Risk-free movement on rock is entertainment - not sport
There have been lots of good arguments on both sides of this debate, and I've found the topic to be both enlightening and entertaining - but this statement is so idiotic it boggles my mind.
Since when is risk the defining factor drawing a line between entertainment and sport? Is tennis not a sport because there's little risk?
The "it's not competition so it's not sport" argument at least holds a little water, because you're trying to compare to other sports, many of which contain a competitive element. But saying no risk = not a sport is just plain stupid. If sport climbing isn't a sport, neither is bouldering or trad or any other kind of climbing - the distinction has absolutely nothing to do with level of risk.
Joseph's quips about "entertainment" are completely devoid of content, from where I'm sitting.
As opposed to several years of your content which mainly show your ignorance of the essence of climbing.
The essential idea is that climbing without risk and technical skills is a far dimished affair from the real thing. Does it have a role in climbing, sure, but as a thing unto itself? You can make that decision, but when you do your are just kidding yourself if you think you are doing anything but a pale shadow of the real thing if all you experience is pre-placed, fixed protection.
Bullshit. You're the portrait of the Bitter Old Trad.
Nope, after 33 years I'm still putting up reasonably hard, fairly sketch, groundup, onsight trad routes and am simply protecting my turf and reminding folks there is way, way more to climbing than simply clipping bolts.
So you are admittedly, then, merely acting out of self-interest, rather than for the ethical reasons, like how the rock has value in its pristine state, that you pretend to espouse.
What you don't seem to get is that spouting "ethics" that the very people you are trying to influence think are embarrassingly archaic defeats the purpose you are trying to achieve.
Jay
The essential difference is my 'ethics' don't require the rock to be altered, yours do. But you, like a cigar smoker who can't imagine or fathom that anyone wouldn't like the smell of his cigar, just can't get your paw on the fact that every bolt exacts a price and represents a commodification of rock as simply another consumable. Fortunately one that is reversable.
The essential idea is that climbing without risk and technical skills is a far dimished affair from the real thing. Does it have a role in climbing, sure, but as a thing unto itself? You can make that decision, but when you do your are just kidding yourself if you think you are doing anything but a pale shadow of the real thing if all you experience is pre-placed, fixed protection.
You're like a parody of a climber from the 70s stuck in a time warp, except you're not a parody.
what was it? bullriding and race-car driving??? or was it mountain climbing and race car drving....
I'm pretty sure it was all three...
Of course, Hemingway was an alchoholic who underwent repeated electroshock treatment for mental issues and ended up taking his life with a shotgun to the face, so I'm not sure I'd be modeling my world view on his opinions.
what was it? bullriding and race-car driving??? or was it mountain climbing and race car drving....
I'm pretty sure it was all three...
Of course, Hemingway was an alchoholic who underwent repeated electroshock treatment for mental issues and ended up taking his life with a shotgun to the face, so I'm not sure I'd be modeling my world view on his opinions.
...volatile conflicts between disparate local climbing user sub-groups, there has been a need for something else.
Thanks for the new sig!
fracture wrote:
In these cases, I think a representative system of government is extremely reasonable (do you have an alternative suggestion we could discuss?).
Yah, I'm thinking that if we don't respect the concept of FA (not my def'n of anarchy btw) then we'll be dealing with a nice little totalitarian dictatorship i.e. the gov't will step in and all the "town hall" meetings and public forums in the world won't stop a bunch of non-climbers from dictating how and when we climb. But no... "a representative system of government" is a fallacy when dealing with special interest groups.
Hark and mark my words! The climbing license is around the corner. If thy permit is not stamp'd by the local magistrate then thou shall not lead climb here! Have you passed your official Yos belay test administered by the $6/hr summer student? Whoa unto us, thou shalt not rappel without your level 3 rappelling certification... And by these signs ye shall recognize the democratic system!
(This post was edited by macblaze on Jun 1, 2007, 6:34 PM)
Wtf? Since when? (My dictionaries say nothing of the sort.)
I'm using a definition along the lines of this one from Am. Her.: "Something that amuses, pleases, or diverts, especially a performance or show."
Yes. Works for me. (Where's "passive"?)
The part in bold. It refers to watching, not participating.
