|
greatgarbanzo
Oct 21, 2002, 11:21 PM
Post #1 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2001
Posts: 360
|
This last weekend I did the F.A. of Piraņa 5.8 R. This route follows a traverse below a roof with very little pro.
I am thinking about giving it the "R" rate but I could not decide so I am leaving this to the RC.COMers...
The route climbs about 60feet with good pro, then traverses to the left 10 feet with no pro, a good #1 cam then 15 feet no pro, a #.75 cam then 20 more feet straight up with no pro but the last 20 feet are of 5.7.
What you guys think???
Here in Venezuela this "R" ratings are not used at all but I am used to them since I learned to climb at J-tree in Cal.
[ Este Mensaje fue editado por: greatgarbanzo el 2002-10-21 16:23 ]
|
|
|
|
|
josher
Oct 21, 2002, 11:37 PM
Post #2 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 21, 2002
Posts: 295
|
I climb at Joshua Tree all the time. To me "R" indicates "run-out" and per JT standards, the placements sound too close to be "R" rated.
Re-reading your post, maybe so. (I sure was a big help, huh?)
[ This Message was edited by: josher on 2002-10-21 16:39 ]
|
|
|
|
|
tanner
Oct 21, 2002, 11:40 PM
Post #3 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2002
Posts: 491
|
I'm not sure if that would be an R rating because its from the hights you said there is no chance of ground fall. Is the gear really good? If I would say PG-13
but they don't rate much in BC that way.
|
|
|
|
|
greatgarbanzo
Oct 21, 2002, 11:46 PM
Post #4 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2001
Posts: 360
|
There is absolutely no chance of hitting the deck IF THE PLACEMENT DOESNT BLOWS (which i think it wont happen.)
The thing is that 20 feet up with no pro is a potential 40 footer... on a #.75 cam.
Oh... by the way... I forgot an important piece of information... SANDSTONE is the rock we are talking about... bulletproof kind.
[ Este Mensaje fue editado por: greatgarbanzo el 2002-10-21 16:49 ]
|
|
|
|
|
greatgarbanzo
Oct 21, 2002, 11:53 PM
Post #5 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2001
Posts: 360
|
PLEASE, someone correct me if I am wrong... isnīt a potential ground fall a R/X rating?
|
|
|
|
|
jhwnewengland
Oct 22, 2002, 12:03 AM
Post #6 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 2, 2002
Posts: 470
|
Yeah, I'd say it merits the R rating in that it's run out 20 feet in one section. However, since the runout section of the route is 5.7, you may consider rating it 5.8 (5.7 R). That is what is done in several guidebooks I have. Whatever, it's R in my opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
wyclimber
Oct 22, 2002, 12:07 AM
Post #7 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 21, 1999
Posts: 78
|
Call it an 'R' and wait and see what happens. If others come and try the route and think it is runout and scary then they will probably agree. If not, then maybe it isn't. It sounds like there is some serious pucker factor going on though, so stay with your gut. Just remember once you have heard some feedback you may want to rethink things if many others are not in agreement with you.
|
|
|
|
|
greatgarbanzo
Oct 22, 2002, 4:49 AM
Post #8 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2001
Posts: 360
|
Out of 4 votes:
2 = Rate the thing "R"!!!.
1 = Donīt know.
+1 = Rate the thing PG-13.
---
4
|
|
|
|
|
bigwalling
Oct 22, 2002, 5:07 AM
Post #9 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 29, 2001
Posts: 728
|
I don't think that is R. I sometimes run it out that far(acctully farther) while passing pro placements. .75 cam is really good in most situations. I think of R as a climb with long falls on small gear(#3 stopper and below) or falls onto copperheads. X rated climbs mean you will surely die!
It really depends on who climbs your route. I'm becoming a bold climber. In fact I'm looking for a route I can protect with hooks and other marginal gear.
So I vote for no "R". If you have to ask it likely means it shouldn't have the R.
|
|
|
|
|
climbsomething
Oct 22, 2002, 5:08 AM
Post #10 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 30, 2002
Posts: 8588
|
I'm not an expert in this area, but it sounds like the last half induces some puckering... so I think you should be prudent and give it an R designation. "R" is a relative thing, but it would be a good heads-up for the next guy...
|
|
|
|
|
tanner
Oct 22, 2002, 5:13 AM
Post #11 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2002
Posts: 491
|
You should bolt it like crazy! THEN RATE IT G. I think that would be funny!
|
|
|
|
|
atg200
Oct 22, 2002, 1:46 PM
Post #12 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 4317
|
doesn't sound R to me - maybe PG or PG13(though the gunks guidebook is the only one i know of using those designations).
