|
hardmanknott
Oct 6, 2004, 7:57 PM
Post #26 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 15, 2003
Posts: 228
|
In reply to: In reply to: Do you know that you CAN climb a route and NOT clip every bolt you come across don't you. That is a specious argument. Having a bail-out option on a scary section of free climbing changes the experience and reduces the commitment level.
I think you've been successfully trolled.
(at least I hope it was a troll--you never know around here)
Hardman Knott
|
|
|
|
|
cjcalls
Oct 6, 2004, 8:00 PM
Post #27 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2003
Posts: 247
|
In reply to: In reply to: Do you know that you CAN climb a route and NOT clip every bolt you come across don't you. That is a specious argument. Having a bail-out option on a scary section of free climbing changes the experience and reduces the commitment level.
Just because it is there does not mean you have to use it. Heck way climb ElCap when you can just walk up the backside?
|
|
|
|
|
jcinco
Oct 6, 2004, 8:08 PM
Post #28 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 395
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Do you know that you CAN climb a route and NOT clip every bolt you come across don't you. That is a specious argument. Having a bail-out option on a scary section of free climbing changes the experience and reduces the commitment level. Just because it is there does not mean you have to use it. Heck way climb ElCap when you can just walk up the backside?
Your comparison to El Cap makes no sense.
Since it doesn't seem that you remotely grasp my argument, I can only assume that you have little to no trad climbing experience, and have no understanding of climbing history. If this is the case, then I suggest you return to this thread when you have a little bit more background.
|
|
|
|
|
jcinco
Oct 6, 2004, 8:16 PM
Post #29 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 395
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Do you know that you CAN climb a route and NOT clip every bolt you come across don't you. That is a specious argument. Having a bail-out option on a scary section of free climbing changes the experience and reduces the commitment level. I think you've been successfully trolled. (at least I hope it was a troll--you never know around here) Hardman Knott
Maybe (and if so I at least hope its entertaining)...
But I think you might be surprised by how many people actually share this view.
|
|
|
|
|
bishopclimber
Oct 6, 2004, 8:26 PM
Post #30 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 15, 2003
Posts: 193
|
from the ASCA site:
Desert Towers
Desert Towers
Route Notes Date Thanks to
Argon Tower Replaced 1 anchor 04/02 Sam Lightner and Forest Dramis
Titan, Finger of Fate Replaced 2 anchors and 8 protection bolts 10/02 Sam Lightner and Forest Dramis
Copyright ©2003 American Safe Climbing Association Site Credits
ASCA did not retrobolt anything on Moses
|
|
|
|
|
hardmanknott
Oct 6, 2004, 8:29 PM
Post #31 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 15, 2003
Posts: 228
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: Do you know that you CAN climb a route and NOT clip every bolt you come across don't you. That is a specious argument. Having a bail-out option on a scary section of free climbing changes the experience and reduces the commitment level. I think you've been successfully trolled. (at least I hope it was a troll--you never know around here) Hardman Knott Maybe (and if so I at least hope its entertaining)... But I think you might be surprised by how many people actually share this view.
Or perhaps you could be insidiously trolling the troll (and the rest of us) into thinking
that you think he is serious--when in fact you know he is knott. :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
atg200
Oct 6, 2004, 8:31 PM
Post #32 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 4317
|
that info is way out of date bishopclimber. the asca has gone back and replaced a ton of bolts on the finger of fate well after sam did his work on it.
In reply to: The ASCA has never retro-bolted anything
that isn't completely true. asca hangers have found their way onto a retro job on a boulder problem(!) in lumpy ridge. i think they've since been removed, but the asca gives away bolts and hangers to just too many people to have a firm grasp of where every one of them goes. i am grateful for the asca's work and donate to them every year, but not everyone with asca bolts and hangers is infallible.
|
|
|
|
|
jcinco
Oct 6, 2004, 8:48 PM
Post #33 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 395
|
In reply to: asca hangers have found their way onto a retro job on a boulder problem(!) in lumpy ridge. i think they've since been removed, but the asca gives away bolts and hangers to just too many people to have a firm grasp of where every one of them goes. i am grateful for the asca's work and donate to them every year, but not everyone with asca bolts and hangers is infallible.
Remember, though, that the unnamed guides from a certain front range guiding operation are only using the ASCA hangers on retro-bolts and projects, "temporarily".
|
|
|
|
|
jsj42
Oct 6, 2004, 8:51 PM
Post #34 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 24, 2002
Posts: 374
|
In reply to: In reply to: asca hangers have found their way onto a retro job on a boulder problem(!) in lumpy ridge. i think they've since been removed, but the asca gives away bolts and hangers to just too many people to have a firm grasp of where every one of them goes. i am grateful for the asca's work and donate to them every year, but not everyone with asca bolts and hangers is infallible. Remember, though, that the unnamed guides from a certain front range guiding operation are only using the ASCA hangers on retro-bolts and projects, "temporarily".
