|
|
|
|
thinksinpictures
Oct 4, 2003, 2:20 PM
Post #26 of 42
(3524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 25, 2003
Posts: 447
|
One thing about the YDS system that people haven't mentioned is that it's sort of awkward to have two easy climbs that are a little different in terms of difficulty be, say, 5.7 and 5.8 where two difficult climbs might be 5.12c and 5.12d. This gives the appearance that the letters used above 5.10 represent a smaller difference in difficulty than the numbers.
Based on my experience (which only goes just into the range were letters are used) and what I've heard from harder climbers than myself, the difference between a 5.8 and a 5.9 is pretty similar to the difference between a 10b and a 10c (as opposed to the difference between 5.10b and 5.11b, which would seem to be the same as the difference between 5.8 and 5.9). I've never used a system other than YDS, but I've always thought this was awkward.
I think I probably did a very poor job of explaining what I'm trying to say, but hopefully people get it. It's early and I need to eat breakfast.
|
|
|
|
|
scallywag
Oct 4, 2003, 3:16 PM
Post #27 of 42
(3524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 13, 2003
Posts: 324
|
In reply to: Never climbed anything with a rating besides the V scale or the YDS, so I really can't tell you. I know the YDS best though. ;) 37 different ratings seems kinda difficult to tell them apart though. If I climb a fairly easy route, I can say 5.8 without having to think much. I wouldn't want to have to figure out one number out of 37.
Well if you thought about it a bit longer you would realise that you wouldn't have to consider any grade above 20 if you were climbing a "fairly easy route". In my mind i would choose something between 14 and 17.
I count four choices. And this doesn't make it easier, it makes it more specific. In my experience a 5.8 can rate in difficulty from anywhere between 14 and 17. easy. Whereas we have smaller steps for each grade progression from the easier grades up, you have only tried to bring this in with letter grades at 5.10.
Seth, it is exactly the same in America, the climbs are still only rated on their hardest move or sequence of moves. you can have 10ft of 5.10b at the base of your climb and be climbing 5.7 for the rest.
I have been travelling climbing around the states for the past 4 months now and i really do miss our ratings system, but i have accepted the YDS. It is part of the culture of American climbing. So that is part what i am here for. I wouldn't want it to change. It would kill off a part of what is climbing. History and tradition.
If you just climb for grades then you are missing out on the big picture.
|
|
|
|
|
teddy
Oct 5, 2003, 9:44 PM
Post #28 of 42
(3524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 2, 2003
Posts: 137
|
Sorry i probably didn't explain myself too well with that. We have 37 grades, its not like figuring it out to us, except when trying to convert to or from the YDS thats effort. But you started at anything up to about 13 - 14 and its just like walking or scrambling up some rocks, u go up and i think a 15 is a 5.7 or something.. go up from there, for every slight grade change in yours (whether it be 5.8 to 5.9 or 5.10c to 5.10d it will have the same thing).
S 5.7 5a 4b 15 5 V VIIa
S 5.8 5b 4c 16 6- VI VIIb
S 5.9 5c 5a 17 6+ VI+ VIIc
S 5.10a 6a 5b 18 7- VI.1 VIIIa
S 5.10b 6a 5b 19 7 VI.1+ VIIIb
S 5.10c 6b 5c 20 7 VI.1+ VIIIb
S 5.10d 6b 5c 21 7+ VI.2 VIIIc
S 5.11a 6c 5c 22 8- VI.2+ IXa
S 5.11b 6c 6a 23 8 VI.3 IXb
S 5.11c 7a 6a 24 8 VI.3 IXb
S 5.11d 7a 6b 25 8+ VI.3+ IXc
S 5.12a 7b- 6b 26 9- VI.4 Xa
S 5.12b 7b 6b 27 9 VI.4+ Xa
S 5.12c 7b+ 6b 27 9 VI.4+ Xa
S 5.12d 7c- 6c 28 9+ VI.5 Xb
S 5.13a 7c+ 6c 29 10- VI.5 Xb
S 5.13b 8a 7a 30 10- VI.5+ Xc
S 5.13c 8a+ 7a 30 10 VI.5+ Xc
S 5.13d 8b 7a 31 10 VI.6 Xc
S 5.14a 8b+ 7a 32 11 VI.7 Xc
S 5.14b 8c 7b 33 11 VI.7 Xc
S 5.14c 8c+ 7b 33 11 VI.7 Xc
S 5.14d 9a 7c 34 11 VI.7 Xc
S 5.15a 9a 7c 34 11 VI.7 Xc |
|
|
|
|
pato
Oct 6, 2003, 1:35 AM
Post #29 of 42
(3524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2003
Posts: 75
|
to be honest the V scale for boulder is quite simple but YDS is rather complicated, so i'll say V scale for bouldering and french or aussie scale for routes.
|
|
|
|
|
jsj42
Oct 6, 2003, 3:03 AM
Post #30 of 42
(3524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 24, 2002
Posts: 374
|
I greatly prefer Jim Erickson's rating system: Everything is 5.9+.
And of course there are important distinctions:
5.9+, 5.9+ R, and 5.9+ X. :twisted:
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Oct 6, 2003, 3:58 AM
Post #31 of 42
(3524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
In reply to: I think Curt is right. It's not always the easiest system that is the most enticing. It looks so much more impressive when a rating comes with both letters and numbers. For many people, that caption with a YDS looks like so much more. Is one better? I dont know
The problem with the YDS isn't that it's a flawed system but rather the creators created a flaw in the system.
Grading classes 1-6 and then sub classes within the class makes perfect sense and gets the job done quite well.
