Forums: Climbing Information: Beginners:
classification versus scale difficulty
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for Beginners

Premier Sponsor:

 
First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All


marc801


Apr 3, 2014, 1:33 PM
Post #26 of 64 (4819 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806

Re: [JimTitt] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

JimTitt wrote:
An often overlooked aspect is that grades are subjective and not only for the grader but the climber as well so precision is impossible despite what the less experienced climber might wish.
Adding to that thought - a given climber who sucks at offwidth may well find a 7" wide 5.11 crack to be far more difficult than a 5.11 finger crack and 5.9 Yosemite chimneys regularly spit out 5.12 climbers unfamiliar with climbing polished chimneys with little protection.


csproul


Apr 3, 2014, 3:01 PM
Post #27 of 64 (4812 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 1769

Re: [marc801] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

marc801 wrote:
Two other examples:
Reeds Pinnacle Direct - the crux 2nd pitch is rated 5.9 - there is no move harder than 5.7 in 120' of crack. There is also no move easier than 5.7 in that 120'.

Hot Line - when Barber did the FA, he rated it the then outrageous and non-existent 5.11. In a magazine interview he justified the new grade by saying that there were so many 10d moves in a row that it was harder than any other 10d.
No move harder than 5.7 on Reeds Direct....that's funny. Like laughable.


marc801


Apr 3, 2014, 3:06 PM
Post #28 of 64 (4810 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806

Re: [csproul] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

csproul wrote:
No move harder than 5.7 on Reeds Direct....that's funny. Like laughable.
That's why I specifically restricted it to the 120' of P2, which really doesn't have any 5.9 moves. That 10'-ish stretch on P1 is certainly 5.9 as is that annoying 4" wide bit at the end of P2. Damned few folks do P3, which is probably more like 10b from what I hear (never did it).


csproul


Apr 3, 2014, 3:13 PM
Post #29 of 64 (4805 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jun 4, 2004
Posts: 1769

Re: [marc801] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

marc801 wrote:
csproul wrote:
No move harder than 5.7 on Reeds Direct....that's funny. Like laughable.
That's why I specifically restricted it to the 120' of P2, which really doesn't have any 5.9 moves. That 10'-ish stretch on P1 is certainly 5.9 as is that annoying 4" wide bit at the end of P2. Damned few folks do P3, which is probably more like 10b from what I hear (never did it).
Dunno, Ive done that 5.9 pitch a couple times, including just a month or so ago and I certainly thought it was full value 5.9 and not just in an enduro sense. I can definitely do 5.7 and 5.8 moves of almost any kind all day long, but that pitch was hard for me. Not much easier than Lunatic Fringe for me.


jacques


Apr 3, 2014, 4:19 PM
Post #30 of 64 (4801 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 13, 2008
Posts: 318

Re: [olderic] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

olderic wrote:
[..]But I think the original point was not about whether or not the YDS grade reflected the substainess or if it was simply a snapshot of the 1 most difficult move, but the point was whether the YDS or any system based on rating the most difficult part of the climb was adequate for describing the difficulty/danger of the climb. Of course its always a dubious practice to assume you know what Jacgues is talking about.

But I think his point is that there are a lot of other factors that go into characterizing the over all difficult of a climb. Jacques is constantly bashing sport climbers and loves to present scenerios where some with a sport climbing mentality will get into trouble when they attempt to trad climb

I think that honnold, who made the three big 2 500 feet wall in a day is a sport climber. I saw him in a video and he describe how he brush his hold before and how he practice some dubtious move to make it ounce in solo. I think that it is a kind of practice well describe by the NCCS. He climb the nose in 3 hours approximately, so he is rating I, with a difficulty of 5.11, A_2...write I,5.11,A-2.

Is it a model. Who have the time to climb a route, clean the hold, etc. And do we have the obligation to climb like that?

If you think that you have the obligation, you will try to climb like them. One guy aid climb with two feet in his aider, a technique for bolt lader extend to other situation, If his pro pop, and we know that the cimetery have many client with bump proof pro, he had felt on his back. He didn't even ralize what will happen. He just try to climb by obligation.

Hopefully, we can also climb remote area with an other ethic than sport. If you like better higher overall difficulty than the hardiest difficulty of a move, For example, the nose, the same as Honnold, is a grade V, 5.9, A2... it can also be hard...and fun. So, the goal is not to perform by obligation or competition, the goal is to master your technique and your soal, your mind and your arms. No comparaison, you start at your level and you progress in many way of your personality.

