillside.
|
|
|
|
|
jds100
Aug 31, 2001, 4:47 AM
Post #39 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2001
Posts: 1008
|
Yup.
|
|
|
|
|
beta
Oct 23, 2001, 3:08 AM
Post #40 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 17, 2001
Posts: 204
|
Most people who free solo are climbing at a level that they are comfortable with during roped climbing. If they are free soloing at a level higher than that then they are not being realistic. The variables involved are random and natural and may result in injury or death. Do I have a right to deny you the experience of trying????? I don't think so. However, If your attempt and/or failure results in me being denied the opportunity to climb, any particular area,(roped or not), I'm probably gonna be upset.
Whats the saying?, there are old climbers and bold climbers but no old, bold climbers.
Use good judgement, I want to be able to talk to you over the next 20 years, (on this forum, or at a more personal level don't take that away from me. Climbing isn't about ego, I'm better than so and so because I,........
Jut my .02 worth.
Jeff
|
|
|
|
|
pollux
Oct 23, 2001, 3:42 AM
Post #41 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 26, 2001
Posts: 106
|
I was driving past a gorge and it looked like a good place to climb, i had my gear with me so I climbed, I guess the biggest thing is only climb as high as you want to fall, and don't make moves that make you feel uncomfortable. If your 40 ft up and there is a questionable hold and you don't feel comfortable, don't continue on. Go back down. Feeling uncomfortable with a grip and having no protection just adds to the problem. You end up mentally killing yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
Oct 23, 2001, 5:18 AM
Post #42 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
I can understand the mental and spiritual rush that one gets free soloing- the one 5.8 crack that I freed was one of the highlights of stupid climbing things that I've done. However, I still believe that free soloing is foolish, and it baffles me as to why so many do it.
I do quite a bit of whitewater rafting as well, and I know of NOBODY that runs class Vs without a life jacket for a "bigger rush". Comprende?
|
|
|
|
|
crackwhore
Nov 19, 2001, 3:54 AM
Post #43 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2001
Posts: 195
|
i'm gonna quote don reid on this one cuz i couldn't say it better myself
these numbers are from yosar and are only inclusive of the valley proper from 1970 through 1990 but i'm sure the ratios would be consistent anywhere.
"at least one true free soloer has been killed and one, critically hurt..."
"fifty one climbers died from traumatic injuries in that period. a dozen more, critically hurt..."
sounds to me like the probability theory doesen't hold much water...
peter puts in more miles than anyone and doesen't fall off.
the reason you dont understand and, more importantly, the reason you dont do is because the rock is a series of moves or a number to be conquered .
when you reach symbiosis then all talk will stop.
namaste
(miss you derek)
[ This Message was edited by: crackwhore on 2001-11-18 19:58 ]
|
|
|
|
|
eclarke98
Nov 19, 2001, 5:46 AM
Post #44 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 23, 2001
Posts: 127
|
Everyone has a point up to which they are willing to risk their own saftey, for some it's much lower that others and of course the people who are willing to risk just about anything, well, they probably won't be around for very long. I don't think free soloing is a good idea because it's nearly impossible to do safely.
|
|
|
|
|
wachy
Nov 19, 2001, 5:57 AM
Post #45 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2001
Posts: 61
|
Crackwhore, I'm not sure what you're trying to say with those numbers... Are you trying to prove that free soloing is safe? Those numbers don't say anything. If there are less free solo deaths/injuries in a given period than regular climbing, that's because there are also a WHOLE LOT LESS free soloers.
I bet the percentage of people that get hurt is a lot higher in the freesolo community than the TR/lead community.
When you freesolo, you're going to climb easier climbs. You're also going to fall less. But the falls are going to be a lot more serious.
|
|
|
|
|
crackwhore
Nov 19, 2001, 7:44 AM
Post #46 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2001
Posts: 195
|
forgive me for dropping numbers.
it seems my true point has eluded you.
safety is an illusion gearheads use to justify their addiction to material security
can you say quantum leap?
|
|
|
|
|
wachy
Nov 19, 2001, 8:20 AM
Post #47 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2001
Posts: 61
|
"forgive me for dropping numbers.
it seems my true point has eluded you.
safety is an illusion gearheads use to justify their addiction to material security
can you say quantum leap? "
ok, you're not helping me understand your true point by being pretty vague and referencing a TV show...
Safety isn't an illusion, I really don't know what you're talking about. There's a big difference in safety between top roping and freesoloing.
Am I addicted to material security? Well, I guess so, whatever that means. I like rope catching me when I fall, it feels really good. I guess that makes me a gearhead-- again, not quite sure what that means though.
|
|
|
|
|
crackwhore
Nov 19, 2001, 9:10 AM
Post #48 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2001
Posts: 195
|
im not sure what TV show you are referring to.
please understand
im not trying to be antagonistic.
let me spell it out for you...
i was dropping science to illustrate the transition ones mind makes when crossing the barrier of fear, whether it be fear of injury, separation, or death.
i believe most (but not all) soloists go through this expansion.
it becomes much easier to focus and climb freely when all encumberances are removed.
a spiritual connection with stone
a gravitational sharing of electrons
a quantum leap
|
|
|
|
|
wachy
Nov 19, 2001, 9:57 AM
Post #49 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 10, 2001
Posts: 61
|
have you really never heard of the show "Quantum Leap?" It starred Scott Bacula, and was pretty interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
ratstar
Nov 19, 2001, 4:06 PM
Post #50 of 108
(12360 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 11, 2001
Posts: 1144
|
I have only done it once. On U-Bend wall. Which at the top is probly 40 feet. But I didnt have to downclimb cause the other side is hikable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
