|
|
|
|
whistleblower
Dec 23, 2003, 3:09 AM
Post #51 of 84
(33506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2003
Posts: 41
|
In reply to: *On the other hand a 5.12d route that is 150 feet long--with no rests (endurance type route) may indeed have no single move harder than V3 or so.* Curt. There's no such thing as a 150' 12d with no rests. Somewhere up there, there's gonna be a shakeout. A 150' 12d with no rests would be 5.14 or something. This is like when you were spraying about Bachar soloing 2000' of 5.11 in one day, it makes me think you don't really understand how routes are rated...
Kalcario, did you even read what Curt wrote? He was saying that a 150' long 5.12d route may have no single move harder than 5.11+ (V3). Couldn't this also be said as, "a 150' 11+ with no rests would be 5.12d or so?"
When you say that "a 150' 12d with no rests would be 5.14 or something," aren't you saying the EXACT same thing as him?
It seems to me that there are two ways to grade routes:
1) Grade it according to its hardest move.
Or 2) Grade it according to the overall effort required to do the climb.
Either one is silly in my opinion. The first favors power the second favors endurance.
You could argue using method one: This way you will know that on a 5.12a climb there will be at least one, perhaps many, moves of 5.12a in difficulty. First ascensionists, guidebooks, your buddy who just got on it... they can then qualify whether the route has a brief crux or is sustained.
You could also argue method two: An example... Take the famous El Matador at Devil's Tower. It is rated 10d/11a but supposedly "no move is harder than 5.9 - there's just 150' of them. Well, I'm willing to bet serious cash that even an uber-fit 5.9 max climber will not be able to do this climb. So this method of rating is good also because it tells the climber what they can expect (an easy or a difficult experience) before they get on the climb.
So which method is correct? DUH. Neither. There aren't RULES in climbing - especially not in grading climbs! Every guidebook I've seen has a big disclaimer about this on the front page.
My personal preference? You can try to convince me till I'm blue in the face that a climb should be rated according to the OVERALL effort required (method 2), but when I do first ascents I would still grade according to the hardest move. As somebody else quoted Tony Yaniro as saying, without the power to do the single crux move, endurance is meaningless. I personally like to know how hard that single crux move is before I step on a climb.
|
|
|
|
|
axewielder
Dec 24, 2003, 12:47 AM
Post #52 of 84
(33506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2003
Posts: 91
|
I think that that "bouldering 3 letter grades higher than redpoint" thing works pretty well
however, if you don't work on the boulder problem as much as one would on a sport climb, it wouldn't work because that wouldn't be "well-rounded" climbing; the idea is supposed to apply to "well-rounded" climbers
im assuming you might work harder on sport climbs than boulder problems...
Anyway, i've redpointed 5.11c and V7; that is pretty messed up but I think I just haven't worked on single sport climbs enough, just working on them for a day or so
time to stop babbling
|
|
|
|
|
axewielder
Dec 24, 2003, 12:49 AM
Post #53 of 84
(33506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 23, 2003
Posts: 91
|
sry, i was replying to something earler, i didn't quote
|
|
|
|
|
devilontheloose
Apr 2, 2006, 11:03 PM
Post #54 of 84
(33506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 28, 2005
Posts: 6
|
I Boulder V5-7 and can lead 5.11 sport and 5.9-5.10 trad.
so these things are not comparable in that sense. add to that the idea that because i climb in Alaska its so much different than if i climbed in Red rock or J tree or anywhere else for that matter.
|
|
|
|
|
bler
Apr 3, 2006, 10:12 PM
Post #55 of 84
(33506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 22, 2004
Posts: 302
|
all i see here is blah blah blah..
who gives a crap about ratings, they are generalized and usually not as percise as people expect them to be..
anyone who knows anything about bouldering development knows that ratings = generalized difficulty..
i hate people who wax for days on 'gee, that felt like a v4+, but it seems like a v4++, but really joe schmoe said its a v5--, but a v4+ and a v5- means that its a v7, get it?'