The problem with the system is the rediculous letter subgrades. A plus and a minus are easy enough to understand but why bother with the letters. Why not regrade everything 5.10 and up to reflect a reformed and open ended YDS. Instead of subgrade letters just go up another #. 5.10a is a 5.11 and so on.
Oddly, I think the end result of a reformed YDS would be something like the Aussie scale with free climbs topping out in the 5.30 range.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Oct 6, 2003, 4:05 AM
Post #32 of 42
(3524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
In reply to: I am actually a little bit dissillusioned with the Ewbank system, this is because it guages a route by its crux only, and doesn't take into account the route as a whole. So for example a guide book might say a route is 23, but in actual fact the majority of the route may be grade 15 with two or three moves at 23 after which it backs off. This IMO is a little inadequate and can be misleading as another route may be graded 23 aswell and have say 15+ moves that are consistently the grade, one is obviously going to be harder than the other, yet they are graded the same. :? I don't know much about the YDS, but does it take into account a route in its entirety? I think this would be much better.
The YDS also is rates the climb for the crux. YOur right it would be nice to know the overall rating of the climb, but the fact is if I can't lead 5.12 I'm not gonna hop on a 5.12 because it only has 3 5.12 moves while the rest of the climb is only 5.9.
Besides grading the overall level of the climb would be tricky as it appears it is quite the challenge to arrive at a consensus crux grade for the couple of crux moves. in general only a few moves of most climbs are at the crux grade (if it's more it usually says something like "sustained for grade") so I can not imagine an average grade system ever working.
|
|
|
|
|
pico23
Oct 6, 2003, 4:07 AM
Post #33 of 42
(3524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2003
Posts: 2378
|
In reply to: the british system is best, as it not only tells you how hard the crux is, but also how much death potentile there is (hence the E for extreme etc). besides we have the best rugby teams and beer in the world
Bullsh!t !!!!! everyone knows the Kiwis are best at rugby (just ask my old coach) and the irish make the best beer. I can't really think of anything useful the English are good at. :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
sanosan34
Oct 6, 2003, 10:07 AM
Post #34 of 42
(3524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 14, 2002
Posts: 11
|
"Somebody finally said, 'O.K., this thing is harder than all those others. It’s finally a 5.11.' People eventually realized that there were four discernable grades in between. The whole letter grade compression was the result of people’s insecurity, not wanting to rate things accurately using an open-ended scale. That’s why the rating system started getting jammed up in the higher grades. We really should be climbing routes that are 5.25." - Tucson climbing history
|
|
|
|
|
stanagesi
Oct 6, 2003, 1:03 PM
Post #35 of 42
(3524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 4, 2002
Posts: 21
|
:D Systems like the australilan are simple but don't tell you alot. Very good for sport (bolted routes) but very restrictive with traditional routes.
I'll give an example of info obtained from an English grade.
E1 5a - this tells you the hardest technical move is 5a but the overall grade of the climb is E1.
E1 5c - this tells you that whilst the overall grade is the same, the hardest technical move is 5c (i.e two grades harder than the previous example).
What does this tell you??
Well it means that if the easier 5a climb gets overall grade E1 it must be sustained and poorly protected with gear.
The E1 5c will although technically harder, be much better protected with good rests.
Once you've got your head around it it tells you a lot about a climb without you even seeing it.
When we grade bolted sport routes we don't use this system we usually use the French.
Cheers
Simon
|
|
|
|
|
stanagesi
Oct 6, 2003, 1:14 PM
Post #36 of 42
(3524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 4, 2002
Posts: 21
|
:roll:
Why don't you ask your coach how come we rolled over New Zealand, S.Africa and Australia this year?
|
|
|
|
|
overlord
Oct 6, 2003, 1:42 PM
Post #37 of 42
(3524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 25, 2002
Posts: 14120
|
i believe that aussies have it.
but also the easiest system for an individual is the one to wich he is most used to. im used to french scale.
|
|
|
|
|
clymber
Oct 6, 2003, 3:22 PM
Post #38 of 42
(3524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 8, 2002
Posts: 1259
|
i think my grading system is the best in the world
its goes like this
easy
fun
hard
F ing hard
and
impossible
|
|
|
|
|
gritstoner
Oct 6, 2003, 4:11 PM
Post #39 of 42
(3524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 1, 2003
Posts: 529
|
the only decent thing drink wise out of ireland is guinness which is a sout not a beer. i chalange any american to drink a few pints of old pec and not fall over.
|
|
|
|
|
teddy
Oct 7, 2003, 3:29 AM
Post #40 of 42
(3524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 2, 2003
Posts: 137
|
In reply to: i think my grading system is the best in the world its goes like this easy fun hard F ing hard and impossible |
|
|
|
|
ajkclay
Oct 8, 2003, 3:13 PM
Post #41 of 42
(3524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2002
Posts: 1567
|
^^^ :lol:
Aussie Ewbank, no doubt.
What? South Africans better at (insert any sport here) than Aussies? Now there is a Troll if ever I read one! Won a Cricket World Cup or Test Match Series against Australia lately? Or did you dip out before the finals despite being favourites in a competition that was held in your own country?
Can anyone hear a choking sound? :P
Heh heh...... bring it on!
|
|
|
|
|
ajkclay
Oct 8, 2003, 3:28 PM
Post #42 of 42
(3524 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2002
Posts: 1567
|
In reply to: :roll: Why don't you ask your coach how come we rolled over New Zealand, S.Africa and Australia this year?
:shock: I don't believe it, a Pom who is actually daring to have a go at the sporting prowess of any other country.
You win a couple of rugby games and all of a sudden the last 20 years of English failure in sport is forgotten? Man you guys are so desperate you will grasp at anything.
Now that's funny!
|
|
|
|
|
|
