Forums: Climbing Information: Beginners:
Understanding numerical grading system for climbs?
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Beginners

Premier Sponsor:

 
First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All


keepitlow


Jun 25, 2010, 1:37 PM
Post #1 of 28 (7825 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 15, 2009
Posts: 66

Understanding numerical grading system for climbs?
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Is there a easy to understand source that breaks down numerical grading system for climbs?


dolphja


Jun 25, 2010, 1:42 PM
Post #2 of 28 (7823 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 18, 2001
Posts: 298

Re: [keepitlow] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

keepitlow wrote:
Is there a easy to understand source that breaks down numerical grading system for climbs?

consensus


rhythm164


Jun 25, 2010, 1:47 PM
Post #3 of 28 (7816 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 28, 2005
Posts: 964

Re: [keepitlow] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

experience


Partner j_ung


Jun 25, 2010, 1:50 PM
Post #4 of 28 (7809 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690

Re: [keepitlow] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

keepitlow wrote:
Is there a easy to understand source that breaks down numerical grading system for climbs?

It's a highly subjective "system." You'll go insane if you try to use it for anything other than a general impression of difficulty.


rangerrob


Jun 25, 2010, 4:12 PM
Post #5 of 28 (7762 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 8, 2003
Posts: 641

Re: [j_ung] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Yep, what they said.

Seriously though, what confuses you about it? is it the 5 part of the 5.something, or is it the number after the decimal? Or, is it the Roman numeral grade that longer routes get in addition to the Yosemite decimal system?

RR


keepitlow


Jun 25, 2010, 4:25 PM
Post #6 of 28 (7750 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 15, 2009
Posts: 66

Re: [rangerrob] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Just don't understand it. I can get class 4 or 5 rapids. But have no idea how they come up with the climbing #'s.

Yea, decimals, letters etc.


(This post was edited by keepitlow on Jun 25, 2010, 4:26 PM)


jt512


Jun 25, 2010, 4:26 PM
Post #7 of 28 (7747 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904

Re: [keepitlow] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

keepitlow wrote:
Just don't understand it. I can get class 4 or 5 rapids. But have no idea how they come up with the climbing #'s.

The harder the climb, the higher the rating. That is all.

Jay


keepitlow


Jun 25, 2010, 4:27 PM
Post #8 of 28 (7744 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 15, 2009
Posts: 66

Re: [jt512] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jt512 wrote:
keepitlow wrote:
Just don't understand it. I can get class 4 or 5 rapids. But have no idea how they come up with the climbing #'s.

The harder the climb, the higher the rating. That is all.

Jay

Yes, understand that.


keepitlow


Jun 25, 2010, 4:29 PM
Post #9 of 28 (7741 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 15, 2009
Posts: 66

Re: [j_ung] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

j_ung wrote:
keepitlow wrote:
Is there a easy to understand source that breaks down numerical grading system for climbs?

It's a highly subjective "system." You'll go insane if you try to use it for anything other than a general impression of difficulty.

Guess that is why no one can splain it? I wonder who came up with it?


jt512


Jun 25, 2010, 4:29 PM
Post #10 of 28 (7740 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904

Re: [keepitlow] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

keepitlow wrote:
jt512 wrote:
keepitlow wrote:
Just don't understand it. I can get class 4 or 5 rapids. But have no idea how they come up with the climbing #'s.

The harder the climb, the higher the rating. That is all.

Jay

Yes, understand that.

Then you pretty much understand it fully.

Jay


gmggg


Jun 25, 2010, 4:35 PM
Post #11 of 28 (7733 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 25, 2009
Posts: 2099

Re: [keepitlow] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

keepitlow wrote:
j_ung wrote:
keepitlow wrote:
Is there a easy to understand source that breaks down numerical grading system for climbs?

It's a highly subjective "system." You'll go insane if you try to use it for anything other than a general impression of difficulty.

Guess that is why no one can splain it? I wonder who came up with it?

All you need to know: http://en.wikipedia.org/...emite_Decimal_System

The best way to "understand' the system as it pertains to your climbing however is to climb enough routes to get a feeling for how difficult particular grades are. It is not extremely subjective, but it is an understanding that can only come with experience.