|
|
|
|
|
mikej
Apr 3, 2006, 10:21 PM
Post #56 of 84
(33506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 7, 2006
Posts: 210
|
Die thread DIE! :deadhorse:
|
|
|
|
|
ccox
Apr 3, 2006, 11:38 PM
Post #57 of 84
(33506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 13, 2006
Posts: 48
|
All things considered, grade comparison charts are accurate. I concur: Die Thread Die!
|
|
|
|
|
billcoe_
Apr 4, 2006, 5:56 AM
Post #58 of 84
(33506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 30, 2002
Posts: 4694
|
OK, Die, but lets revive it in 2009, 3 year hence. :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
rocketsocks
Apr 4, 2006, 8:06 AM
Post #59 of 84
(33506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 11, 2006
Posts: 179
|
As others have pointed out, climb difficulty is multi-dimensional due to variations in skill set, strength, flexability, endurance, height, weight, etc. among climbers. It is mathematically impossible to create a fully consistent ordering system for anything multi-dimensional. You can create ordering systems, sure, but they will always have some weak point or inconsistency.
Comparing bouldering difficulty vs. route difficulty is just a reflection of the general difficulty of comparing the difficulty of one route to any other route. You can try, you can even do a good job, but it will never, ever, ever be 100% consistent.
It's almost a shame that a numbering system is used, it gives an air of accuracy and precision that just isn't, and can't be, there.
|
|
|
|
|
jboulderct
Apr 4, 2006, 12:29 PM
Post #60 of 84
(33506 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 31, 2006
Posts: 25
|
climb for the lines and and moves not the rating. :shock:
|
|
|
|
|
sevrdhed
Apr 4, 2006, 1:00 PM
Post #61 of 84
(33508 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 5, 2004
Posts: 923
|
Man, thread resurrection like mad! This is a good idea. I'm going to start browsing posts originating 5 years ago, and then reply by spraying like a skunk about my grades.
Steve
P.S. V8 5.12 booyah!
|
|
|
|
|
me_lad
Apr 4, 2006, 2:16 PM
Post #62 of 84
(33508 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 26, 2003
Posts: 114
|
Man,
I started this thread 5 years ago and people are still posting!!! I only asked as i was new to America and a complete gumby. All i knew what VS,HVS 5a, etc was, and have never heard of V grades :?
This was answered within the first 2 posts :)
grade on dudes!
|
|
|
|
|
grateful1
Apr 14, 2006, 8:31 PM
Post #63 of 84
(33508 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 14, 2006
Posts: 9
|
The V comes from the last name of this guy who was bouldering in Hueco way back in the day. I can't remember his name, but that's sort of why Hueco is sort of the Yosemite of bouldering.
|
|
|
|
|
nfowler50
May 7, 2008, 5:18 AM
Post #64 of 84
(10721 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 26, 2008
Posts: 22
|
need a scale where
a certain YDS grade = this V grade crux
|
|
|
|
|
brian.haffner
May 18, 2008, 10:41 PM
Post #65 of 84
(10614 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2008
Posts: 4
|
[quote] ps. I also would like to add that I think the chart farther up this thread by "Offwidthclimber" is pretty accurate. It seems to be about the same as the conversion chart that I supplied John Sherman and appears in his book "Stone Crusade." [/quote]
Dude - you gave John Sherman a conversion chart?! That's pretty funny, considering he invented the V scale.
|
|
|
|
|
subantz
Nov 18, 2009, 8:00 PM
Post #66 of 84
(10301 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 7, 2007
Posts: 1247
|
Your wish is my command 2009 and its back.
It will never die. If so see you in 2012!
|
|
|
|
|
subantz
Nov 18, 2009, 8:01 PM
Post #67 of 84
(10301 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 7, 2007
Posts: 1247
|
[quote "billcoe_"]OK, Die, but lets revive it in 2009, 3 year hence. :lol:[/quote]
Here are my marching orders for the day. I have a commitment here BILLY OH BILLLLLLY
|
|
|
|
|
lostlazy
Nov 18, 2009, 8:27 PM
Post #68 of 84
(10293 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 29, 2004
Posts: 136
|
What's bouldering ? A red-line comes up under it, so I know it's not a word...I'm confused...
|
|
|
|
|
Bag11s
Nov 18, 2009, 11:48 PM
Post #69 of 84
(10238 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 8, 2009
Posts: 98
|
I apologize in advance for feeding a dead horse.
