|
angry
Oct 9, 2008, 10:08 PM
Post #26 of 57
(1345 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
I just don't see very many clear cut cases of bolted cracks. Occasionally I do and they are usually promptly removed.
Seriously, bolting cracks is more of an internet problem than on real rock.
|
|
|
|
|
quiteatingmysteak
Oct 9, 2008, 10:14 PM
Post #27 of 57
(1339 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2004
Posts: 804
|
angry wrote: I just don't see very many clear cut cases of bolted cracks. Occasionally I do and they are usually promptly removed. Seriously, bolting cracks is more of an internet problem than on real rock.
Exactly. A clear cut case wouldn't be any fun, now would it? We want CONTROVERSY! Bolt an insipiant seam, and pray Sonnie Trotter or Dave McCloed doesn't climb it on silly putty and paperclips.
|
|
|
|
|
cragmasterp
Oct 9, 2008, 11:17 PM
Post #28 of 57
(1331 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2003
Posts: 278
|
|
|
|
|
|
hafilax
Oct 9, 2008, 11:56 PM
Post #29 of 57
(1323 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 12, 2007
Posts: 3025
|
There has been a trend of bolting offwidths in Squamish when they pop up in the middle of a long route. If a route doesn't get climbed very often here they disappear under the moss so every effort is made to encourage others to get on these by making sure you don't need Big Bros and Valley Giants. If you walk around the Smoke Bluffs you can see bolts peaking out of the moss on some of the unpopular hard routes (slabs and thin cracks).
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Oct 10, 2008, 12:04 AM
Post #30 of 57
(1323 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
quiteatingmysteak wrote: dingus wrote: notapplicable wrote: It seems at times that a portion of the climbing population simply does not respect the mental component of the game as much as the physical. Some of the boldest climbers and most intelligent folks I know are sport climbers. What more people do not respect is 150 runnouts on overhanging 5.12 choss. Or certainly not the sort of respect that will prompt them to jump on such a route. DMT I gotta disagree on this one, as I don't see it as a sportVStrad debate (version 2.0). Rather, I see it as applicable to lines that CAN go on gear. I am immediately reminded of at least five routes that give this legs: 1. Greenspit. 5.14 euro roof crack bolted, debolted, sent! Not much to discuss, this is the far end of the scale. 2. The Path. 5.14R climbing, probably takes smallish gear, not a climb for mortals. Chopped, re-sent. Getting more grey. 3. East Face of Monkey Face. Again another Sonnie Trotter route. Climbed on teeny tiny nuts by a guy with huge stoppers. Not chopped, Re-Sent. 4. Arcturus FFA. Piz and Anderson added bolts to a crack, which caused a backbreaking fall. Later sent free. Two arguments were used by the party - "It was not a very appealing or difficult aid pitch, so it won't change the difficulty of the aid route" and "We weren't able to get any gear to fit." Sounds a little strange to me. 5. Dihedral Wall. Bolts added to a seam by Skinner, used on the FFA by TC. Probably, Tommy could have done so with less bolts. It reduced the difficulty of the aid pitch (only 40 or so feet of a 3000 foot route, so no huge issue some might say), and is protectable on cruddy gear. Could have fixed a few pins, but is this better than a bolt? Not sure. We can see things getting more and more blurry. Could the dihedral wall or Arcturus be sent without the bolts? Maybe, we will never know. Could the Path and Greenspit go without bolts? OF COURSE! So the point sits. Adding bolts to a crack, insipiant crack, or even (as one crazy british bastard showed us) the Bachar-Yerian can be avoided. There is no right-wrong here. Whats important is to take the reality of the future generation with your drill. Will this climb be a mega-classic? Will this choss never see a Second ascent? Are others nipping at the bud to get on this? Case by case logic kills these discussions, so lets embrace it!
You totally changed the subject but whatever
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
kyote321
Oct 10, 2008, 1:18 AM
Post #32 of 57
(1297 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 24, 2005
Posts: 636
|
In reply to: Now one could say that you could simply skip the bolts which is true, just as you could skip chipped holds.
not true. there is a physical limit so that skipping a shipped hold would become impossible at a point.
rock is rock kids. take it off the pedestal. it is largely lifeless dirt.
the 'somebody hurt the rock with a nasty evil bolt crowd' needs to stop driving their cars on roads, walking on paths, eating beef, wearing leather and voting republican.