I think it is the heart of trad climbing. I can climb a bolt route in trad. But the ethic will be different and it the ethic could be understand and describe with the NCCS classification.


(This post was edited by jacques on Apr 3, 2014, 6:08 PM)


rocknice2


Apr 3, 2014, 5:31 PM
Post #31 of 64 (4797 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 13, 2006
Posts: 1221

Re: [jacques] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

We can't help it if it takes you all day to climb a 250 foot 5.6 and Alex climbs a 3000 foot 5.11 in a few hours!

It doesn't make your route grade 4 as much as it doesn't make Alex's route grade 1. Alex makes us all look like weenies.

Everything is rated for the onsite or is supposed to be rated that wayway.

I had to read your post 8 times and I still don't understand most of it!


dynosore


Apr 4, 2014, 6:20 AM
Post #32 of 64 (4771 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 29, 2004
Posts: 1768

Re: [jacques] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

How did people ever climb before reams of beta, guidebooks, and ratings Unimpressed

Some of my funnest days have been just wandering around until I see something that catches my eye. So what if you have to bail or yank on a cam now and then? If you can't tell the difference between a 2 pitch climb and a grade IV, you don't belong on either.


jacques


Apr 4, 2014, 9:01 AM
Post #33 of 64 (4751 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 13, 2008
Posts: 318

Re: [dynosore] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

dynosore wrote:
How did people ever climb before reams of beta, guidebooks, and ratings Unimpressed [..]
If you can't tell the difference between a 2 pitch climb and a grade IV, you don't belong on either.

One difficulty of climbing is the variability of the skill of climber. How rating a route work?


took one climber and let him climb three routes at the gunks. Shockley ceiling, Bonnies roof and Fat city. He will rate it 5.6, 5.8 and 5.10. A second climber will rate them 5.5, 5.9 and 5.11, a third 5.7, 5.7 and 5.10... when you will have the results of one hundred, you will have a means of 5.6, 5.8 and 5.10 for the hardiest move for each climb. It is statistical.

For the overall difficulty, the problem is that the time will vary with the skill of the climber. If you are a 5.11 climber, you will rate Shockley ceiling I, Bonnies Roof I and Fat city II. If you are a 5.8 climber, you will rate Shockley ceiling I, Bonnies roof II and fat city could take you a day because you will hangdogging before finally you make the move. So it will rate III. If you are a 5.6 climber, it will be II for shockley, III for Bonnies and IV A-3 for fat city.

So, I am pretty sure that you didn't understand the rating system that way, and recognize the differences between a two pitches and the over all difficulty of a climb.

If you do fat city in A-3, you are climbing hard. I don't know what you are going to find to go to the pin, I don't even know if it is possible.

If you climb fat city in three hours, you are climbing hard. If you climb fat city in six hours you climb hard moves, but you are weaker than the one who climb it in three hours.

Sport climber like to do hard moves, come back after to show to every body that he is good...indeed some are very strong and you find them in competition ordinarly. One guy work a route for three month before he free all the pitches. So, for his first ascent he took 2160 hours!!! He claim after that he do the route in 9 hours because after he memorize all the moves, place the pro, he was able to do a fixe programation of the climb, like a dance in a competition. He his a climber for hard difficulty...I won't say a hard climber for the overall difficulty.

So, next time you choose a trad route. Look at the rating time and try to be as close as you can to it with your partner. If you choose a sport route, go to cathedral and do hangdogging. People will admire you, but???


marc801


Apr 4, 2014, 9:30 AM
Post #34 of 64 (4744 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806

Re: [jacques] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jacques wrote:
dynosore wrote:
How did people ever climb before reams of beta, guidebooks, and ratings Unimpressed [..]
If you can't tell the difference between a 2 pitch climb and a grade IV, you don't belong on either.

One difficulty of climbing is the variability of the skill of climber. How rating a route work?


took one climber and let him climb three routes at the gunks. Shockley ceiling, Bonnies roof and Fat city. He will rate it 5.6, 5.8 and 5.10. A second climber will rate them 5.5, 5.9 and 5.11, a third 5.7, 5.7 and 5.10... when you will have the results of one hundred, you will have a means of 5.6, 5.8 and 5.10 for the hardiest move for each climb. It is statistical.