A good analogy would be music. Think about your favorite genre of music, now think about all of the various micro-genres that exist in that one set. To an outsider it's all the same, but with time and patience you can distinguish (and/or grade) each particular song's type.


welle


Jun 25, 2010, 5:08 PM
Post #12 of 28 (7709 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 8, 2008
Posts: 212

Re: [jt512] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Then there are historical grades. Old school "5.9+" Shocked


cornstateclimber


Jun 25, 2010, 5:08 PM
Post #13 of 28 (7708 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 24, 2005
Posts: 324

Re: [gmggg] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

5.0-5.5 easy, 5.6-5.8 moderate 5.9-5.10 somewhat difficult, 5.11-5.12 hard, anything above that, way above me!!!!


blueeyedclimber


Jun 25, 2010, 5:42 PM
Post #14 of 28 (7685 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602

Re: [welle] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

welle wrote:
Then there are historical grades. Old school "5.9+" Shocked

No, that's easy to understand. That means 5.11b.Cool


VIclimber303


Jun 26, 2010, 7:42 AM
Post #15 of 28 (7592 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 24, 2010
Posts: 10

Re: [blueeyedclimber] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yosemite_Decimal_System

The 5 generally means you need a rope, or you risk death or serious injury if you do not use one.

The article explains it pretty well.


rangerrob


Jun 26, 2010, 12:17 PM
Post #16 of 28 (7564 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 8, 2003
Posts: 641

Re: [VIclimber303] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Seriously? A whole website full of so called experienced climbers and no one can explain it to the guy? Here's a qucik breakdown. There are six classes of hiking/climbing....that's the number before the decimal.

Class 1 - walking on a flat, maintained trail

Class 2 - steep trail hiking with some rock steps

Class 3 - Using hands and feet for upward or downward movement. Steep. Some fall potential, but generally people will not need to rope up.

Class 4 - steep exposed rock scrambling. A fall will result in serious injury or death. Most people will want to be roped up.

Class 5 - technical rock climbing, roped up, split into pitches, etc etc

Class 6 - Direct aid climbing. Using climbing equipment for direct aid to help you ascend.

Then the numbers after the decimal. Someone above broke that down pretty well.

If there is Roman numeral before or after, it measures the commitment level of the climb as a whole, including the approach.

I - one or two pitches with an easy approach. Most parties will take an hour or two

II - 3 or more pitches, often with some approach time. Average parties will take up to half a day

III - 4 or more pitches, frequently with a longer approach. Average parties will take half to 3/4 of a day.

IV - a full day of climbing. Slow parties may overnight. Approach could be arduous

V - long alpine routes. approaches could be long. Most parties will spend at least one night on the wall

VI - The biggest alpine walls in the world. Serious difficulties, remote settings, several days to weeks on the wall.

Of course there are other things that come into play with commitment, such as ease of retreat, etc. These are just Yosemite decimal system ratings. Once you go to another country, you'll have to figure out their system. Try the UK....holy obscure Batman!

Hope that helps somewhat. I'm not expert, but I think that description is close.

RR


olderic


Jun 26, 2010, 1:08 PM
Post #17 of 28 (7554 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 17, 2003
Posts: 1539

Re: [keepitlow] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

But how does a Font traverse grade correlate to the open ended Oz system and the UiAA one? Is XS the same as TD are have the Frogs and Limeys one upped each other again.


HVS has always been my favorite


jt512


Jun 26, 2010, 1:37 PM
Post #18 of 28 (7550 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904

Re: [rangerrob] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

rangerrob wrote:
Seriously? A whole website full of so called experienced climbers and no one can explain it to the guy? Here's a qucik breakdown. There are six classes of hiking/climbing....that's the number before the decimal.

Class 1 - walking on a flat, maintained trail

Class 2 - steep trail hiking with some rock steps

Class 3 - Using hands and feet for upward or downward movement. Steep. Some fall potential, but generally people will not need to rope up.

Class 4 - steep exposed rock scrambling. A fall will result in serious injury or death. Most people will want to be roped up.

Class 5 - technical rock climbing, roped up, split into pitches, etc etc

Class 6 - Direct aid climbing. Using climbing equipment for direct aid to help you ascend.