... and need to admit that their experience that they have with the rock is their experience, not something the rock gives to them. a dog gives you affection and makes you feel good, rock does not. you are reflecting your own experience.
|
|
|
|
|
jmeizis
Oct 10, 2008, 1:31 AM
Post #33 of 57
(1295 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 25, 2006
Posts: 635
|
There aren't a lot of bolted cracks but they are there, mostly at "sport" crags. More often it's fully bolted lines that have bolts right next to an acceptable gear placement. Like I said I don't have a problem with bolts when they're placed in appropriate places. It seems that most often you'll find overbolted climbs in sport areas where they figure what's one more bolt.
I know there are plenty of climbs that are chipped. Despite the few lacking integrity most can agree that this is a poor practice, but I don't need to restate what I already said. I stick by my premise until evidence that there is loads of chipping still going on that people readily accept. Glad to see you treating this like the trivial conversation this is Dingus 
I disagree that it's easy to skip a bolt. If you're feeling sketched out on lead twenty feet above crappy gear I bet anyone without balls the size of watermelons would clip that bolt if it was there. If there are bolts all over the place then it's plenty easy to skip holds that are chipped. We all skip holds on routes if we don't need them. The reason we agree chipping is bad is because it changes the grade. If I walk up to a 5.12 and chip it down to a 5.10 then I'm bringing it down to my level, for my own selfish reasons. I think you can change a 5.6 into a 5.12 if you fill in all the holds with glue but it's generally agreed that the reason we climb outside is to climb natural rock and accept it on it's own terms, not bring it to our level.
Rock is an inanimate object but our relation to it is not. My experience climbing is altered by those before me. I'm sure the first person to climb the Bastille Crack in Eldo didn't have to worry about slipping off the superpolished holds near the start. If I do a bolted climb and there are perfectly good gear placements it alters the experience I would have if the bolts weren't there, regardless of whether I clip them or not.
Again I have to ask, if you wouldn't bring a climb down to your physical level why would you bring it down to your mental level?
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Oct 10, 2008, 2:12 AM
Post #34 of 57
(1278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
quiteatingmysteak wrote: WHINER
Whore.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
asiaclimber
Oct 10, 2008, 2:14 AM
Post #35 of 57
(1278 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 21, 2007
Posts: 214
|
chipping is bad. bolting protectable routes is bad. bolting unprotectable or really poorly protectable routes is smart. just because the original climber decided he was crazy enough to put something up in a x or r rating doesnt mean it should stay that way. but what do i know i live in asia where it is fasionable to over bolt everything aside from scary 50ft run out on slab and bolting cracks is farily normal(not to say that i aprove of this).
|
|
|
|
|
sungam
Oct 10, 2008, 2:37 AM
Post #36 of 57
(1263 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 24, 2004
Posts: 26804
|
I don't get why you left out the bold face climbs that many people would have bolted. You know, like rhapsody, echo wall, and the walk of life.
|
|
|
|
|
quiteatingmysteak
Oct 10, 2008, 2:51 AM
Post #37 of 57
(1258 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 15, 2004
Posts: 804
|
sungam wrote: I don't get why you left out the bold face climbs that many people would have bolted. You know, like rhapsody, echo wall, and the walk of life.
WHAT WAS THAT?
I DON'T SPEAK SHEEP BUGGERER
Srsrsrsrsrsrsrsly though, my point is valid. If you don't think so, you're probably a whore like me 
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
Oct 10, 2008, 4:38 AM
Post #38 of 57
(1245 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
dingus wrote: notapplicable wrote: dingus wrote: notapplicable wrote: It seems at times that a portion of the climbing population simply does not respect the mental component of the game as much as the physical. Some of the boldest climbers and most intelligent folks I know are sport climbers. What more people do not respect is 150 runnouts on overhanging 5.12 choss. Or certainly not the sort of respect that will prompt them to jump on such a route. DMT Huh? Perhaps the word "mental" was a poor choice as intelligence has little to do with ones ability to manage doubt and fear and wasn't what I was talking about. Nor do I think that bolts and bold climbing or sport climbers and bold climbing are mutually exclusive. I wasn't even so much talking about a respect, or lack there of, for a certain style of climbing but more for the people who enjoy climbs that are (for a lack of better phrasing) "heady" and pose as much of a psychological challenge as a physical one. I was talking to the "why not bolt it so everyone can enjoy the climb" crowd. The people who don't understand or respect the fact that for some people the route is much more fun and interesting with out the bolts. I think there is enough rock for everyone to climb in the style they enjoy and one style should not be sacrificed for the sake of the other. My only comment is that the vast majority of those who claim to prefer 'heady' climbs only do so on a part time basis and rarely, in practice. There are very notable exceptions of course. DMT
I'm not saying I'm that guy, because I'm not but there is a reason "R" and "X" rated routes see repeats. Some of them frequently.
