|
jbone
Oct 24, 2012, 9:17 PM
Post #51 of 83
(5594 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 30, 2002
Posts: 463
|
We need a flowchart that when you get to a hold that becomes loose it reverts you back to removing holds that would fall off or be dangerous. IMO gluing any rock is removing the natural element to a sequence.
|
|
|
|
|
redlude97
Oct 24, 2012, 10:32 PM
Post #52 of 83
(5576 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990
|
cracklover wrote: redlude97 wrote: What about reinforcing a hold with glue? How is that really that different than gluing a hold on? You honestly don't see the difference? One is creating something that's not there, the other is preserving something that is. Wish I could find that picture of the crag with all the bolted on gym holds. Then you could explain how that's just the same as cleaning choss, right? LOL GO
1. The hold broke becuase that was what the rock wanted. Gluing or reinforcing would not be using what the rock gave you because clearly it was going to break off.
2. If the hold broke off, then it just made the climb harder. Just because it made a 5.9 into a 5.14 doesn't change the fact that maybe someday someone could climb it without that crucial hold.
Developers make these decisions all the time, and massive chipping and manufacturing is obviously over the line and I don't think anyone here is really disagreeing with that. But to say that all routes should only be on the basis that they should use what the rock provides, then many famous and historical climbs wouldn't meet that definition. My point is that the view that chipping, as defined by HugePedro is the line, and there is no gray is just not the way it works. No amount of gray makes black white, as you mentioned, but to say there is only black and white is also incorrect. That gray area in route development is accteptable to the majority of climbers, except for the ones that lie on both fringes.
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Oct 25, 2012, 12:09 AM
Post #53 of 83
(5557 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
ObviousTroll wrote: caughtinside wrote: cracklover wrote: - Comfortizing stops at running your hammer over razor edges and points to make them possible to touch. See? Pedro already thinks you are a chipper if you do that. There are no absolutes on choss. lol you just keep making yourself look pro chipping every post. It's like you ignore peoples logic, just to stand by a principal. But you make it difficult because your principal is ultimately about the same as the rest of us.
I haven't stood by a principal since the mid 90s. I rotated the window squirter on the back of my bitchin volvo wagon so it would shoot water outward and I could squirt kids on bikes.
|
|
|
|
|
hugepedro
Oct 25, 2012, 12:44 AM
Post #54 of 83
(5550 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875
|
cracklover wrote: marc801 wrote: redlude97 wrote: According you HugePedro, if you hammer a sharp edge to make it useable with a hammer, you are a pussy. My only point is that many of these developers have vast amounts more experience than I do, and I'll leave it up to their judgement what is acceptable. To label them as pussies is beyond harsh IMO Maybe he's never climbed in a limestone area, where the sharp edges can easily slice to the bone, especially when you're hanging all your weight off of two fingers. Or, more likely, he's only ever climbed on them after they were dulled a little, and doesn't realize what they were like beforehand. GO
Not so. I know when rock's been worked or not, and spent plenty of time on sport limestone. I know you pussies would prefer this not be the case so you could more readily rationalize your pussiness.
Of course I'm being a prick here, to make a point. Where is the boundary between altering a hold so that you are comfortable using it, and chipping? Aren't both altering the rock to your level rather than taking the route that is there to be climbed on the rock's terms?
If a hold has a sharp edge, you have a choice, don't you? You can decide that you can use it by holding it in a manner that avoids contact with the edge. If you're not strong enough to do that, or you don't think it's possible, you can decide not to risk it. There are other climbers strong enough and ballsy enough to use holds that you aren't willing to use, don't you think? I guarantee there are, and they will just think that's part of the challenge of the route.
There are plenty of holds that aren't sharp but would still rip your finger off if you fell on them. Is it ok to chisel them out to remove that danger? Let's just turn them into nice, comfy pockets, eh? Where does that sit in the context of comfortizing/chipping?