Then the numbers after the decimal. Someone above broke that down pretty well.

If there is Roman numeral before or after, it measures the commitment level of the climb as a whole, including the approach.

I - one or two pitches with an easy approach. Most parties will take an hour or two

II - 3 or more pitches, often with some approach time. Average parties will take up to half a day

III - 4 or more pitches, frequently with a longer approach. Average parties will take half to 3/4 of a day.

IV - a full day of climbing. Slow parties may overnight. Approach could be arduous

V - long alpine routes. approaches could be long. Most parties will spend at least one night on the wall

VI - The biggest alpine walls in the world. Serious difficulties, remote settings, several days to weeks on the wall.

Of course there are other things that come into play with commitment, such as ease of retreat, etc. These are just Yosemite decimal system ratings. Once you go to another country, you'll have to figure out their system. Try the UK....holy obscure Batman!

Hope that helps somewhat. I'm not expert, but I think that description is close.

RR

You'd be very helpful in the "what's a kilonewton?" threads, too.

Jay


blueeyedclimber


Jun 26, 2010, 2:43 PM
Post #19 of 28 (7531 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602

Re: [olderic] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

olderic wrote:

HVS has always been my favorite

I've seen climbers who could turn ANY route into HVS. Cool


Partner camhead


Jun 26, 2010, 2:44 PM
Post #20 of 28 (7530 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939

Re: [rangerrob] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

rangerrob wrote:

I - one or two pitches with an easy approach. Most parties will take an hour or two

II - 3 or more pitches, often with some approach time. Average parties will take up to half a day

III - 4 or more pitches, frequently with a longer approach. Average parties will take half to 3/4 of a day.

IV - a full day of climbing. Slow parties may overnight. Approach could be arduous

V - long alpine routes. approaches could be long. Most parties will spend at least one night on the wall

VI - The biggest alpine walls in the world. Serious difficulties, remote settings, several days to weeks on the wall.

Actually, there are some grade VII bigwalls.


rangerrob


Jun 29, 2010, 12:17 AM
Post #21 of 28 (7366 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 8, 2003
Posts: 641

Re: [camhead] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Yeah I knew someone was going to point that out. I got tired of typing.


anarkhos


Jul 3, 2010, 4:00 AM
Post #22 of 28 (7145 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 1, 2006
Posts: 229

Re: [rangerrob] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

The rating system actually goes:

5.9

10a

10b

5.9+

10c

11a

10d

11b

11c

12a

11d

12b

etc.

Also, don't rate things unless you've climbed routes put up in the 70s.


rangerrob


Jul 3, 2010, 3:13 PM
Post #23 of 28 (7107 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 8, 2003
Posts: 641

Re: [anarkhos] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

The above post is VERY true!


macblaze


Jul 3, 2010, 4:20 PM
Post #24 of 28 (7089 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 23, 2005
Posts: 807

Re: [keepitlow] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

As I understand it, the Class (5) indicates the type of climbing and the decimal shows a rating from 1 to 10. Nothing could be simpler...

No one ever thought they'd be climbing as hard as they do now with all the rubber and gear and shit but, unfortunatley some super bad ass climbers went and ruined it for the more numerically linear among us.

So firtt they tried adding +'s and when that didn't work they gave up and started in on numbers above 10. This time however they were smarter and figured to add in an a,b,c,d to try and hedge their bets.

I have no doubt in another 20 years some spoiler is going to climb a 20f+ with his super stick shoes and confuse the issue even more.


anarkhos


Jul 4, 2010, 12:48 AM
Post #25 of 28 (7033 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 1, 2006
Posts: 229

Re: [macblaze] Understanding numerical grading system for climbs? [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

macblaze wrote:
work they gave up and started in on numbers above 10. This time however they were smarter and figured to add in an a,b,c,d to try and hedge their bets.

Um, how is that smarter? Why not just keep using numbers like the Australian system?

The 'decimal' system (which was really never decimal since that implies counting by 10s) would go up to 5.32.

Is 32 a hard number to wrap one's mind around? Plus we wouldn't have this 11d being much harder than a 12a business.

Damned stupid if you ask me

First page Previous page 1 2 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Climbing Information : Beginners

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook