|
ClimbinBob
Jan 26, 2008, 7:37 PM
Post #2 of 172
(8172 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 17, 2007
Posts: 63
|
 Angry,
Why do always sound so bitter in your posts? Maybe you should change your climbing name to Asshole!
|
|
|
|
|
zeke_sf
Jan 26, 2008, 7:47 PM
Post #5 of 172
(8144 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2006
Posts: 18730
|
epoch wrote: ClimbinBob wrote: Angry, Why do always sound so bitter in your posts? Maybe you should change your climbing name to Asshole! No, Zeke is the asshole.
Get it straight, chump! I'm the asstrohole, named so both after my personality as well as a moderate climb in Yosemite.
|
|
|
|
|
epoch
Moderator
Jan 26, 2008, 7:48 PM
Post #6 of 172
(8144 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2005
Posts: 32163
|
In all seriousness, though, the definition of moderate as it applies to climbing is a subjective term that, unless proper data was collected from ALL climbers on the planet wouldn't properly be defined.
Your vague description of a typical bell that would be used in statistics really isn't good for a valid argument, as your definition of moderate climb and mine are two totally different grades. I know that what I consider at the edge of my mean is not what you consider at your edge.
R,
~weekend warrior
|
|
|
|
|
epoch
Moderator
Jan 26, 2008, 7:49 PM
Post #7 of 172
(8140 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2005
Posts: 32163
|
zeke_sf wrote: epoch wrote: ClimbinBob wrote: Angry, Why do always sound so bitter in your posts? Maybe you should change your climbing name to Asshole! No, Zeke is the asshole. Get it straight, chump! I'm the asstrohole, named so both after my personality as well as a moderate climb in Yosemite.
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Jan 26, 2008, 7:52 PM
Post #8 of 172
(8135 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
epoch wrote: In all seriousness, though, the definition of moderate as it applies to climbing is a subjective term that, unless proper data was collected from ALL climbers on the planet wouldn't properly be defined. Your vague description of a typical bell that would be used in statistics really isn't good for a valid argument, as your definition of moderate climb and mine are two totally different grades. I know that what I consider at the edge of my mean is not what you consider at your edge. R, ~weekend warrior
I'm not talking about me. I know I'm fucking sweet.
Throughout many years of observation and guide book flipping I have seen that most climbs are in the 5.9 to 5.11 area. As are most climbers.
Even you, Epoch, I doubt that 5.2 to 5.7 represents the majority of your climbing.
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Jan 26, 2008, 7:53 PM
Post #9 of 172
(8131 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
Did you censor my post you mod nazi?
|
|
|
|
|
epoch
Moderator
Jan 26, 2008, 7:59 PM
Post #10 of 172
(8119 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2005
Posts: 32163
|
angry wrote: epoch wrote: In all seriousness, though, the definition of moderate as it applies to climbing is a subjective term that, unless proper data was collected from ALL climbers on the planet wouldn't properly be defined. Your vague description of a typical bell that would be used in statistics really isn't good for a valid argument, as your definition of moderate climb and mine are two totally different grades. I know that what I consider at the edge of my mean is not what you consider at your edge. R, ~weekend warrior I'm not talking about me. I know I'm fucking sweet. Throughout many years of observation and guide book flipping I have seen that most climbs are in the 5.9 to 5.11 area. As are most climbers. Even you, Epoch, I doubt that 5.2 to 5.7 represents the majority of your climbing.
Considering that I am one of those .10- to .12- climbers I agree with you that the definition of moderate is not going to to necessarily entail grades from 5.2 to 5.7. In most books those grades are considered "easy" grades and by tradition are reserved for newer climbers.
Though by a strict definition, moderate for me is 5.9.
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Jan 26, 2008, 8:02 PM
Post #12 of 172
(8110 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
It's too warm and sunny here to go climb.
I took advantage of the weather yesterday and got on rock, I discovered that ice climbing is just a great way to get out of shape in the winter.
Seriously.
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Jan 26, 2008, 8:17 PM
Post #13 of 172
(8101 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
epoch wrote: In all seriousness, though, the definition of moderate as it applies to climbing is a subjective term that, unless proper data was collected from ALL climbers on the planet wouldn't properly be defined.
It shouldn't be terribly difficult to figure out.
At one end, there's 5.0. The other end has 5.15.
5.7, thus would be half way between. Go two number grades on either side, and moderate becomes 5.5 to 5.9.