I suspect I might know who's behind this!
|
|
|
|
|
on_sight_man
Oct 6, 2004, 8:56 PM
Post #35 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 11, 2002
Posts: 628
|
I guess I really don't know that it's been retro-bolted from the FA because 1) I don't know exactly how many bolts Ed Webster put on it, and 2) I haven't climbed it. What I do know is that as of Mar 1999 when the route was entered into climbingmoab.com, and I suspect for a lot longer, the last piece of fixed pro was a pin with a ring which people stood on, and then there were some spicey moves with possibly a .75 piece somewhere inside the crack. I had heard that this, along with the overall committiment, was the psychological crux of the climb. I would think someone looking at the picture in this thread could comment on whether it has changed recently. Frankly, even if the FA DID have a bunch of bolts, I'm still bummed because over time, those pins fell out and the climb became something different. IMO
And to the person who suggested we don't clip the bolt, yeah, you probably enjoy camping in your backyard cause it's "just like the real thing"
|
|
|
|
|
takeme
Oct 7, 2004, 2:00 AM
Post #36 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 7, 2003
Posts: 367
|
In reply to: I guess I really don't know that it's been retro-bolted from the FA because 1) I don't know exactly how many bolts Ed Webster put on it, and 2) I haven't climbed it. What I do know is that as of Mar 1999 when the route was entered into climbingmoab.com, and I suspect for a lot longer, the last piece of fixed pro was a pin with a ring which people stood on, and then there were some spicey moves with possibly a .75 piece somewhere inside the crack.
It's interesting to look at Ed's original topo for the route (posted on climbingmoab.com). It sure looks like the bolts go all the way to the top of the Ear. Of course, for an old-school climber like Ed, that short squeeze (and hence the gap in the bolts) would probably be so minor that he'd hardly even remember it, so it wouldn't show up that way on the topo.
Or maybe the topo is off 'cause Ed's brain was a bit fried from just having soloed one of the desert's most difficult climbs, in the searing heat, while taking a huge upside down fall in the process. Sick!
|
|
|
|
|
ambler
Oct 7, 2004, 2:25 AM
Post #37 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2002
Posts: 1690
|
In reply to: In reply to: I guess I really don't know that it's been retro-bolted from the FA because 1) I don't know exactly how many bolts Ed Webster put on it, and 2) I haven't climbed it. What I do know is that as of Mar 1999 when the route was entered into climbingmoab.com, and I suspect for a lot longer, the last piece of fixed pro was a pin with a ring which people stood on, and then there were some spicey moves with possibly a .75 piece somewhere inside the crack. It's interesting to look at Ed's original topo for the route (posted on climbingmoab.com). It sure looks like the bolts go all the way to the top of the Ear. Of course, for an old-school climber like Ed, that short squeeze (and hence the gap in the bolts) would probably be so minor that he'd hardly even remember it, so it wouldn't show up that way on the topo.
http://www.climbingmoab.com/...mrose_dihedrals.html
For those who don't know Mike, I'll just add that his observations should carry some weight; he's been a hard-core desert (and alpine, and wall) climber for more than three decades.
|
|
|
|
|
takeme
Oct 7, 2004, 2:42 AM
Post #38 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 7, 2003
Posts: 367
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: I guess I really don't know that it's been retro-bolted from the FA because 1) I don't know exactly how many bolts Ed Webster put on it, and 2) I haven't climbed it. What I do know is that as of Mar 1999 when the route was entered into climbingmoab.com, and I suspect for a lot longer, the last piece of fixed pro was a pin with a ring which people stood on, and then there were some spicey moves with possibly a .75 piece somewhere inside the crack. It's interesting to look at Ed's original topo for the route (posted on climbingmoab.com). It sure looks like the bolts go all the way to the top of the Ear. Of course, for an old-school climber like Ed, that short squeeze (and hence the gap in the bolts) would probably be so minor that he'd hardly even remember it, so it wouldn't show up that way on the topo. Whatever the story regarding aid/protection bolts, the new anchor bolts seem to be a great change. On ClimbingMoab.com, Mike Munger describes how the new anchors as well as the new climbing bolts bring down one of the desert's great climbs: http://www.climbingmoab.com/...mrose_dihedrals.html For those who don't know Mike, I'll just add that his observations should carry some weight; he's been a hard-core desert (and alpine, and wall) climber for more than three decades.
