Well it's a good thing that climbing grades are subjective cause I'm going to have to disagree. A climbers endurance should not be a factor in the grade. It should be about the crux move or moves.

And some boulder problems have multiple cruxes, but if they are all V7 (5.13a) cruxes, it does not make sense (to me) to give it a V8 (5.13 b/c) or V9 (5.13d) grade. All good climbers should just have endurance.

If I'm grading a problem that is sustained V7 climbing, I would not give it a V9 grade.

If a fat, chubby, out of shape climber who can climb V7 moves can't do a sustained V7 problem, he/she would grade it V8 or V9 on the FA.

He graded a new problem and gave it a new name.

And really....should adding one V7 (5.13a) move to an existing V14 (5.15) change the 'crux move' to V15 (5.15 c/d)?

Aren't these folks just trying to be the best and up their scorecards so they can take more climbing trips and get more free shwag ?

Think about the oil....

Where do you draw the line? 20 V7 problems stacked on top of each other isn't going to be V7/5.13a

The crux was still V14, apparently he doesn't have the endurance to climb that hard. That's why he graded it V15 when he put on the extension.

you are an idiot, o and check your ratings there.

Well it's a good thing that climbing grades are subjective cause I'm going to have to disagree. A climbers endurance should not be a factor in the grade. It should be about the crux move or moves.

And some boulder problems have multiple cruxes, but if they are all V7 (5.13a) cruxes, it does not make sense (to me) to give it a V8 (5.13 b/c) or V9 (5.13d) grade. All good climbers should just have endurance.

If I'm grading a problem that is sustained V7 climbing, I would not give it a V9 grade.

If a fat, chubby, out of shape climber who can climb V7 moves can't do a sustained V7 problem, he/she would grade it V8 or V9 on the FA.

That's a problem.

On the other hand, if a climber has excellent endurance, and can cruise the same V7 sustained problem, he/she would give it a V6 or V7 rating if FA'ed.


They would both agree that the moves are sustained V7 but they would both give the problem different grades based on their endurance levels.

Then what's next? Adjusting grades because of ape index, age, sex, or shoe size?

Just give the grade based on the crux(es) move(s) and everyone else can judge it easily.


Where is Hollow Mtn Cave? Again you speak of linkups which is a combination of 2, 3 or more problems that are combined to make a new problem with a new name and grade. This I understand.


That's what she said


I agree. 'Long monsters' should be given a route grade because one must have proper endurance to complete the 'long monster'.

But for a boulder problem, whether it's 7 ft. or 27 ft., giving the grade that correlates with the crux or cruxes is most convenient. IMO.

Grades are subjective. Upgrade or downgrade all you want, but I will never add grades because of length or endurance. That's just me.

I'll cruise your V9 because it's 3 V7 cruxes

That's an extension of an existing problem. The Op'er didn't ask about that. I wasn't commenting about an extension of a problem.

Just a comment from the listening gallery... you lost points on this one bro.

DMT

A climbers endurance should not be a factor in the grade.
All good climbers should just have endurance.

I agree. 'Long monsters' should be given a route grade because one must have proper endurance to complete the 'long monster'.

They would both agree that the moves are sustained V7 but they would both give the problem different grades based on their endurance levels.

Then what's next? Adjusting grades because of ape index, age, sex, or shoe size?

Well it's a good thing that climbing grades are subjective cause I'm going to have to disagree. A climbers endurance should not be a factor in the grade. It should be about the crux move or moves.

And some boulder problems have multiple cruxes, but if they are all V7 (5.13a) cruxes, it does not make sense (to me) to give it a V8 (5.13 b/c) or V9 (5.13d) grade. All good climbers should just have endurance.

Cheers man. I have no dog in this fight. I can't even polish your bouldering shoes, mate!

But you still lost points on that one. Hehe.

DMT

HUH?! You don't see how you're contradicting yourself? How are the rules for applying endurance different for bouldering than route climbing?! With your logic a route climber with super good endurance could make the same argument against your sustained route climb.


How are those the characteristics judged the same as endurance. You can't say that about strength. For instance, if I'm super strong I may call a one move V7, a V5, but if you're super weak and struggle through it, you may think it's V9. That doesn't mean we should adjust for either person really. It should be a consensus and most people are going to agree that doing two or more V7 cruxes is harder than doing one...period!

Well you loose points for having no dog and not being willing to polish my bouldering shoes.

Cheers

In the context of a conversation about bouldering, that comment is laughable.

Jay

In the immortal words of principal Max Anderson:

Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

Here's a scenario for all you V scale experts:

I cleaned a FA somewhere in the Sierras last year.
It's 20 ft tall, slightly overhanging and it goes like this...

It's a hard sit start that is V5 then eases into some V2 and V3 climbing. Then goes to a dynamic V5 move followed by a V1 topout.

Should I rate it V6?

    Vroute =  Va + 1/7 Vb + 1/49 Vc + ...+ ( 1/7 Vb if Vb = Va) 
where Va = Crux; Vb = next hardest move; Vc = next hardest move...

    V = V5 + 1/7 V5 + 1/49 V3 + 1/343 V2 + 1/2401 V1 + 1/7 V5

If we were all drunk by the pool trying to figure out what day it is, I'm sure you'd be the smartest guy there.

You really know the v-scale don't you? Enlighten us all so that this thread can die.

The only reason the thread hasn't died is that you persist in being wrong. At least a half-dozen people have explained to you that problems are rated based on their overall difficulty, not their hardest move, and have given multiple specific examples of this. So, how about you either admitting you're wrong, or coming up with specific counterexamples showing that the rating of a problem is unrelated to its length, as you believe. And, no, not problems rated by you.

Jay