I am a climber that plateaued for over fifteen years: Here's my experience based on quite a few boulders and routes climbed every year:
No more than V5 problems, maximum- when I’m in my best fitness.
No more than 12c sport, maximum- when I’m in my best fitness.
I also commonly see V2 through V4 boulder problems on 11d-12b routes.
Up to V5, my experience is that the two scales relate remarkably well.
This year a new bouldering gym opened near my house so my plan is to boulder methodically all winter and see if I can make a consistent breakthrough of (ideally) two V grades, and see how that translates in my climbing next year. Even in a few months at this gym, I have noticed improvements in power, technique and on-sight bouldering ability.
|
|
|
|
|
subantz
Nov 19, 2009, 5:01 PM
Post #70 of 84
(10196 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 7, 2007
Posts: 1247
|
I like V4 problems. I can climb rocks> Am I a noob. Help
|
|
|
|
|
sp00ki
Nov 19, 2009, 10:44 PM
Post #71 of 84
(10175 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 2, 2009
Posts: 552
|
geckobean1 wrote: I think offwidthclimber's scale is right. So far the hardest i have climbed is 5.11, and bouldered V2. Which by his chart are equal.
This is pretty much it.
When you climb routes primarily, you will boulder much lower; when you boulder primarily, you will climb routes much lower.
To me, V2 is an onsight, but 5.11 isn't happening, period. You probably see 5.11 the way i see V4+, and V2 the way i see a 5.9.
These comparisons are typically made by those who climb both a lot, which is going to be more accurate than those who climb one discipline more than the other.
(This post was edited by sp00ki on Nov 19, 2009, 10:47 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Nov 19, 2009, 11:41 PM
Post #72 of 84
(10151 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
brian.haffner wrote: [quote] ps. I also would like to add that I think the chart farther up this thread by "Offwidthclimber" is pretty accurate. It seems to be about the same as the conversion chart that I supplied John Sherman and appears in his book "Stone Crusade." [/quote] Dude - you gave John Sherman a conversion chart?! That's pretty funny, considering he invented the V scale.
So, when you look at the grade conversion chart in the back of Stone Crusade and it says "adapted from a compilation by Curt Shannon," what do you think that means?
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
jbone
Nov 19, 2009, 11:51 PM
Post #73 of 84
(10148 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 30, 2002
Posts: 463
|
You can have a V4 in a 5.12 but you can't have a 5.12 in a V4.
Bouldering grades are like atoms where route climbing grades are molecules.
It would be easier if beta for route climbing consisted of the series of bouldering grades you experience throughout the line, but when you start taking climbing that seriously you lose all the fun.
Every BP is V4, thats what I learned in Hueco.
|
|
|
|
|
USnavy
Nov 20, 2009, 5:40 AM
Post #74 of 84
(10117 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 6, 2007
Posts: 2667
|
kalcario wrote: A 150' 12d with no rests would be 5.14 or something.
Maybe if every move was 5.12d but otherwise not. My current project is rated 5.12d. It’s about 75 - 80 feet long and it offers a rest about 8 feet up and another about 60 feet up. Other than that there are no reasonable rests. The first 20 feet is sustained mid 5.12 with a few legitimate 5.12d moves on ultra small and highly technical crimps. The next 40 feet is sustained 10+ to 11- on slightly overhanging sloapers. Then the final 15 feet is the second crux, 5.11c. The best climbers we have are working this route and ALL of them get completely destroyed trying it. By the time we hit the final 11c crux we are practically about to pass out from exhaustion and extreme pump. But despite the fact that you go from 5.12+ moves to 40 more feet of 5.11 over sloping and slightly overhanging moves, the route is still rated 5.12d and I agree with its rating. There are three people that have redpointed it. One rates it 5.12c/d, one rates it 5.12d, the last rated it 5.13a, and I think its 5.12d.
(This post was edited by USnavy on Nov 20, 2009, 5:46 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
subantz
Nov 20, 2009, 6:03 AM
Post #75 of 84
(10102 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 7, 2007
Posts: 1247
|
Details curt DETAILS!!!!!
What does it mean. Only you the old wise one can explain to us
Please enlighten the masses!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