Do you need a dictionary for "especially", also? As I mentioned, my dictionary even lists "sport" as a synonym. Is sport passive? ;)
But I think the bigger problem is that you're not understanding how this works. It is quite possible for your (or my) dictionary to be wrong. The word means what people use it to mean. Good dictionaries try to describe the full range of usage as accurately and completely as possible, and how people use words is a scientific question, period. I think there is copious real use of the English word "entertainment" to describe interactive pastimes. (And I can produce some google search results for you if you really don't believe me, but you can probably also do it yourself.)
In reply to:
In reply to:
Well, for one thing, I don't know whether to actually believe you. (People are potentially fallible if asked to describe their own idiolect.)
Yeah, believe me. I don't consider something as "entertainment" when one is actively participating.
Sorry, I can't believe you. (And I predict you'll wince next time you catch yourself using the word to describe something interactive, like, say, posting on internet forums.)
Do you not consider video games entertainment? Remember, that's an important segment of the "entertainment industry". What about youtube (basically an interactive version of TV)? Writing blog entries? Reading wikipedia?
Can you enumerate what type of data, if it were produced or could be produced, would convince you that you're mistaken? (If not, I'd like to humbly suggest that you re-evaluate your position on this topic with a more rational and scientific eye.)
allow me to muddy the waters further by stating that prior to this post, I was not interacting nor participating, but was thoroughly entertained. Now that I have posted, I am interacting, but feel that my level of entertainment will plummet as I realize how big of a time waste it was to even write this paragraph. Please consider this the least helpful contribution to this otherwise stimulating english lesson. Any chance we can move this thread from "Forums: Climbing Disciplines: Sport Climbing " to " Forums: Waste of Time: You say tomato, I say fuck you." ??
Old climbers who are reading this should realize that there was thing commonly referred to as the "sport climbing revolution" that took place like two decades ago.
Jay
I'm glad it did.
Say J, if say some 'majority' of climbers votes to retro Bachar Yerian, are you seriously OK with that?
DMT
I've stated no opinion on retro-bolting, but to me, it's pretty straightforward: trad routes should be left in their original condition, unless the FAist consents to the change. On the other hand, a dangerously bolted sport route is a contradiction, and should be fixed, regardless of what the FAist thinks.
Jay
Thanks. I suspect you represent the vast majority of climbers with this sentiment. That's pretty much how I see it as well.
Cheers DMT
If the above statements hold true, I move to reclassify "sport" climbing as any route put up while on rappell. In doing so, this would also reclassify any bolted route established "ground-up" as a "traditional" route, free from any alteration by subsequent ascent "attempt" parties.
If clipping bolts on a route established ground-up gives one "snail-eye", perhaps one is not yet ready to attempt such a thing. Aspire to be something more. I mention this with B-Y in mind, of course, but there are probably a myriad of other climbs which would meet similar criteria.
Which is to say: Any route established ground-up should remain free of subsequent attempts to sanitize/sterilize the climbing "experience" for oneself or future parties, unless it is the express action of the FA. Notice I say "express action of the FA", meaning IMO it should require more than the FA's "blessing" to alter a route, it would require the FA's personal involvement in such an activity. Perhaps in doing so they will remember why more bolts were not placed, and perhaps their accompaniment might gain a greater appreciation for why the route was bolted the way it was.
what was it? bullriding and race-car driving??? or was it mountain climbing and race car drving....
I'm pretty sure it was all three...
Of course, Hemingway was an alchoholic who underwent repeated electroshock treatment for mental issues and ended up taking his life with a shotgun to the face, so I'm not sure I'd be modeling my world view on his opinions.
I bet his feet stunk too. But the point remains, the concept of sport = risk has been with us for quite some time old chap. Quite some time. Prior to Hemmingway's Bullfighting, race car driving and mountaineering thing, but it was all I could think of on the spot.
Sporting, don't you think?
(why do they say, 'let the GAMES...... begin...' huh.... HUH????)
If the above statements hold true, I move to reclassify "sport" climbing as any route put up while on rappell. In doing so, this would also reclassify any bolted route established "ground-up" as a "traditional" route, free from any alteration by subsequent ascent "attempt" parties.