I suppose one COULD, were they so inclined, work the same method with the letter sub-grades (5.11c, .12b, etc.) I'm not so inclined, though. And then we'd have to argue over the variances between the "+/- system" (5.11-) vis a vis the letter sub-grades.
For me, I consider anything over 5.10 to be in the realm of "harder." Beyond 5.12 is "gecko/human hybrid mutant" territory. Below 5.7 is easy.
That's just me, though. Disclaimer applies.*
*Your mileage might vary, void where prohibited by law, Vermont residents add 6% sales tax. The views expressed in this post are the author's alone and do not represent the views of the author's employer, friends or family. These messages may contain information that is confidential, privileged, vulgar, or unsuitable for overly sensitive persons with low self-esteem, no sense of humor, or irrational religious beliefs. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution or copying of this post is not authorized (either explicitly or implicitly) and constitutes an irritating social faux pas. Unless the word absquatulation has been used in its correct context somewhere other than in this disclaimer it does not have any legal or grammatical use and may be ignored. No animals were harmed in the creation of this post, although that tomcat next door is living on borrowed time, let me tell you. If you found this post in error, please add nutmeg and two lightly beaten egg whites. Place in a warm oven for 40 minutes. Whisk briefly and let stand for two hours before icing. Now, I sense my audience tires of the babbling and it is time to absquatulate. Exit, stage right.
(This post was edited by reno on Jan 26, 2008, 8:22 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Jan 26, 2008, 8:27 PM
Post #14 of 172
(8087 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
I thought about it that way and it doesn't hold up.
Mostly because there is a bigger difference between 10a and 10d than there is between 5.4 and 5.7. Crunching the numbers just isn't going to work.
You need to look at what climbs there are and what people are climbing.
I think these easy grades are called moderates to keep from saying easy. Easy connotes easy, and well we just can't have that. I do the same thing, I only call routes 5.11+ and harder easy, because I'm an asshole as pointed out earlier.
|
|
|
|
|
epoch
Moderator
Jan 26, 2008, 8:31 PM
Post #15 of 172
(8082 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2005
Posts: 32163
|
reno wrote: epoch wrote: In all seriousness, though, the definition of moderate as it applies to climbing is a subjective term that, unless proper data was collected from ALL climbers on the planet wouldn't properly be defined. It shouldn't be terribly difficult to figure out. At one end, there's 5.0. The other end has 5.15. 5.7, thus would be half way between. Go two number grades on either side, and moderate becomes 5.5 to 5.9. I suppose one COULD, were they so inclined, work the same method with the letter sub-grades (5.11c, .12b, etc.) I'm not so inclined, though. And then we'd have to argue over the variances between the "+/- system" (5.11-) vis a vis the letter sub-grades. For me, I consider anything over 5.10 to be in the realm of "harder." Beyond 5.12 is "gecko/human hybrid mutant" territory. Below 5.7 is easy. That's just me, though. Disclaimer applies.* * Your mileage might vary, void where prohibited by law, Vermont residents add 6% sales tax. The views expressed in this post are the author's alone and do not represent the views of the author's employer, friends or family. These messages may contain information that is confidential, privileged, vulgar, or unsuitable for overly sensitive persons with low self-esteem, no sense of humor, or irrational religious beliefs. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, distribution or copying of this post is not authorized (either explicitly or implicitly) and constitutes an irritating social faux pas. Unless the word absquatulation has been used in its correct context somewhere other than in this disclaimer it does not have any legal or grammatical use and may be ignored. No animals were harmed in the creation of this post, although that tomcat next door is living on borrowed time, let me tell you. If you found this post in error, please add nutmeg and two lightly beaten egg whites. Place in a warm oven for 40 minutes. Whisk briefly and let stand for two hours before icing. Now, I sense my audience tires of the babbling and it is time to absquatulate. Exit, stage right.
Take the hardest grade you've ever climbed and the lowest grade you could do. Find the mid point.
That is what I did to figure out my median. Which would give me a moderate range of 5.8 to 5.10b
|
|
|
|
|
moditup
Jan 26, 2008, 8:35 PM
Post #16 of 172
(8074 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 7, 2006
Posts: 221
|
angry wrote: Throughout many years of observation and guide book flipping I have seen that most climbs are in the 5.9 to 5.11 area. As are most climbers.