I think trundling/cleaning are one thing, that's just making a route available to climb. Once you start fucking with altering holds I think it's much harder to justify how you are not altering the nature of the route for a purpose other than making the route available to climb. IMO, that's going somewhere we really shouldn't want this sport to go. You should just stay in the gym, or get your mom to belay you on top rope instead of leading anything, if you can't handle an uncomfortable hold.
Yeah, I know, it's sport climbing, blah, blah, blah.
You're still pussies.
|
|
|
|
|
ObviousTroll
Oct 25, 2012, 2:22 AM
Post #55 of 83
(5532 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2012
Posts: 90
|
caughtinside wrote: ObviousTroll wrote: caughtinside wrote: cracklover wrote: - Comfortizing stops at running your hammer over razor edges and points to make them possible to touch. See? Pedro already thinks you are a chipper if you do that. There are no absolutes on choss. lol you just keep making yourself look pro chipping every post. It's like you ignore peoples logic, just to stand by a principal. But you make it difficult because your principal is ultimately about the same as the rest of us. I haven't stood by a principal since the mid 90s. I rotated the window squirter on the back of my bitchin volvo wagon so it would shoot water outward and I could squirt kids on bikes.
This must count for your .3 of your 8.3 posts per day.
|
|
|
|
|
dynosore
Oct 25, 2012, 2:32 PM
Post #56 of 83
(5474 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 29, 2004
Posts: 1768
|
marc801 wrote: dynosore wrote: I will never understand sport climbing "ethics". It's a mortal sin to chip a small hold, but blasting 4" deep holes and placing hundreds of permanent bolts is cool  And I will never understand those who cannot see the inherent difference between those two actions. You do understand that bolts were used for protection on otherwise unprotectable rock long before sport climbing existed, yes?
Plenty of sport climbs ARE protectable, but it would involve small gear and run outs. So, blast in a bunch of bolts and bring it down to your level. How is this different than chipping a hold? Hangdogging a route into submission then claiming the redpoint so you can spray about your 5.1x is better ethics? Sport climbing is all about pushing the grade by using bolts to do a climb you couldn't otherwise do, so why not chip a hold or two?
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Oct 25, 2012, 3:21 PM
Post #57 of 83
(5456 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Your post is so stupid it's not really worth a response, but what the hell, I'll go ahead and point out your blatant hypocrisy:
hugepedro wrote: If you're not strong enough to work around [razor-sharp sections of rock], or you don't think it's possible, you can decide not to risk it. There are other climbers strong enough and ballsy enough to use holds that you aren't willing to use, don't you think? I guarantee there are, and they will just think that's part of the challenge of the route. <snip> I think trundling/cleaning are one thing, that's just making a route available to climb.
LOL
So really, you should just work around the death blocks, or find another route.
Be honest now, have you ever done development on limestone in areas that get these? If not, you're just talking out your ass.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Oct 25, 2012, 3:26 PM
Post #58 of 83
(5454 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
ObviousTroll wrote: caughtinside wrote: ObviousTroll wrote: caughtinside wrote: cracklover wrote: - Comfortizing stops at running your hammer over razor edges and points to make them possible to touch. See? Pedro already thinks you are a chipper if you do that. There are no absolutes on choss. lol you just keep making yourself look pro chipping every post. It's like you ignore peoples logic, just to stand by a principal. But you make it difficult because your principal is ultimately about the same as the rest of us. I haven't stood by a principal since the mid 90s. I rotated the window squirter on the back of my bitchin volvo wagon so it would shoot water outward and I could squirt kids on bikes. This must count for your .3 of your 8.3 posts per day.
Numbers aren't your strong suit either, are they? That one counted for 1.0 post. A little more than 3x the credit you'd give it. I think I learned about averages from a teacher in elementary school. No principal involved there.
