thanks for linking that. it is not surprising, but indicative of the quality of this site that something like the Compressor Route getting freed then chopped would not get a bit of mention on rc.knoob.

well, the noticeable lack of discussion here is also stark compared to other sites. But whatever.

I'm actually curious if the Lama deal last year gave these guys the idea of chopping or not. OK, usually folks who have decided to chop such a route have already made up their minds, but when I think about it, that controversy might have pushed things over the line to the point where this team decided to not let something like that happen again. In other words, if the bolts had remained then what would have stopped others from doing what Lama's team did.

Probably not true, but I think it's an interesting theory.

It might have been in response to the Lama thing, but the chopping of the bolts was also a hot topic in 2007 when Wharton proposed doing so and caused a lot of butthurt then.

Not going to have an opinion on this, since I've never been to Patagonia, let alone climbed a free bigwall in some of the most unstable weather on earth, but I do want to know this: did Kennedy and Kruk work the route by using the bolts that they later chopped?

If so, then what they did was just as lame as, but on a greater scale then, Trotter working The Path on bolts then chopping it, or Kemple toproping then intentionally rap bolting a 5.13 route with 5.11+ X sections.

thanks for linking that. it is not surprising, but indicative of the quality of this site that something like the Compressor Route getting freed then chopped would not get a bit of mention on rc.knoob.

well, the noticeable lack of discussion here is also stark compared to other sites. But whatever.

I'm actually curious if the Lama deal last year gave these guys the idea of chopping or not. OK, usually folks who have decided to chop such a route have already made up their minds, but when I think about it, that controversy might have pushed things over the line to the point where this team decided to not let something like that happen again. In other words, if the bolts had remained then what would have stopped others from doing what Lama's team did.

Probably not true, but I think it's an interesting theory.

Since we can only speculate without the full story being in yet, my wild guess would be that they only decided to chop after climbing most of the route with their few variations to it. They may have seen many places where pro could have been placed making no need for the bolts. But then again, back when the bolts went in much of the route could of been covered in ice at the time and the zest for the summit (even though he didn't) dictated the high number of bolts that did go in.

Lama frees it:

http://www.planetmountain.com/...?l=2&keyid=39061

Wow. That seems rather ironic.

Just to clarify another point made above, it seems as if Kennedy and Kruk's decision to chop the bolts was made on the summit.

I do have a question, though. Where's the compressor now?

So who wants to bet on how long it will take until someone puts the bolts back in?

Doing new ascents by fair means is one thing - chopping bolts is another.

As controversial as the maestri route is, it IS a historical monument. Not exactly a nice one, but it is one. As far as i understand the situation, it was the consensus that the bolts stay, but no additional bolts get placed. Yes, it is a great feat to be able to climb that route without them, but does that give you the right to remove them?

Where is the line? Here in my home area there are dozens of routes that i can and have climbed skipping bolts or even without using any. So can i now go and chop them, because i have shown that it is possible without them?

qwert

So who wants to bet on how long it will take until someone puts the bolts back in?

Doing new ascents by fair means is one thing - chopping bolts is another.

As controversial as the maestri route is, it IS a historical monument. Not exactly a nice one, but it is one. As far as i understand the situation, it was the consensus that the bolts stay, but no additional bolts get placed. Yes, it is a great feat to be able to climb that route without them, but does that give you the right to remove them?

Where is the line? Here in my home area there are dozens of routes that i can and have climbed skipping bolts or even without using any. So can i now go and chop them, because i have shown that it is possible without them?

qwert

I was just taking a guess as to what was done. What I said above was not even intended as an opinion.

I too have no dog in this fight. I've never climbed it nor have I ever been in that part of the world. Those that have can iron this out among themselves.

Initially I smiled to myself when I read that this infamous desecration had been chopped. But, a little digging led me to these snippets:

"American climbers choosing to make a statement based on their own personal ethics regardless of the history and agreement of locals in Argentina seems both culturally and historically disrespectful (despite the stupid and ethically questionable placement of the original bolts).

Two wrongs don't necessarily make a right."

-comment on Alpinist article

and

"On 14 February 2007, Valentine’s Day for most, circa 40 international mountaineers held an extraordinary meeting at El Chalten’s "Los Glaciares" visitor center to discuss the possibility of removing the expansion bolts along Cesare Maestri’s 1970 “Compressor route” up the SE Ridge of Cerro Torre. <snip> At the end of assembly circa 30 of the 40 mountainerrs voted to leave the bolts in loco. But perhaps the actual outcome of the 2007 is the least important aspect, as the 34 year old Argentine Mountain Guide Vicente Labate who lives and works at El Chalten explains in his résumé if the “Mountaineering democracy” at the foot of Cerro Torre."

http://www.planetmountain.com/...?l=2&keyid=35788

Given that these guys used bolts on their ascent and didn't free the route, and they're not even from that hemisphere, it seems more than a bit presumptuous of them to chop the route. If an Argentinian or Chilean skipped some bolts on the Nose, claimed "better style" then chopped it on rappel, what would the reaction be here?

Didn't Maestri himself chop some of the bolts on his way down and had wanted to chop more sometime?
I can't remember that as fact right now but seems like I had read that. That would add another tidbit for perspective.

I'll try and see if I can reread that again. Meantime, maybe someone else knows?