I just don't think the "boltem so we can all have fun" crowd should be free to take that dish off the menu. When I feel like combining the mindset of a solo with the physical puzzle of protecting a lead, I want the kitchen to still be open...so to speak.
|
|
|
|
|
bender
Oct 10, 2008, 6:16 AM
Post #39 of 57
(1232 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 23, 2002
Posts: 188
|
dingus wrote: bender wrote: in reference to peaks id say the childs use is the predicate You couldn't be more cryptic if you tried. DMT
ya, sorry
my first exposure to the statement was reading greg childs musing in concern of a summit block his party put several rivits into to reach a high altitude summits top; id not realize messner had previously coined the term
the devolution of this inquiry to the practices of present day sport climbers ravishing crags is a comical charade given the idealism the thread starters ingender
he wants to talk about courage??
then its time for him to jump ship and find another sport that decades of skilled devotation and technological admixture have not rendered down to a science; as has occured in the pursuit we follow
the words of elders hes praising are aged; and the enviroment they were utter in hasnt existed for decades; save the rarified surrounding of the few who can presently travel as if the past hasnt expired
id say their offenses are a mockery of anything climbing was protended to be
screw them
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Oct 10, 2008, 10:32 AM
Post #40 of 57
(1220 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
notapplicable wrote: dingus wrote: notapplicable wrote: dingus wrote: notapplicable wrote: It seems at times that a portion of the climbing population simply does not respect the mental component of the game as much as the physical. Some of the boldest climbers and most intelligent folks I know are sport climbers. What more people do not respect is 150 runnouts on overhanging 5.12 choss. Or certainly not the sort of respect that will prompt them to jump on such a route. DMT Huh? Perhaps the word "mental" was a poor choice as intelligence has little to do with ones ability to manage doubt and fear and wasn't what I was talking about. Nor do I think that bolts and bold climbing or sport climbers and bold climbing are mutually exclusive. I wasn't even so much talking about a respect, or lack there of, for a certain style of climbing but more for the people who enjoy climbs that are (for a lack of better phrasing) "heady" and pose as much of a psychological challenge as a physical one. I was talking to the "why not bolt it so everyone can enjoy the climb" crowd. The people who don't understand or respect the fact that for some people the route is much more fun and interesting with out the bolts. I think there is enough rock for everyone to climb in the style they enjoy and one style should not be sacrificed for the sake of the other. My only comment is that the vast majority of those who claim to prefer 'heady' climbs only do so on a part time basis and rarely, in practice. There are very notable exceptions of course. DMT I'm not saying I'm that guy, because I'm not but there is a reason "R" and "X" rated routes see repeats. Some of them frequently. I just don't think the "boltem so we can all have fun" crowd should be free to take that dish off the menu. When I feel like combining the mindset of a solo with the physical puzzle of protecting a lead, I want the kitchen to still be open...so to speak.
I'm a big believer in local ethics. I am totally against retrobolting and have no problem when retrobolt whiners here and elsewhere get their shit chopped.
I simply too exception to the notion that sport routes do not have a mental component.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
tomcat
Oct 10, 2008, 1:15 PM
Post #41 of 57
(1198 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 15, 2006
Posts: 325
|
So just to continue the discussion I will throw a couple of things into the mix.
I used to climb a lot at two crags.One well known,the other,though nearby,was a locals secret.Over a few years we climbed about 25 routes at the secret cliff,which was really within 100 feet of a road,on gear.I visited Great Britain one summer,on on my return,did a gear lead of the tallest wall at the secret cliff,an overhanging 5.8.This climb was a popular toprope problem,and I had TR'd it as much as anyone.This first real gear of any merit was probably 2/3rd's the way up.The whole route is about 65'.
I've read recently the route has been bolted,top to bottom,with five bolts.What do you think of this?