|
|
|
|
|
wigglestick
Oct 22, 2002, 2:26 PM
Post #13 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 27, 2001
Posts: 1235
|
To me "R" doesn't necessarily mean runout to an extreme. A route can be moderately runout and yet you risk a nasty fall onto a ledge or something and the route can still be called "R". The actual lengths of the runouts are irrelevant. There are sport climbs in France that have 40-50 runouts between bolts, yet a fall is clean and no chance for serious injury, hence no "R" rating. Each situation is different. It is the combination of the availabilty of pro, the quality of the pro, and the consequences of a fall on that pro that dictate whether something is "R" rated.
|
|
|
|
|
stevo
Oct 22, 2002, 4:11 PM
Post #14 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 99
|
In my opinion the climb doesn't warrant an R rating, as 20 feet above a good placement is not runout. If it was 20 feet above a bad cam behind a loose block then maybe it would deserve it. Most importantly it should reflect the attitude in the area, since people don't use it where you are, save it for more serious runouts. Ledge falls, ground falls, a series of poor placements may warrant it, but it is very subjective and you can do whatever you want.
But counter to that I have climbed mulitple routes with ledge fall potential that haven't recieved an R rating, and climbed super thin ice with 50 m ground fall potential that only got an R and not an X. I think a 50 m ground fall could kill you.
Do what you think it deserves, if it left a stain in your shorts give it an R.
|
|
|
|
|
tradklime
Oct 22, 2002, 4:20 PM
Post #15 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 2, 2002
Posts: 1235
|
Think of R as a fall with a high potential for serious injury. Think of X as a fall with a high potential of death.
|
|
|
|
|
esoteric1
Oct 22, 2002, 4:30 PM
Post #16 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 8, 2002
Posts: 705
|
well, on the traverse, if you blow it near the end will you pendulim into a ledge or dihedral/ i think if you blow it at the wrong spot and can get seriously hurt it deserves an r. its just a heads up isnt it/
|
|
|
|
|
stevematthys
Oct 22, 2002, 6:13 PM
Post #17 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 13, 2000
Posts: 1248
|
i would say give it the "R" rating so that so gumby does not jump on the route and then end up scared shitless or mabye get hurt
|
|
|
|
|
venezuela
Oct 22, 2002, 6:46 PM
Post #18 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 15, 2002
Posts: 69
|
epa great garbanzo....yo nunca he oido de usar la R o X en rutas a qui en venezuela...pero asi como la describes, creo que se merece la R.
Donde queda esa ruta? suena interesante...
Diego.
|
|
|
|
|
holmeslovesguinness
Oct 22, 2002, 7:24 PM
Post #19 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 10, 2002
Posts: 548
|
As has been said already, I think an R rating indicates the potential for injury due to a run out and/or poor protection. Since you established the route, you're the best one to judge that. Looking at the picture and your own description, it seems like an R rating *might* not be warranted, as it doesn't look like there are any nasty ledges or features you'd hit if you fell on that last section of the climb (assuming the pro is solid). That being said, I always get a bit nervous when I can't plug in a piece less than 10 feet from my last one, so certainly let people know that the pro gets thin towards the top.
|
|
|
|
|
radistrad
Oct 22, 2002, 8:14 PM
Post #20 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 25, 2002
Posts: 800
|
"R" generally means run out, but it is also an indication of a dangerous fall that is not a ground fall. It could be a run out where that if you fell you could bounce off of a ledge, swing into a corner. Even though the route over all has good pro there could be potential danger hiding, hence the "R"
-rad
|
|
|
|
|
fishypete
Oct 23, 2002, 9:24 AM
Post #21 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 5, 2002
Posts: 200
|
I have never seen "R" equated with run-out.
I have only ever seen it linked with the potential for a nasty fall with injury potential.
As was said earlier, even if there is a 40 foot runout, if it is a clean fall then I dont think there should be an "R" rating.
So in your situation, I would assess the broken-bones potential, not the run-out.
Cheers
Fishy.
|
|
|
|
|
dirtbag
Oct 23, 2002, 9:54 AM
Post #22 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 3, 2002
Posts: 54
|
As far as I know X and R designations are used only to indicate the potential for serious injury after or during a fall.
R - meaning, your probably gonna get screwed up.
X- meaning, your probably gonna die.
Do either of these apply - if no then drop the R. If yes then refer to above.
|
|
|
|
|
greatgarbanzo
Oct 24, 2002, 4:50 AM
Post #23 of 23
(3714 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 13, 2001
Posts: 360
|
O.K. the thing with this route is that is kind of slabby so if you fall you get hurt... and very bad because while you bounce on the wall you fall through a 4 feet roof just to hit the wall again after you go through it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