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Oct 25, 2012, 3:27 PM
Post #59 of 83
(5453 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
cracklover wrote: Your post is so stupid it's not really worth a response, but what the hell, I'll go ahead and point out your blatant hypocrisy: hugepedro wrote: If you're not strong enough to work around [razor-sharp sections of rock], or you don't think it's possible, you can decide not to risk it. There are other climbers strong enough and ballsy enough to use holds that you aren't willing to use, don't you think? I guarantee there are, and they will just think that's part of the challenge of the route. <snip> I think trundling/cleaning are one thing, that's just making a route available to climb. LOL So really, you should just work around the death blocks, or find another route. Be honest now, have you ever done development on limestone in areas that get these? If not, you're just talking out your ass. GO
I think it's pretty obvious.
|
|
|
|
|
hugepedro
Oct 25, 2012, 4:45 PM
Post #60 of 83
(5426 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875
|
cracklover wrote: Your post is so stupid it's not really worth a response, but what the hell, I'll go ahead and point out your blatant hypocrisy: hugepedro wrote: If you're not strong enough to work around [razor-sharp sections of rock], or you don't think it's possible, you can decide not to risk it. There are other climbers strong enough and ballsy enough to use holds that you aren't willing to use, don't you think? I guarantee there are, and they will just think that's part of the challenge of the route. <snip> I think trundling/cleaning are one thing, that's just making a route available to climb. LOL So really, you should just work around the death blocks, or find another route. Be honest now, have you ever done development on limestone in areas that get these? If not, you're just talking out your ass. GO
Where did I suggest that anyone should "work around death blocks" or find another route? Nobody is debating whether trundling is acceptable. Please try to keep up here.
You conveniently left out the part of my post where I clearly distinguished between trundling and modifying holds. You know, the part that makes your accusation of hypocrisy just silly? Logical reasoning FAIL. Here's a hint for you, if you want to prove hypocrisy on my part, you have to prove that trundling and modifying holds are the same thing. GO
No, I haven't developed limestone. If you think that nullifies any climber's argument about chipping, then you just lost this argument.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Oct 25, 2012, 4:51 PM
Post #61 of 83
(5422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
hugepedro wrote: cracklover wrote: Your post is so stupid it's not really worth a response, but what the hell, I'll go ahead and point out your blatant hypocrisy: hugepedro wrote: If you're not strong enough to work around [razor-sharp sections of rock], or you don't think it's possible, you can decide not to risk it. There are other climbers strong enough and ballsy enough to use holds that you aren't willing to use, don't you think? I guarantee there are, and they will just think that's part of the challenge of the route. <snip> I think trundling/cleaning are one thing, that's just making a route available to climb. LOL So really, you should just work around the death blocks, or find another route. Be honest now, have you ever done development on limestone in areas that get these? If not, you're just talking out your ass. GO Where did I suggest that anyone should "work around death blocks" or find another route? Nobody is debating whether trundling is acceptable. Please try to keep up here. You conveniently left out the part of my post where I clearly distinguished between trundling and modifying holds. You know, the part that makes your accusation of hypocrisy just silly? Logical reasoning FAIL. Here's a hint for you, if you want to prove hypocrisy on my part, you have to prove that trundling and modifying holds are the same thing. GO No, I haven't developed limestone. If you think that nullifies any climber's argument about chipping, then you just lost this argument.
Where did you suggest anyone should work around death blocks? You didn't. That's your hypocrisy. You do know what the word means, right?
As for me having lost the argument, you couldn't be more wrong. Rather, you just proved my point, that you're a hypocrite using your own ignorance as a shield.
The fact is that comfortizing some holds does exactly what you approve of: "just making a route available to climb". You just don't realize it. But if you can't justify comfortizing, then you can't justify cleaning loose choss, since by your own argument, a climber should be able to climb around the choss, or leave it for a better/stronger climber.
The one is no more "making the route available to climb" than the other.