For the overall difficulty, the problem is that the time will vary with the skill of the climber. If you are a 5.11 climber, you will rate Shockley ceiling I, Bonnies Roof I and Fat city II. If you are a 5.8 climber, you will rate Shockley ceiling I, Bonnies roof II and fat city could take you a day because you will hangdogging before finally you make the move. So it will rate III. If you are a 5.6 climber, it will be II for shockley, III for Bonnies and IV A-3 for fat city.

So, I am pretty sure that you didn't understand the rating system that way, and recognize the differences between a two pitches and the over all difficulty of a climb.

If you do fat city in A-3, you are climbing hard. I don't know what you are going to find to go to the pin, I don't even know if it is possible.

If you climb fat city in three hours, you are climbing hard. If you climb fat city in six hours you climb hard moves, but you are weaker than the one who climb it in three hours.

Sport climber like to do hard moves, come back after to show to every body that he is good...indeed some are very strong and you find them in competition ordinarly. One guy work a route for three month before he free all the pitches. So, for his first ascent he took 2160 hours!!! He claim after that he do the route in 9 hours because after he memorize all the moves, place the pro, he was able to do a fixe programation of the climb, like a dance in a competition. He his a climber for hard difficulty...I won't say a hard climber for the overall difficulty.

So, next time you choose a trad route. Look at the rating time and try to be as close as you can to it with your partner. If you choose a sport route, go to cathedral and do hangdogging. People will admire you, but???

And what of the trad routes that took as long or longer than the hard sport routes to either free or establish? Stannard spent 40 weekends working to free Foops. Supercrack was originally called Wunsch Upon a Climb, due to the number of days Steve Wunsch worked the route. Look at the months of effort Steve Burke put in to freeing The Nose.

Your entire argument is pointless.


JimTitt


Apr 4, 2014, 10:10 AM
Post #35 of 64 (4736 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002

Re: [marc801] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

marc801 wrote:

Your entire argument is pointless.

Told you that at the start!


rocknice2


Apr 4, 2014, 2:21 PM
Post #36 of 64 (4712 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jul 13, 2006
Posts: 1221

Re: [JimTitt] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

JimTitt wrote:
marc801 wrote:

Your entire argument is pointless.

Told you that at the start!
Yeah but this is the best thread on rc.com at the moment. How far the mighty have fallen.

Clearly someone has feelings of inadequacy because it takes him two days to climb Thin Air at Cathedral Ledge.


jacques


Apr 4, 2014, 4:28 PM
Post #37 of 64 (4703 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 13, 2008
Posts: 318

Re: [marc801] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

marc801 wrote:
And what of the trad routes that took as long or longer than the hard sport routes to either free or establish? Stannard spent 40 weekends working to free Foops. Supercrack was originally called Wunsch Upon a Climb, due to the number of days Steve Wunsch worked the route. Look at the months of effort Steve Burke put in to freeing The Nose.

I never say that it is good or bad to work a route...

I said that it is not in the trad mentality. Those route was climb in aid with the rating of NCCS.


marc801


Apr 4, 2014, 5:11 PM
Post #38 of 64 (4699 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806

Re: [jacques] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jacques wrote:
I never say that it is good or bad to work a route...

I said that it is not in the trad mentality. Those route was climb in aid with the rating of NCCS.
Frankly, that's absolute bull shit. And no, they were not "with the rating of NCCS" when they were first done, either on aid or free.


JimTitt


Apr 4, 2014, 11:46 PM
Post #39 of 64 (4685 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002

Re: [jacques] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

jacques wrote:
marc801 wrote:
And what of the trad routes that took as long or longer than the hard sport routes to either free or establish? Stannard spent 40 weekends working to free Foops. Supercrack was originally called Wunsch Upon a Climb, due to the number of days Steve Wunsch worked the route. Look at the months of effort Steve Burke put in to freeing The Nose.

I never say that it is good or bad to work a route...

I said that it is not in the trad mentality. Those route was climb in aid with the rating of NCCS.

The trad mentality (at least in the UK where I come from and most of Europe) includes practicing the route on a top rope, cleaning on abseil, practicing gear placements, using pitons (and the occasional bolt), aid, mats and just about anything else you can think of. We´ve even introduced the H prefix before the grade to show the route was worked to death before the FA such as Rhapsody which took a couple of years to beat into submission. This has been going on since long before I started climbing and no doubt will continue long after I´m dead.


jacques


Apr 7, 2014, 4:46 AM
Post #40 of 64 (4649 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 13, 2008
Posts: 318

Re: [JimTitt] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

JimTitt wrote:
The trad mentality (at least in the UK where I come from and most of Europe) includes practicing the route on a top rope, cleaning on abseil, practicing gear placements, using pitons (and the occasional bolt), aid, mats and just about anything else you can think of.