Yeah, I tend to agree with Mike's view of the new anchors. Of course, many tower routes coincide with good rap routes, so for those who haven't climbed Primrose before, these anchors won't necessarily seem out of character with desert adventure climbing. Still, when I climbed Primrose, the added commitment of not being able to just zip down the route in an uncomplicated fashion definitely made my experience more satisfying. As I recall there were some anchors, but nothing too confidence-inspiring.
|
|
|
|
|
tradmanclimbs
Oct 7, 2004, 2:45 AM
Post #39 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2003
Posts: 2599
|
from the topo it sure does look like ed drilld a ladder there origionaly? I do agree that adding fixed belays is bad as it removes the commitment level of the climb. I don't know the climb but it seems like if the drilled angles had fallen out of the ear years ago and it had become standard practice to free climb that section without the A1 ladder, that the origional fixed gear would have been grandfathered out of the picture?
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Oct 7, 2004, 2:53 AM
Post #40 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
For what it is worth, the supertopo shows a line of five bolts for the ear pitch.
|
|
|
|
|
bobd1953
Oct 7, 2004, 3:21 AM
Post #41 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941
|
I did the route in 1983 for the first time and thought the pins/bolts on the Ear pitch were ok. The pins and bolts were used for aid on the FA. Ed later came back with Steve Hong and freed the route. The route sees a lot traffic and upgrading the fixed protection doesn't bother me in the least. The rap off the tower used to go down the north face and wasn't that big of a deal. Thanks to who ever took the time to upgrade the protection.
As state before, Ed aid the ear pitch on the FA and there was at 5 fixed peices on that pitch in 1983.
|
|
|
|
|
beckerw
Oct 7, 2004, 4:23 AM
Post #42 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 23, 2002
Posts: 171
|
wow,
thanks bob. finally someone who has an opinion based on something more than blind faith.
|
|
|
|
|
on_sight_man
Oct 7, 2004, 11:51 AM
Post #43 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 11, 2002
Posts: 628
|
In reply to: The rap off the tower used to go down the north face and wasn't that big of a deal. Thanks to who ever took the time to upgrade the protection.
For me personally, the belay anchors don't mean as much though I fully understand and support the principle of not installing them. The rap before simply meant you were encouraged to finish the route or lose SOMETHING (committment).
In reply to: As state before, Ed aid the ear pitch on the FA and there was at 5 fixed peices on that pitch in 1983.
From climbingmoab.com
In reply to: There are 5 bolts and two drilled pins now. With the last two bolts above where the old ring pin was the run out has been eliminated.
There are now 7 pieces on this pitch, and the runout at the end has been eliminated. I'm also glad for rebolting (I understand the pins and stuff were getting pretty manky). But adding bolts or significantly changing their placement sucks.
|
|
|
|
|
takeme
Oct 7, 2004, 5:14 PM
Post #44 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 7, 2003
Posts: 367
|
In reply to: wow, thanks bob. finally someone who has an opinion based on something more than blind faith.
There are other people posting in this thread who have done the route, you know. Possibly even more recently.
What exactly was Bob's "opinion", anyway? That upgrading the fixed pro on the Ear doesn't bother him? Is there anybody posting to this thread who disagrees with that? I thought we were discussing whether or not the added bolts were retro-bolts (rather that re-bolts, i.e. an upgrade), and if so, how climbers feel about that. As far as I could tell, Bob's post didn't touch on that subject.
Not that I don't value your contributions, Bob. And yes, apparently I'm still thin-skinned.
|
|
|
|
|
jcinco
Oct 7, 2004, 5:37 PM
Post #45 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 395
|
In reply to: wow, thanks bob. finally someone who has an opinion based on something more than blind faith.
Ridiculous comment (or poor troll).
I've done the route. Why is Bob's opinion more valid? After all, Bob didn't say he'd been up the route since the alleged retrobolting.
In reply to: Thanks to who ever took the time to upgrade the protection.
That's an interesting stance to take, Bob. So if the reports are true (and it seems Mike is a credible source), and someone has retrobolted the chimney, then that is something you support? Its great that someone has upgraded the bolt ladder, but adding bolts to a heady section of 5.9 free climbing... a section that hundreds (or more) of mortal climbers have safely navigated? I find your support surprising coming from someone who has argued against such actions in the past.
-Joe
|
|
|
|
|
beckerw
Oct 7, 2004, 5:43 PM
Post #46 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 23, 2002
Posts: 171
|
the point isn't who has done the route most recently....rather who has done the route most historically. i think those opinions matter. i believe his opinion was that upgrading protection is good. i think he shied away from any opinion on addign bolts. however, i have learned that i lot of people squak about adding bolts, when the FA was done with protection in the same place. i think bob was trying to give a factual statement about how many bolts/pins were in place historically.
the bravado and machismo associated with doing "scary" climbs by limiting safe adn reliable protection amazes me. If people feel so strongly about it, skip it! why doesn't someone ask soony trotter if he felt like he had an easy way out when he skipped bolts on monkey face recently. skipping bolts is a personal statement just like free soloing.
climbers are the most reluctant people to actually adopt innovation. i think we are always just jealous that we didn't have the same bag of tricks.
|
|
|
|
|
on_sight_man
Oct 7, 2004, 6:08 PM
Post #47 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 11, 2002
Posts: 628
|
In reply to: the point isn't who has done the route most recently....rather who has done the route most historically. i think those opinions matter.