At the bigger cliff,we did a FA of the best route there.We managed it with no bolts at all.It was too scary,so after a year we added a bolt,which then made it popular.Now a second bolt has been added.
At the same cliff,I did a short hard route that has also become very popular.I placed one bolt from a hook,the second crux was protected by a Friend,and not as hard as the first crux.That has now been retrobolted too.
One thing never mentioned in these discussions is the vast amount of lines new routers of the past,like me,saw,and decided NOT to Murder the Impossible,in hopes some new gear or just better climbers would manage it as is.At the cliffs I mention above we followed a "one bolt,placed on lead,if it creates a decent climb" ethic.
I think there is a need and a place for R routes. X routes,not so sure.Problem with X routes is that the motivation is there for the first ascent,and maybe a few more,but why risk your life for the 33rd ascent,when you could just climb something new and get a FA?
|
|
|
|
|
notapplicable
Oct 10, 2008, 2:58 PM
Post #42 of 57
(1187 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17771
|
dingus wrote: notapplicable wrote: dingus wrote: notapplicable wrote: dingus wrote: notapplicable wrote: It seems at times that a portion of the climbing population simply does not respect the mental component of the game as much as the physical. Some of the boldest climbers and most intelligent folks I know are sport climbers. What more people do not respect is 150 runnouts on overhanging 5.12 choss. Or certainly not the sort of respect that will prompt them to jump on such a route. DMT Huh? Perhaps the word "mental" was a poor choice as intelligence has little to do with ones ability to manage doubt and fear and wasn't what I was talking about. Nor do I think that bolts and bold climbing or sport climbers and bold climbing are mutually exclusive. I wasn't even so much talking about a respect, or lack there of, for a certain style of climbing but more for the people who enjoy climbs that are (for a lack of better phrasing) "heady" and pose as much of a psychological challenge as a physical one. I was talking to the "why not bolt it so everyone can enjoy the climb" crowd. The people who don't understand or respect the fact that for some people the route is much more fun and interesting with out the bolts. I think there is enough rock for everyone to climb in the style they enjoy and one style should not be sacrificed for the sake of the other. My only comment is that the vast majority of those who claim to prefer 'heady' climbs only do so on a part time basis and rarely, in practice. There are very notable exceptions of course. DMT I'm not saying I'm that guy, because I'm not but there is a reason "R" and "X" rated routes see repeats. Some of them frequently. I just don't think the "boltem so we can all have fun" crowd should be free to take that dish off the menu. When I feel like combining the mindset of a solo with the physical puzzle of protecting a lead, I want the kitchen to still be open...so to speak. I'm a big believer in local ethics. I am totally against retrobolting and have no problem when retrobolt whiners here and elsewhere get their shit chopped.
I know that man, thats one area we definitily agree.
dingus wrote: I simply too exception to the notion that sport routes do not have a mental component. DMT
Ahhhh, I see what you were getting at earlier with your comment on intelligent and bold sport climbers. Sorry, didn't pick up what you were laying down at first.
Didn't mean to give the impression that I was attacking sport climbing, I just want to preserve the ground up FA's. Let the next guy feel alittle bit of what it was to climb the route, not bolts where they would be the most useful but rather where it was possible to pause long enough to hand drill one.
|
|
|
|
|
tomcat
Oct 10, 2008, 3:08 PM
Post #43 of 57
(1180 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 15, 2006
Posts: 325
|
Also want to ask.Am I the only one that sees more than just danger taken away by bolting? I mean,when I trad,I often find myself asking,around the corner here,or go to the top and then around.This can happen on the simplest ground on a slab,or some steep place in the Gunks on great holds.
|
|
|
|
|
Gmburns2000
Oct 10, 2008, 5:44 PM
Post #44 of 57
(1170 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15266
|
tomcat wrote: Also want to ask.Am I the only one that sees more than just danger taken away by bolting? I mean,when I trad,I often find myself asking,around the corner here,or go to the top and then around.This can happen on the simplest ground on a slab,or some steep place in the Gunks on great holds.