I don't think most climbers are 5.9 to 5.11. Maybe most devoted climbers, who get out every weekend are, but I'd say 'most' climbers are one-a-month kinda people. When I go out looking for "moderates" to climb, I'm looking for 5.7-5.8. Then again, in Jtree I look for 5.6, in Tahoe I look for 5.9, and in Vegas I look for my pants. Has anyone seen my pants?
I don't think you can come to a conclusion about the average skill level of 'most' climbers and actually the best estimate would be to analyze skills in a gym (although more precisely a conglomerate of gyms around the country). Although obviously they aren't the same as outdoors, I'd say that the differences between grades is pretty close.
When is it my turn to be the astrohole? Zeke hurt his widdle liddle finger pretending to boulder. What have I told you man? You have to train for that. Did you remember to take off your shirt and put on your beanie? Let's go slacklining so we can increase our finger strength.
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Jan 26, 2008, 8:39 PM
Post #17 of 172
(8068 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
That will skew everyones answer to the low end. Of course a 5.10 climber can get up routes easier than that, duh.
There is the whole take a letter grade off the easiest route you've fallen off in the last 6 months idea. That makes me about a 10d climber I think.
I'm not talking about your personal mid grade though, I'm talking about the entire communities mid grade and why that mid grade is called stout, tough, serious, committing, or pretty hard.
To recap
Intermediate = Moderate = 5.9-5.11
Easy equals < 5.9
Of course there are exceptions that make easy climbing seem hard, these generally include lightning, loose rocks, ninja's, yeti, snowstorms, and oatmeal.
|
|
|
|
|
Arrogant_Bastard
Jan 26, 2008, 8:50 PM
Post #18 of 172
(8058 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2007
Posts: 19994
|
epoch wrote: reno wrote: epoch wrote: In all seriousness, though, the definition of moderate as it applies to climbing is a subjective term that, unless proper data was collected from ALL climbers on the planet wouldn't properly be defined. It shouldn't be terribly difficult to figure out. At one end, there's 5.0. The other end has 5.15. 5.7, thus would be half way between. Go two number grades on either side, and moderate becomes 5.5 to 5.9. I suppose one COULD, were they so inclined, work the same method with the letter sub-grades (5.11c, .12b, etc.) I'm not so inclined, though. And then we'd have to argue over the variances between the "+/- system" (5.11-) vis a vis the letter sub-grades. For me, I consider anything over 5.10 to be in the realm of "harder." Beyond 5.12 is "gecko/human hybrid mutant" territory. Below 5.7 is easy. That's just me, though. Take the hardest grade you've ever climbed and the lowest grade you could do. Find the mid point.
Ok, 5.3+. Now what?
|
|
|
|
|
microbarn
Jan 26, 2008, 9:00 PM
Post #19 of 172
(8048 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 12, 2004
Posts: 5920
|
dictionary.com wrote: 1. kept or keeping within reasonable or proper limits; not extreme, excessive, or intense: a moderate price. 2. of medium quantity, extent, or amount: a moderate income. 3. mediocre or fair: moderate talent. 4. calm or mild, as of the weather. 5. of or pertaining to moderates, as in politics or religion. –noun 6. a person who is moderate in opinion or opposed to extreme views and actions, esp. in politics or religion. 7. (usually initial capital letter) a member of a political party advocating moderate reform. –verb (used with object) 8. to reduce the excessiveness of; make less violent, severe, intense, or rigorous: to moderate the sharpness of one's words. 9. to preside over or at (a public forum, meeting, discussion, etc.). –verb (used without object) 10. to become less violent, severe, intense, or rigorous. 11. to act as moderator; preside.
I don't think anyone is wrong, but I also think the most common usage of moderate is the one you are complaining about.
I go one step more. I assume the person is looking for climbs toward the G rating of protection when they ask for moderate too. (note definitions 1, 4, 8, and 10 again)
|
|
|
|
|
reno
Jan 26, 2008, 9:52 PM
Post #20 of 172
(7999 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 30, 2001
Posts: 18283
|
angry wrote: I'm not talking about your personal mid grade though, I'm talking about the entire communities mid grade and why that mid grade is called stout, tough, serious, committing, or pretty hard.
Can't do that and hold up any measure of intellectual honesty, though. You're a good climber, John. What you call "moderate" below others would call "hard." Your system is entirely subjective, based on YOUR experiences.
My system defines "moderate" by a middle point on the grade spectrum.
Think of it like this: A 4 minute mile is easily done by lots of folks. Do we now call 4 minute miles "moderate"?
In reply to: To recap Intermediate = Moderate = 5.9-5.11 Easy equals < 5.9
So, Bachar-Yerrian is now a "moderate" climb? The Eiger Nordwand (at 5.7) is "easy"?
I don't buy it, sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Jan 26, 2008, 10:13 PM
Post #21 of 172
(7976 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
angry wrote: Of course there are exceptions that make easy climbing seem hard, these generally include lightning, loose rocks, ninja's, yeti, snowstorms, and oatmeal.
You're getting ahead of yourself. I'm talking about move difficulty in it's distilled state. Read where I just quoted myself.
I've been on routes that were very very serious feeling, that had all easy climbing. That example is not what I'm talking about.
The Eiger or Bachar-Yerian are excellent examples of the above quote.
I've been on easy routes with no good gear, bees, and lichen and been scared as hell. It made the thing feel harder. It did not make the route harder, just my experience on the route. Same goes with climbing with a backpack, while fatigued, out of gear, or with kidney stones, it certainly changes your experience on the route. It's not fair to say that the route is harder though, just harder that time.
Also, are you saying that a well travelled and well read climber cannot make relatively accurate predictions of the whole based on his observations.
I could be off a letter grade or two. So what if the "mid-range" of grades and climbers is 5.8-10c. That's still pretty close to my guess.
I'm not basing a bit of this on what I can get up. This thread is about the disconnect I've observed with what "average" appears to be and the use of "moderate" to describe routes.
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Jan 26, 2008, 10:34 PM
Post #22 of 172
(7955 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
reno wrote: Think of it like this: A 4 minute mile is easily done by lots of folks. Do we now call 4 minute miles "moderate"?
That brings up a whole new way of thinking, totally complicated, but with some validity.
A 4 minute mile is the standard that 4A runners will need to be under in order to stay on the team (assuming a one mile discipline). So while unbelievably fast it is not only moderate but is probably the low end or minimum speed seen on that very select group.
Yet if I clicked on any one mile fun run results posting on the internet, we'd see a very different scenario. Last years mens winner of the Pearl Street Mile was 4:16 and last place was 6:31 so it's obvious that while every time is still quick, the average of this group is a much slower five and half minutes.
We could go one farther and look at the results I got from the 6th, 7th, and 8th graders I did a mile run with last year. Fastest time, (I don't remember exact) just under 6 minutes. Slowest time that finished, 20 minutes (we only had 20 minutes to complete it.) Mathematically it was around 11 minutes for the average mile for middle school kids at 8000ft.
Should we do that among climbers? Separate them into groups? Or should we compare what folks on an afternoon jog do to what a 4A athlete does in competition?
It's sticky to do because of the inherent non-competetiveness of climbing and general disdain among climbers to be classified in any way. That's all.
Funny thing is, calling an easy route a moderate is only a pet peeve of mine, nothing more. So I brought it up.
|
|
|
|
|
byran
Jan 26, 2008, 10:45 PM
Post #23 of 172
(7941 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 6, 2006
Posts: 266
|
I think 5.8-5.10 is pretty accurate. That seems to be the upper end of what most climbers can lead, which would make the majority of us "moderate" climbers. "Moderate" definitely doesn't span any grades higher than that though. You'd have a hard time convincing me there's anything "moderate" about a 5.11 slab or 5.11 chimney.
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Jan 26, 2008, 10:55 PM
Post #24 of 172
(7931 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
I'm bored today, can't you tell.
To your slab and chimney comment, I'll add another faggot to the fire (it's a bundle of sticks).
The level at which trad climbing ceases to be intermediate and becomes more along the lines of advanced is lower than that of sport and sport is lower than bouldering.
A 5.11 crack (finger, OW, chimney, whatever as long as you know what you're doing) takes similar effort to climb as a 5.11+ or 12a sport climb and it's all V2 moves!!
But thats the subjekt for a different thread.
|
|
|
|
|
pyrosis
Jan 26, 2008, 11:05 PM
Post #25 of 172
(7921 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 1, 2004
Posts: 150
|
I think the answer is, of course, it depends...
By almost any definition, 5.5 isn't moderate, its easy. Unless of course you're talking about a 4000' long ridge in Patagonia. Then I would say it was HARD by the standards of climbing in general (most boulderers/sport climbers couldn't get up it) but EASY in terms of the sub-population of Patagonian alpinists.. Hmm
But yeah, in general, I agree. I like to call them 'warmups'
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