GO
(This post was edited by cracklover on Oct 25, 2012, 4:56 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
ObviousTroll
Oct 25, 2012, 4:57 PM
Post #62 of 83
(5419 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2012
Posts: 90
|
caughtinside wrote: ObviousTroll wrote: caughtinside wrote: ObviousTroll wrote: caughtinside wrote: cracklover wrote: - Comfortizing stops at running your hammer over razor edges and points to make them possible to touch. See? Pedro already thinks you are a chipper if you do that. There are no absolutes on choss. lol you just keep making yourself look pro chipping every post. It's like you ignore peoples logic, just to stand by a principal. But you make it difficult because your principal is ultimately about the same as the rest of us. I haven't stood by a principal since the mid 90s. I rotated the window squirter on the back of my bitchin volvo wagon so it would shoot water outward and I could squirt kids on bikes. Numbers aren't your strong suit either, are they? That one counted for 1.0 post. A little more than 3x the credit you'd give it. I think I learned about averages from a teacher in elementary school. No principal involved there.
I'll bet you hear that wooshing sound over your head quite a bit.
|
|
|
|
|
IsayAutumn
Oct 25, 2012, 5:30 PM
Post #63 of 83
(5399 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 8, 2008
Posts: 355
|
This thread just keeps getting better and better. Pussies, chippers, hypocrites, and trolls. Just the kind of menagerie that makes it hard to put down a lame horse like RC.com.
|
|
|
|
|
hugepedro
Oct 25, 2012, 6:13 PM
Post #64 of 83
(5385 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875
|
cracklover wrote: hugepedro wrote: cracklover wrote: Your post is so stupid it's not really worth a response, but what the hell, I'll go ahead and point out your blatant hypocrisy: hugepedro wrote: If you're not strong enough to work around [razor-sharp sections of rock], or you don't think it's possible, you can decide not to risk it. There are other climbers strong enough and ballsy enough to use holds that you aren't willing to use, don't you think? I guarantee there are, and they will just think that's part of the challenge of the route. <snip> I think trundling/cleaning are one thing, that's just making a route available to climb. LOL So really, you should just work around the death blocks, or find another route. Be honest now, have you ever done development on limestone in areas that get these? If not, you're just talking out your ass. GO Where did I suggest that anyone should "work around death blocks" or find another route? Nobody is debating whether trundling is acceptable. Please try to keep up here. You conveniently left out the part of my post where I clearly distinguished between trundling and modifying holds. You know, the part that makes your accusation of hypocrisy just silly? Logical reasoning FAIL. Here's a hint for you, if you want to prove hypocrisy on my part, you have to prove that trundling and modifying holds are the same thing. GO No, I haven't developed limestone. If you think that nullifies any climber's argument about chipping, then you just lost this argument. Where did you suggest anyone should work around death blocks? You didn't. That's your hypocrisy. You do know what the word means, right? As for me having lost the argument, you couldn't be more wrong. Rather, you just proved my point, that you're a hypocrite using your own ignorance as a shield. The fact is that comfortizing some holds does exactly what you approve of: "just making a route available to climb". You just don't realize it. But if you can't justify comfortizing, then you can't justify cleaning loose choss, since by your own argument, a climber should be able to climb around the choss, or leave it for a better/stronger climber. The one is no more "making the route available to climb" than the other. GO
You seem to be having a great deal of difficulty reading. I pointed out precisely what you missed and you still ignored it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
caughtinside
Oct 25, 2012, 6:24 PM
Post #68 of 83
(5367 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
ObviousTroll wrote: caughtinside wrote: ObviousTroll wrote: caughtinside wrote: ObviousTroll wrote: caughtinside wrote: cracklover wrote: - Comfortizing stops at running your hammer over razor edges and points to make them possible to touch. See? Pedro already thinks you are a chipper if you do that. There are no absolutes on choss. lol you just keep making yourself look pro chipping every post. It's like you ignore peoples logic, just to stand by a principal. But you make it difficult because your principal is ultimately about the same as the rest of us. I haven't stood by a principal since the mid 90s. I rotated the window squirter on the back of my bitchin volvo wagon so it would shoot water outward and I could squirt kids on bikes. Numbers aren't your strong suit either, are they? That one counted for 1.0 post. A little more than 3x the credit you'd give it. I think I learned about averages from a teacher in elementary school. No principal involved there. I'll bet you hear that wooshing sound over your head quite a bit.
Not so much a whooshing... as a scraping noise. It's the same noise I hear when I run the side of my hammer over a razor sharp edge on a pocket.
|
|
|
|
|
redlude97
Oct 25, 2012, 6:31 PM
Post #69 of 83
(5362 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990
|
hugepedro wrote: cracklover wrote: hugepedro wrote: cracklover wrote: Your post is so stupid it's not really worth a response, but what the hell, I'll go ahead and point out your blatant hypocrisy: hugepedro wrote: If you're not strong enough to work around [razor-sharp sections of rock], or you don't think it's possible, you can decide not to risk it. There are other climbers strong enough and ballsy enough to use holds that you aren't willing to use, don't you think? I guarantee there are, and they will just think that's part of the challenge of the route. <snip> I think trundling/cleaning are one thing, that's just making a route available to climb. LOL So really, you should just work around the death blocks, or find another route. Be honest now, have you ever done development on limestone in areas that get these? If not, you're just talking out your ass. GO Where did I suggest that anyone should "work around death blocks" or find another route? Nobody is debating whether trundling is acceptable. Please try to keep up here. You conveniently left out the part of my post where I clearly distinguished between trundling and modifying holds. You know, the part that makes your accusation of hypocrisy just silly? Logical reasoning FAIL. Here's a hint for you, if you want to prove hypocrisy on my part, you have to prove that trundling and modifying holds are the same thing. GO No, I haven't developed limestone. If you think that nullifies any climber's argument about chipping, then you just lost this argument. Where did you suggest anyone should work around death blocks? You didn't. That's your hypocrisy. You do know what the word means, right? As for me having lost the argument, you couldn't be more wrong. Rather, you just proved my point, that you're a hypocrite using your own ignorance as a shield. The fact is that comfortizing some holds does exactly what you approve of: "just making a route available to climb". You just don't realize it. But if you can't justify comfortizing, then you can't justify cleaning loose choss, since by your own argument, a climber should be able to climb around the choss, or leave it for a better/stronger climber. The one is no more "making the route available to climb" than the other. GO You seem to be having a great deal of difficulty reading. I pointed out precisely what you missed and you still ignored it.
Your statement: People should not chip.
Reason 1: People should use what the rock provides
Reason 2: People should not bring a climb down to their level.
Fine, that sounds somewhat reasonable.
If you apply your logic now to trundling however,
1. Trundling alters the rock, you are not using what the rock provides. Much of the time, trundling removes rocks in various states of attachment.
2. Stronger climbers can climb around choss or loose rock. This happens all the time on alpine routes when cleaning just isn't necessary or feasible.
The only logical conclusion that can come about from your reasoning for chipping is that trundling should also not be done.
