I have found grades softening in some areas, so I suppose I understand to a certain degree. I don't think I've really found enough of a difference for me to really care though, and it hasn't been consistent across all areas.
I don't really think I could pick from that comprehensive list of poll options. I would probably say that routes graded 5.10c that were established between March 16th - May 22nd 2003 are the hardest of all.
(This post was edited by kriso9tails on Jul 9, 2010, 10:31 PM)
I have found grades softening in some areas, so I suppose I understand to a certain degree. I don't think I've really found enough of a difference for me to really care though, and it hasn't been consistent across all areas.
I don't really think I could pick from that comprehensive list of poll options. I would probably say that routes graded 5.10c that were established between March 16th - May 22nd 2003 are the hardest of all.
Maybe it is where you climb, but in my experience, traditional grades are always harder than sport grades and old grades are always harder than new.
but in my experience, traditional grades are always harder than sport grades and old grades are always harder than new.
Smith Rock and Indian Creek both disprove your assertion.
Let me rephrase that then.
In my experience, which only includes climbing in the Southeast and at the Gunks, traditional grades are always harder than sport grades and old grades are always harder than new.
Seeing as it was my thread that got you to thinking, i obviously can't comment on whether an 11 trad or 12 sport is harder, because i have yet to climb either. if you knock back the grades a bit, and let me answer regarding say an 11 sport route and a 10 trad route, i say the old school (Gunks and Seneca in my experience) trad route is substantially harder than a newer sport route of a slightly higher grade.
Thanks. That's my impression too. Honestly, I think even if you climbed both on top-rope, and reduced the risk to minimal, I think the pure difficulty of the moves on many old 11+ routes is a bit higher.
I think many of the "new" 12a's are kind of like gym routes, with moves that kind of flow nicely. Really good quality, and my intent was not to demean those route, just to better define what "hard" really means.
I know the subject is a little trollish, but I was hoping for at least a little more banter.
The grade is the grade is the grade. I don't think a climb put up 5 years ago is really any easier or harder than a route put up 10 or 15 years ago. You won't really start noticing that shit till you go way back and hit the old school 9+'s. Now those will take the piss out of you.
Seeing as it was my thread that got you to thinking, i obviously can't comment on whether an 11 trad or 12 sport is harder, because i have yet to climb either. if you knock back the grades a bit, and let me answer regarding say an 11 sport route and a 10 trad route, i say the old school (Gunks and Seneca in my experience) trad route is substantially harder than a newer sport route of a slightly higher grade.
As an ex-Seneca local and current Gunks local, I agree with you 100%.
It doesn't matter when the route was FA. I bet almost everybody finds a similar graded trad route harder than a sport route with just bolts. For the most part people climb harder sport than trad. That's because sport is easier. I mean how many 5.14 trad routes are there compared to 5.14 sport? 5.14 bolted routes are abundant and a few of my friends have climbed a few easy 14's. But they would struggle on 5.11 trad, or slab.
Agree with you 100%, if you throw the head game into the equation there's no question it's going to be easier getting up a slightly "harder" sport route. I like the OP's suggestion of taking the whole lead factor out altogether, and comparing the two on toprope. I would still bet the older trad routes hold up to the test, and are in fact harder.
13 /
100%