Are you referring to route-finding? If so, then yes, route-finding is somewhat limited as a result of bolting, but that kind of depends on how the route was bolted. If you're talking about a solitary bolt on a run-out section, then route finding is probably not being stripped that much whereas a bolt ladder pretty much shows the line from bottom to top.
|
|
|
|
|
tomcat
Oct 10, 2008, 8:35 PM
Post #45 of 57
(1155 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 15, 2006
Posts: 325
|
No shit.What I am refering to is does this detract from the experience for you?
|
|
|
|
|
drector
Oct 10, 2008, 8:59 PM
Post #46 of 57
(1152 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 1037
|
Technically, the FA brought the climb down to their own level when they placed the original bolts (assuming a retro-bolt situation). Adding bolts just changes who is the target audience but doesn't change the fact that the climb was arbitrarily altered to meet someones mental ability. So why should I leave it at what some other person thought was appropriate. Can't I make the same judgment and alter the climb too? The answers for me personally are respect and humility but that's has nothing to do with the proposed logical argument. Using logic, the FA altered the climb and that can be considered offensive to some. He/she should have left it alone until he/she was prepared to climb it as-is.
Fortunately, I enjoy climbs protected with removable gear so I can usually bring the climb down to whatever level I like.
Really, this comes down to same old question of altering the rock in a way that affects others when they do the climb. It's the same argument that gets played out on this and other forums every few months when someone proposes some new comment that is not much different from all of the old comments.
Is there really anything new in the OP question? it sounds so familiar.
Dave
|
|
|
|
|
jmeizis
Oct 12, 2008, 11:48 PM
Post #47 of 57
(1127 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 25, 2006
Posts: 635
|
Tomcat,
The first climb, the overhanging 5.8 that was retrobolted with 5 bolts. Those are some good size whippers. If you don't hit anything on that big of a whipper and the bolts aren't significantly close to the gear placement a ways up then it doesn't bother me. Did you place the bolts, or did someone just bolt it, that would bother me. Although I suppose they're free to do what they want it's in poor taste I think to bolt someone elses previously ascended line without asking is lame.
If a climb was done without the bolt then why was it necessary to add the bolt? Was there decking potential or was it just scary. Lots of climbs are plenty scary yet safe. Did you add the second bolt?
The last circumstance bothers me the most because it's what seems to happen the most often. Someone FA's a mixed route in good style, not overbolting or putting the bolts next to a gear placements and then someone else (my assumption) comes and adds more bolts because they're too lazy or too incompetent to bring some gear with them.
Drector,
I think for the most part you are correct. The FA brings the climb down to their level when they place a bolt. I think that if they place those bolts to keep a climber from decking or being maimed by some feature and it's not next to a gear placement of any sort then that's not a big deal. I'm not advocating people only free solo. Climbing certainly has an element of danger but that's not all it's about. If the person placing the bolts does it because they don't want long falls or are too lazy to carry trad gear with them then that changes the nature of a climb to a greater degree than just providing safe passage. After the FA the climb is already altered, why alter it further?
|
|
|
|
|
sausalito
Oct 13, 2008, 1:14 PM
Post #48 of 57
(1106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 20, 2005
Posts: 155
|
I can only answer this for myself but for me the answer is pretty simple. Most routes that I climb that have bolts are not otherwise protectable. I don't free solo anymore because I have a wife and a job as a nurse that I love. I feel my life is much more than climbing and climbing is by and large a fun past time of mine. I like both the physical and mental aspects but realize that shit happens, holds break. I for one am not willing to take that risk on a poorly protected route. If you are referring to retro bolts I couldnt agree more. Thats just ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
|
zeke_sf
Oct 13, 2008, 10:19 PM
Post #49 of 57
(1072 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2006
Posts: 18730
|
tomcat wrote: No shit.What I am refering to is does this detract from the experience for you?
It seems like they are two very different experiences, so to say it detracts from the experience points out more that particular person's preference than anything else [no shit?]. So, are you asking for a poll? I don't think it detracts from the experience, it is just a different kind of puzzle to figure out.
|
|
|
|
|
chossmonkey
Oct 13, 2008, 10:34 PM
Post #50 of 57
(1067 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 1, 2003
Posts: 28414
|
jmeizis wrote: So I have to ask, if you wouldn't chip a climb to bring it down to your physical level then why would you bolt it to bring it down to your mental level? Now one could say that you could simply skip the bolts which is true, just as you could skip chipped holds. Nevertheless you still have an escape because someone brought the level of the climb down mentally or physically. If you don't feel ready for a climb physically or mentally you don't have to do it. So to reiterate the question why would you bring a climb down to your level mentally or physically?
|
|
|
|
|
|