If clipping bolts on a route established ground-up gives one "snail-eye", perhaps one is not yet ready to attempt such a thing. Aspire to be something more. I mention this with B-Y in mind, of course, but there are probably a myriad of other climbs which would meet similar criteria.
Which is to say: Any route established ground-up should remain free of subsequent attempts to sanitize/sterilize the climbing "experience" for oneself or future parties, unless it is the express action of the FA. Notice I say "express action of the FA", meaning IMO it should require more than the FA's "blessing" to alter a route, it would require the FA's personal involvement in such an activity. Perhaps in doing so they will remember why more bolts were not placed, and perhaps their accompaniment might gain a greater appreciation for why the route was bolted the way it was.
I disagree since the first three routes I put up all went ground up drilling from hooks and stances with multiple changes of underwear. They are sport. I did this only because a few years back Ken Nichols went on a bolt chopping spree. I wanted to do it in a style that wouldn't get erased. All my subsequent route are rap bolted. I don't want people changing anything without my permission. Have I made mistakes? Yes. Others have found different sequence that required a different bolt position, so I change it. Plugging the old hole(s) with epoxy and rock dust. Out of 20+ routes I've altered 2. One of which I removed a bolt because there were just too many. It wasn't enjoyable. Now it feels like your climbing not toproping.
As for the term "sport". It's use in climbing is a lot like sex, as in "sport sex". Where there is much commitment or attachment. The opportunity presence itself so you take advantage of it.
Out of 20+ routes I've altered 2. One of which I removed a bolt because there were just too many. It wasn't enjoyable. Now it feels like your climbing not toproping.
...and how many of the remaining 18 have been altered w/o your knowledge or permission?
Personally, I don't think routes established ground-up should be altered by anyone but the FA, as I stated above, and then I imagine it to be done in a manner similar to conditions of the route's original establishment IE: while on the sharp end.
Rap-bolted routes are another animal all together, IMHO, especially routes which are installed by one guy then FA'd by another. Bolts may need to be relocated, some bolts may be unnecessary... I'm willing to give rap-bolted routes a little more latitude in their adjustments, but I'd be willing to bet that few of them would require additional bolts, as they generally tend to be fairly intelligently installed, depending on who's operating the bolt gun of course.
This opinion doesn't mean that I think rap-bolted routes should be changed willy-nilly, merely that I would give them considerably more opportunity for subsequent climbers to provide relevant input to the protection scheme than anything installed ground-up. Even then, the adjustments should be made by the original bolt installer, as they generally tend to take pride in their work and would be the most suited to doing a quality job.
This is only my opinion, I'm sure you will find 99 other opinions which stink just as bad as mine.
Wtf? Since when? (My dictionaries say nothing of the sort.)
I'm using a definition along the lines of this one from Am. Her.: "Something that amuses, pleases, or diverts, especially a performance or show."
Yes. Works for me. (Where's "passive"?)
The part in bold. It refers to watching, not participating.
Do you need a dictionary for "especially", also? As I mentioned, my dictionary even lists "sport" as a synonym. Is sport passive? ;)
Do you need a dictionary for "synonym?"
But I think the bigger problem is that you're not understanding how this works. It is quite possible for your (or my) dictionary to be wrong. The word means what people use it to mean. Then it seems that it is you who doesn't understand "how this works," because I'm telling you what the word means to me. I would never think of my climbing as entertainment. "I climb for entertainment"? It sounds wrong. I would never think say that. I climb because I enjoy it and find it satisfying. I go see Woody Allen movies for entertainment.
In reply to:
Can you enumerate what type of data, if it were produced or could be produced, would convince you that you're mistaken?
I can't be mistaken, by your own argument, because the word means to me what it means to me. I do agree with you though that playing modern video games is entertainment, but that's because they are more like watching movies than engaging in a physical sport.
that would lead us to think that a consensus has arrived with sport developers.....
proving that your "majority" does not quite agree with the super bum mentality you and your fellow yesteryear traddies are crying for.
not in the actual real world actions taking place.
i guess there are still a few old madmen who like to make runouts.
The one thing about doing runouts... eventually someone will fall, and i bet anyone who falls on an unsafely bolted runout will wish there had been an extra "dogging" bolt in the wall rather than a pin in the ankle or worse
why do tard climbers constantly misunderstand the idea of sport bolting??