And what is the definition of trad, the definition of sport???

You already said that it is different because you place a H!!!


marc801


Apr 7, 2014, 5:23 AM
Post #41 of 64 (4640 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806

Re: [jacques] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jacques wrote:
And what is the definition of trad, the definition of sport???
Gee, that's something that's only been discussed here about 12000 times....

This thread has now lost what little shred of relevance it may have had.


JimTitt


Apr 7, 2014, 7:10 AM
Post #42 of 64 (4631 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002

Re: [jacques] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jacques wrote:
JimTitt wrote:
The trad mentality (at least in the UK where I come from and most of Europe) includes practicing the route on a top rope, cleaning on abseil, practicing gear placements, using pitons (and the occasional bolt), aid, mats and just about anything else you can think of.

And what is the definition of trad, the definition of sport???

You already said that it is different because you place a H!!!

The H is added to a trad graded route to indicate the first ascent was done using sport-climbing attitudes and methods even though the route itself is protected using leader placed protection. A subsequent ascent without working the route would give a new trad grade without the H. This is a modern idea and older routes just appear in the guide with no indication as to whether working them was the normal or original method. Since it´s only climbing anyway who really cares?
If it was a pure sport route with the normal level of bolt protection it would have been given a sport grade (the British use the French grades for this)since working sport routes is considered standard practice and so grades are given for redpoint not onsight around a grey area somewhere in the French 7´s.
Traditional climbing is using any method to get up, pitons and bolts, standing on your buddies shoulders and so on were the method of choice for previous generations before movable protection appeared.
Adventure climbing (what you call trad I expect) is climbing to have a feeling of adventure, sport climbing is treating the movement of climbing as a sport in it´s own right. How you achieve either is entirely up to you and the commitment is the same, just concentrates on different aspects.


Partner camhead


Apr 7, 2014, 10:56 AM
Post #43 of 64 (4608 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 9, 2001
Posts: 20939

Re: [marc801] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

marc801 wrote:
...Look at the months of effort Steve Burke put in to freeing The Nose.

Your entire argument is pointless.

Scott Burke. And yes, I agree that Jacques is trying to argue something that makes no sense.


marc801


Apr 7, 2014, 11:30 AM
Post #44 of 64 (4602 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806

Re: [camhead] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

camhead wrote:
marc801 wrote:
...Look at the months of effort Steve Burke put in to freeing The Nose.

Your entire argument is pointless.

Scott Burke. And yes, I agree that Jacques is trying to argue something that makes no sense.
Oops. Of course. Scott. I work with a Steve Burke.


jacques


Apr 9, 2014, 6:44 AM
Post #45 of 64 (4560 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 13, 2008
Posts: 318

Re: [JimTitt] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

JimTitt wrote:
The H is added to a trad graded route to indicate the first ascent was done using sport-climbing attitudes and methods even though the route itself is protected using leader placed protection. A subsequent ascent without working the route would give a new trad grade without the H. This is a modern idea and older routes just appear in the guide with no indication as to whether working them was the normal or original method. [..]
How you achieve either is entirely up to you and the commitment is the same, just concentrates on different aspects.

So, there is a difference and modern idea is going on.

The important point is that some people want to make climbing and olympic sport and it is not every body who had time to train for olympic.

And some people want to spend good time doing a challenging sport. They want to climb and remember the adventure after. As they think that sport is there way to achieve there goal...they train for hard move and neglect difficulty. They try to imitate olympic level guys and forget the basic.

As I am a trad climber concern by safety. I promote that new idea of the differences between both activity to make a clear understanding that safety most be learn first and climbing after.


marc801


Apr 9, 2014, 9:39 AM
Post #46 of 64 (4545 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806

Re: [jacques] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jacques wrote:
The important point is that some people want to make climbing and olympic sport and it is not every body who had time to train for olympic.
Not everyone has time to train for an Olympic sport - what a news flash. What relevance does that have to anything in this thread?