If you say trundling is ok, then you are a hypocrite your own statements
|
|
|
|
|
hugepedro
Oct 25, 2012, 7:15 PM
Post #70 of 83
(5338 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875
|
redlude97 wrote: hugepedro wrote: cracklover wrote: hugepedro wrote: cracklover wrote: Your post is so stupid it's not really worth a response, but what the hell, I'll go ahead and point out your blatant hypocrisy: hugepedro wrote: If you're not strong enough to work around [razor-sharp sections of rock], or you don't think it's possible, you can decide not to risk it. There are other climbers strong enough and ballsy enough to use holds that you aren't willing to use, don't you think? I guarantee there are, and they will just think that's part of the challenge of the route. <snip> I think trundling/cleaning are one thing, that's just making a route available to climb. LOL So really, you should just work around the death blocks, or find another route. Be honest now, have you ever done development on limestone in areas that get these? If not, you're just talking out your ass. GO Where did I suggest that anyone should "work around death blocks" or find another route? Nobody is debating whether trundling is acceptable. Please try to keep up here. You conveniently left out the part of my post where I clearly distinguished between trundling and modifying holds. You know, the part that makes your accusation of hypocrisy just silly? Logical reasoning FAIL. Here's a hint for you, if you want to prove hypocrisy on my part, you have to prove that trundling and modifying holds are the same thing. GO No, I haven't developed limestone. If you think that nullifies any climber's argument about chipping, then you just lost this argument. Where did you suggest anyone should work around death blocks? You didn't. That's your hypocrisy. You do know what the word means, right? As for me having lost the argument, you couldn't be more wrong. Rather, you just proved my point, that you're a hypocrite using your own ignorance as a shield. The fact is that comfortizing some holds does exactly what you approve of: "just making a route available to climb". You just don't realize it. But if you can't justify comfortizing, then you can't justify cleaning loose choss, since by your own argument, a climber should be able to climb around the choss, or leave it for a better/stronger climber. The one is no more "making the route available to climb" than the other. GO You seem to be having a great deal of difficulty reading. I pointed out precisely what you missed and you still ignored it. Maybe you can follow this logic if we spell it out for you. Your statement: People should not chip. Reason 1: People should use what the rock provides Reason 2: People should not bring a climb down to their level. Fine, that sounds somewhat reasonable. If you apply your logic now to trundling however, 1. Trundling alters the rock, you are not using what the rock provides. Much of the time, trundling removes rocks in various states of attachment. 2. Stronger climbers can climb around choss or loose rock. This happens all the time on alpine routes when cleaning just isn't necessary or feasible. The only logical conclusion that can come about from your reasoning for chipping is that trundling should also not be done. If you say trundling is ok, then you are a hypocrite your own statements
Ok, let me spell this out, because apparently it's too nuanced for you pussies.
The difference between trundling and chipping/comfortizing is that trundling does not alter the means by which we climbers move over the rock. The holds we use to move over the rock are core to what we do, so altering them is conceptually WAY different than trundling. Conceptually, trundling is more similar to building a trail to the crag than it is to chipping.
As I've already pointed out, some people will climb on holds that aren't comfortized and just consider that part of the challenge. So clearly, that is not essential to making the route "available".
I know you spurtards put convenience above just about everything, but don't kid yourself that you aren't making the route easier when you comfortize a hold. What you're doing is just a milder form of chipping. I also recognize this is normal practice for you pussies, and honestly, I don't care whether or not you do it. Just don't have any illusions that you aren't a pussy for doing so.
|
|
|
|
|
redlude97
Oct 25, 2012, 7:40 PM
Post #71 of 83
(5321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2008
Posts: 990
|
hugepedro wrote: redlude97 wrote: hugepedro wrote: cracklover wrote: hugepedro wrote: cracklover wrote: Your post is so stupid it's not really worth a response, but what the hell, I'll go ahead and point out your blatant hypocrisy: hugepedro wrote: If you're not strong enough to work around [razor-sharp sections of rock], or you don't think it's possible, you can decide not to risk it. There are other climbers strong enough and ballsy enough to use holds that you aren't willing to use, don't you think? I guarantee there are, and they will just think that's part of the challenge of the route. <snip> I think trundling/cleaning are one thing, that's just making a route available to climb. LOL So really, you should just work around the death blocks, or find another route. Be honest now, have you ever done development on limestone in areas that get these? If not, you're just talking out your ass. GO Where did I suggest that anyone should "work around death blocks" or find