NO ONE IS ASKING FOR AN EXTRA DOGGING BOLT ON ESTABLISHED CLIMBS
NO ONE IS ASKING FOR GRID BOLTING EVERY 4 FEET OF AVAILABLE ROCK
all we are talking about is safely bolting sport routes.
how simple is that?
so save your purist ethics we are talking about drills here ok?
its not like we are shaping the line with hammers...
pay attention here, spurt climber: the OP was in regard to a "poorly" bolted climb, with bolts installed at distances which gave the OP snail-eye. per his suggestion, we have shouted down his request that we give the blessing to add bolts to a line which few people have enough sack to attempt, or so it might seem. This may have been done under the assumption that in the days of yore, climbs were installed from the sharp end of the rope, and that this climb might have been one of them.
The FA party was split in its decision, ergo there is no consensus on the right of subsequent parties to fuck-up the line by adding bolts.
There have been multiple opinions offered regarding the line, some reasonable (leave the line alone or TR it till the sack appears), some well-intended (form a climbers alliance bolting commmittee to ensure over-bolted lines) others not so reasonable (retro-bolt it to make it more appealing to the sackless dweebs so common to the entry-levels of the sport these days).
are you on the same page now?
good.
The summary from where I sit:
Fuck ANY Retro-bolter who alters a line put up on lead, unless they were the FA. Period. Additional bolts will be chopped, and rightly so.
Rap-bolted routes may offer a bit more lattitude, but still should not be altered without the blessing of the FAist or route developer.
...are we CRYSTAL?
(This post was edited by stymingersfink on Jun 2, 2007, 1:26 AM)
Out of 20+ routes I've altered 2. One of which I removed a bolt because there were just too many. It wasn't enjoyable. Now it feels like your climbing not toproping.
...and how many of the remaining 18 have been altered w/o your knowledge or permission?
Personally, I don't think routes established ground-up should be altered by anyone but the FA, as I stated above, and then I imagine it to be done in a manner similar to conditions of the route's original establishment IE: while on the sharp end.
Rap-bolted routes are another animal all together, IMHO, especially routes which are installed by one guy then FA'd by another. Bolts may need to be relocated, some bolts may be unnecessary... I'm willing to give rap-bolted routes a little more latitude in their adjustments, but I'd be willing to bet that few of them would require additional bolts, as they generally tend to be fairly intelligently installed, depending on who's operating the bolt gun of course.
This opinion doesn't mean that I think rap-bolted routes should be changed willy-nilly, merely that I would give them considerably more opportunity for subsequent climbers to provide relevant input to the protection scheme than anything installed ground-up. Even then, the adjustments should be made by the original bolt installer, as they generally tend to take pride in their work and would be the most suited to doing a quality job.
This is only my opinion, I'm sure you will find 99 other opinions which stink just as bad as mine.
~Sty
This I would agree with for the most part. Althought one FA's balance 'tween safety and seasoning my be different than of some 'Gym Rats' or 'Makita Come Lately'.
I hate to say this 'cause some nOOb will take this as a liscence to drill. Readjusting of bolts say to make the line straighter, to keep the rope out of the way of the climbing, or to make clipping easier is OK under certain situations. Make all possible efforts to contact the FA. If this is impossible. It must be considered, reconsidered, slept on, discussed with more people who frequent the crag and in particular the guys/gals who actually put up routes there. This is just for a simple readjustment.
Now if we're talking adding another bolt. This is way more serious. Extra thought should be given, above and beyond the thoughts I listed above. One has to get the opinion of more than just their motley crew of quickdraw slinging dogs, way more. Has the route been onsighted by others. What do they think?
Just because I'm too scared to do a route doesn't mean I would consider bring it down to my ability. I would have probably/definitely put it up in a diferent style but I didn't get there first so I'll just let it be.
This is a sensitive topic that has more than safety to question. It's a Directer's Cut. I just hate edited for content, alotted time and formatted to fit this screen.
I'd say that if a climber has never put up a route they shouldn't start by altering others.
I can say that my climbs are unaltered by others. The climbing comunity is relatively small when compaired to other activities, atleast here. The Equippeur[fr.] comunity is even smaller so we know who's doing what, where and when.
19 /
16%