I agree, and he confirmed that for at least twenty years there have been five pieces there. It sounds like there are seven now (5 bolts and 2 pins). Bob, (or anyone) can you look at the picture posted on climbingmoab (reproduced here) and SEE whether there are bolts higher than they were?
In reply to: the bravado and machismo associated with doing "scary" climbs by limiting safe adn reliable protection amazes me. If people feel so strongly about it, skip it! why doesn't someone ask soony trotter if he felt like he had an easy way out when he skipped bolts on monkey face recently. skipping bolts is a personal statement just like free soloing.
This is trolling.
|
|
|
|
|
jcinco
Oct 7, 2004, 6:16 PM
Post #48 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 395
|
In reply to: the point isn't who has done the route most recently....rather who has done the route most historically. i think those opinions matter.
That's not what you said, though. You said everyone else's opinion was based on blind faith, implying that everyone else either hasn't climbed the route, or doesn't know the context of the situation.
In reply to: the bravado and machismo associated with doing "scary" climbs by limiting safe adn reliable protection amazes me. If people feel so strongly about it, skip it! why doesn't someone ask soony trotter if he felt like he had an easy way out when he skipped bolts on monkey face recently. skipping bolts is a personal statement just like free soloing.
Comparing Trotter's ascent of Monkey Face to the Primrose is comparing apples to oranges, and you know it.
OK, you live in Colorado, right? Should we put a bolt ladder on the runout of Jules Verne to make it safer? We could just tell everyone who has sacked it up and led it, as well as the people who aspire to lead the runout, to just skip the bolts if they don't like them.
|
|
|
|
|
bobd1953
Oct 7, 2004, 6:24 PM
Post #49 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 3941
|
In reply to: That's an interesting stance to take, Bob. So if the reports are true (and it seems Mike is a credible source), and someone has retrobolted the chimney, then that is something you support? Its great that someone has upgraded the bolt ladder, but adding bolts to a heady section of 5.9 free climbing... a section that hundreds (or more) of mortal climbers have safely navigated? I find your support surprising coming from someone who has argued against such actions in the past. -Joe
Joe-Look when I first did the route! I done three times total. I enjoyed each ascent. I am glad that someone took time and made the effort to upgraded the original fixed protection.
That should clear things up.
|
|
|
|
|
jsj42
Oct 7, 2004, 6:39 PM
Post #50 of 69
(9631 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 24, 2002
Posts: 374
|
In reply to: the bravado and machismo associated with doing "scary" climbs by limiting safe adn reliable protection amazes me. If people feel so strongly about it, skip it!
This view, expressed before and even in this very thread - never ceases to amaze me! I can only see how it must be either a) not thought out, or b) coming from someone who never does bold climbs. But to give you the benefit of the doubt, beckerw, perhaps you can explain how, for someone who's upset by a retrobolting (and therefore safer climb), just skipping the bolts would recreate the experience they are after?
I've met very few climbers who want to get injured or die, but I've met many bold climbers who do bold climbs. I'm one of them. We do it because it is a rewarding and thrilling experience physically AND mentally when we climb these climbs and succeed. Even moreso, in a case like Primrose Dihedrals, there is a satisfaction in knowing we are doing the climb with just the same points of protection the first ascentionist had (thus, in a sense, experiencing something similar to what he experienced). Yes, I acknowledge that even the old pins and bolts, when new, were probably not as good as what they've been replaced with today, and yes, I acknowledge that we have new technology - cams, shoes, etc. But, to say that adding a few bolts where they weren't before will make a climb safer for everyone, and for those who want the experience I'm talking about, they can just choose to skip them... well, that's just not right. What's the distinction? Generally, people will try to make a climb, even a scary one, as safe as possible. That means making use of the available pro. When I climbed Jules Verne, I made sure my gear before the long run out was as bomber as it could be, then I climbed it. I knew that what I did was similar to the experience that Wunsch must have had years ago. The fact is, adding fixed pro CHANGES the character of a climb. A single bolt would make Jules Verne a MUCH safer climb - you could say, "just skip the bolt if you want bold and dangerous, it's still Jules Verne with the bolt." I'd say, "Once a bolt is placed on that face the climb is no longer Jules Verne." Yes the moves are the same, but the "essence" is different. The same is true for Primrose Dihedrals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