another route? Nobody is debating whether trundling is acceptable. Please try to keep up here. You conveniently left out the part of my post where I clearly distinguished between trundling and modifying holds. You know, the part that makes your accusation of hypocrisy just silly? Logical reasoning FAIL. Here's a hint for you, if you want to prove hypocrisy on my part, you have to prove that trundling and modifying holds are the same thing. GO No, I haven't developed limestone. If you think that nullifies any climber's argument about chipping, then you just lost this argument. Where did you suggest anyone should work around death blocks? You didn't. That's your hypocrisy. You do know what the word means, right? As for me having lost the argument, you couldn't be more wrong. Rather, you just proved my point, that you're a hypocrite using your own ignorance as a shield. The fact is that comfortizing some holds does exactly what you approve of: "just making a route available to climb". You just don't realize it. But if you can't justify comfortizing, then you can't justify cleaning loose choss, since by your own argument, a climber should be able to climb around the choss, or leave it for a better/stronger climber. The one is no more "making the route available to climb" than the other. GO You seem to be having a great deal of difficulty reading. I pointed out precisely what you missed and you still ignored it. Maybe you can follow this logic if we spell it out for you. Your statement: People should not chip. Reason 1: People should use what the rock provides Reason 2: People should not bring a climb down to their level. Fine, that sounds somewhat reasonable. If you apply your logic now to trundling however, 1. Trundling alters the rock, you are not using what the rock provides. Much of the time, trundling removes rocks in various states of attachment. 2. Stronger climbers can climb around choss or loose rock. This happens all the time on alpine routes when cleaning just isn't necessary or feasible. The only logical conclusion that can come about from your reasoning for chipping is that trundling should also not be done. If you say trundling is ok, then you are a hypocrite your own statements Ok, let me spell this out, because apparently it's too nuanced for you pussies. The difference between trundling and chipping/comfortizing is that trundling does not alter the means by which we climbers move over the rock. The holds we use to move over the rock are core to what we do, so altering them is conceptually WAY different than trundling. Conceptually, trundling is more similar to building a trail to the crag than it is to chipping. As I've already pointed out, some people will climb on holds that aren't comfortized and just consider that part of the challenge. So clearly, that is not essential to making the route "available". I know you spurtards put convenience above just about everything, but don't kid yourself that you aren't making the route easier when you comfortize a hold. What you're doing is just a milder form of chipping. I also recognize this is normal practice for you pussies, and honestly, I don't care whether or not you do it. Just don't have any illusions that you aren't a pussy for doing so.
|
|
|
|
|
dagibbs
Oct 25, 2012, 7:45 PM
Post #72 of 83
(5318 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 1, 2007
Posts: 921
|
hugepedro wrote: Ok, let me spell this out, because apparently it's too nuanced for you pussies. The difference between trundling and chipping/comfortizing is that trundling does not alter the means by which we climbers move over the rock. The holds we use to move over the rock are core to what we do, so altering them is conceptually WAY different than trundling. Conceptually, trundling is more similar to building a trail to the crag than it is to chipping.
Actually, trundling does change the rock you climb on. It makes available hand holds and foot holds that would have been obscured/blocked by the un-trundled rock.
Where I feel that trundling is different from comfortizing holds, or chipping holds is that trundling is a safety issue. With large loose chunks of rock, the climb is not just dangerous for the climber, but also far more dangerous for the belayer, and anyone else in the potential fall zone.
(I think there can be a similar argument in favour of bolts being acceptable as a safety reason for modifying the rock as opposed to comfortizing or chipping holds to make progress easier/more comfortable.)
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Oct 25, 2012, 8:37 PM
Post #73 of 83
(5299 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Good god you're clueless. I thought you just didn't know anything about sharp limestone. Turns out you know nothing about cleaning *any* routes.
hugepedro wrote: The difference between trundling and chipping/comfortizing is that trundling does not alter the means by which we climbers move over the rock.
You couldn't be more wrong. It's a rare sport route, and pretty much no sport route on choss, in which at least a few holds, and sometimes many sequences, aren't changed via the cleaning off the crap. In fact, it's not even worth getting more than a rough idea where the route will go until it's somewhat cleaned. And definitely not a good idea to bolt until you've cleaned it pretty well. There are areas where most of the face is buried under choss!
So, obviously, you simply haven't the slightest idea what you're talking about. But that's okay, keep digging...
In reply to: The holds we use to move over the rock are core to what we do, so altering them is conceptually WAY different than trundling. Conceptually, trundling is more similar to building a trail to the crag than it is to chipping.
Hahahaha! That's a good one.
In reply to: As I've already pointed out, some people will climb on holds that aren't comfortized and just consider that part of the challenge.
You can keep repeating this as though it were true, but you've already admitted your ignorance about such holds. The fact that you haven't felt these edges that would cut through tape and flesh together, and disallow any route through them, does not mean they don't exist. It just means you didn't feel them before they were comfortized for your convenience, or you simply don't climb in those areas.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Oct 25, 2012, 8:49 PM
Post #74 of 83
(5291 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
redlude97 wrote: No one is claiming that trundling is acceptable in every situation, and no one is claiming that chipping is acceptable in every(or even most) situations, but there are cases where both are acceptable. Otherwise, if you have a black and white definition you end up being a hypocrite.
As to this notion that in cleaning and bolting sport routes, well sometimes you trundle and sometimes you don't, and sometimes you chip and drill holds, and sometimes you don't - I think that's silly.
If you are informed of reality (unlike our friend pedro here), it actually *is* pretty black and white. On sport routes, fairly extensive cleaning is expected. And while most routes do not require comfortizing, when it's necessary for the route to go, that's expected too. As for loose holds, it's at the discretion of the person cleaning the route whether to reinforce or not. If it's a key hold, probably best to do so. If it's not, and might come off, probably best to clean it.
Everything else is grey or black.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
hugepedro
Oct 26, 2012, 1:31 AM
Post #75 of 83
(5265 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875
|
cracklover wrote: It's a rare sport route, and pretty much no sport route on choss, in which at least a few holds, and sometimes many sequences, aren't changed via the cleaning off the crap. In fact, it's not even worth getting more than a rough idea where the route will go until it's somewhat cleaned. And definitely not a good idea to bolt until you've cleaned it pretty well. There are areas where most of the face is buried under choss!
Cleaning reveals the route. What you do after that to the available holds on the potential route is what’s being discussed here. How dumb do you have to be to not understand that distinction? If you don’t understand that you might as well manufacture away, no holds barred. Hell, maybe that is what you do, I don’t know.
And yes, when you alter holds you are doing something that is fundamentally different than cleaning.
cracklover wrote: In reply to: As I've already pointed out, some people will climb on holds that aren't comfortized and just consider that part of the challenge. You can keep repeating this as though it were true, but you've already admitted your ignorance about such holds. The fact that you haven't felt these edges that would cut through tape and flesh together, and disallow any route through them, does not mean they don't exist. It just means you didn't feel them before they were comfortized for your convenience, or you simply don't climb in those areas.
Again, you seem to be having difficulty reading. I’ve not admitted ignorance of such holds, nor have I made any claim they don’t exist. They do, in fact exist. Try making an argument against what I’ve actually said, please.
Disallow any route through them? Don’t flatter yourself, as though if you can’t do it nobody else could. I’m not making the claim that there is zero hold that can’t be used without comfortizing, but there are plenty of comfortized holds that could have been used had the razor edge been left there. On most of them it just takes better technique. And if you think that the 13 year olds climbing 5.14 today, or climbers 20 years from now, couldn’t climb your routes if you didn’t knock off the edges, and that you haven’t made the route easier, you truly are an arrogant fool.
I also gave an example of another kind of scary hold, the kind that isn’t sharp but would grab your finger and rip it off if you fell on it. Forget a severe cut to the bone, you’re losing a fricken finger. We have TONS of such mono and 2 finger pocket holds here in New Mexico on our basalt, which is the rock that most of our sport routes are on. It’s not unusual that there are more than 1 such amputation holds on a single route. What would you do in that situation, chisel it out? That’s not what we do out here, because we aren’t pussies.
Just face it, when you comfortize it’s about making the route climbable, it’s about making it nice for you and other gym-born weak-asses because you’re scared.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