JimTitt


Apr 9, 2014, 11:08 AM
Post #47 of 64 (4530 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002

Re: [jacques] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jacques wrote:
JimTitt wrote:


As I am a trad climber concern by safety. I promote that new idea of the differences between both activity to make a clear understanding that safety most be learn first and climbing after.

Tie-in properly and clip into something every now and then which keeps you off the ground, climbing´s that simple, sport, trad, big wall, alpine etc. If you are a boulderer it´s simpler still.
The commitment doesn´t change with the genre, only the person. That´s why a "commitment" grade is about as stupid an idea as it gets.


jacques


Apr 9, 2014, 6:35 PM
Post #48 of 64 (4507 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 13, 2008
Posts: 318

Re: [JimTitt] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

JimTitt wrote:
Tie-in properly and clip into something every now and then which keeps you off the ground, climbing´s that simple,[..] The commitment doesn´t change with the genre, only the person. That´s why a "commitment" grade is about as stupid an idea as it gets.

The commitment rating is not a good term to describe the overall difficulty of the climb. It is not a synonyme and, as trad, it have a conotation to discourage people to climb, You committ a crime, it is old style of climbing, etc...

The over all difficulty of the climb is more valuable. Route finding: on a sport route, you follow the white hold...it is easy, but when you have to decide between left and right, between a 5.9 and a run out in 5.11 and a 5.9 with good protection...the idea of overall difficulty is understandable.

Longer of the route: six pitch of an hour and six pitch who take you nine hours will change a lot of think for a climber. One most bring a head lamp to be safe and there is also the fatigue. After nine hours at 50 degree, it is colder than after six. Difficulty to place protection: if you have to place three rp"s thread together and do a blind move after, it will take more time to do the move and place the pro than if you have to put a cam into a large crack. etc.

So, you have a false interpretation of the overall difficulty of a climb. The route finding change with the route you climb, not with the climber.

It is to avoid that people forget about the danger that we have to make a clear distinction between trad and sport.


JimTitt


Apr 9, 2014, 11:29 PM
Post #49 of 64 (4488 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002

Re: [jacques] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

jacques wrote:
JimTitt wrote:
Tie-in properly and clip into something every now and then which keeps you off the ground, climbing´s that simple,[..] The commitment doesn´t change with the genre, only the person. That´s why a "commitment" grade is about as stupid an idea as it gets.

The commitment rating is not a good term to describe the overall difficulty of the climb. It is not a synonyme and, as trad, it have a conotation to discourage people to climb, You committ a crime, it is old style of climbing, etc...

The over all difficulty of the climb is more valuable. Route finding: on a sport route, you follow the white hold...it is easy, but when you have to decide between left and right, between a 5.9 and a run out in 5.11 and a 5.9 with good protection...the idea of overall difficulty is understandable.

Longer of the route: six pitch of an hour and six pitch who take you nine hours will change a lot of think for a climber. One most bring a head lamp to be safe and there is also the fatigue. After nine hours at 50 degree, it is colder than after six. Difficulty to place protection: if you have to place three rp"s thread together and do a blind move after, it will take more time to do the move and place the pro than if you have to put a cam into a large crack. etc.

So, you have a false interpretation of the overall difficulty of a climb. The route finding change with the route you climb, not with the climber.

It is to avoid that people forget about the danger that we have to make a clear distinction between trad and sport.

So you´re saying the NCCS number tells me how long it will take to climb the route, how difficult the route finding is, how cold it is, whether I need to carry a head torch, how hard it is to get 3 RP´s in, that there are blind moves and how dangerous the route is? Dream on.


jacques


Apr 10, 2014, 8:52 AM
Post #50 of 64 (4461 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 13, 2008
Posts: 318

Re: [JimTitt] classification versus scale difficulty [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

JimTitt wrote:
So you´re saying the NCCS number tells me how long it will take to climb the route, how difficult the route finding is, how cold it is, whether I need to carry a head torch, how hard it is to get 3 RP´s in, that there are blind moves and how dangerous the route is? Dream on.

The NCCS was proposed for accessibility

The NCCS is a model for all around climber, versus sport climber who are very good to do the hardiest move.

Doing the hardiest move is a very good think. People who have children can go climbing in control area like rumney, with bolt to protect them, and climb like the guy in the cover page of a magazine.

hardiest move is one difficulty. often, I brought people who was confirm 5.11 climber in white horse slabs direct and they where not able to do the first move. It is normal that some one can be good at face climbing, crack, bridging...and can't place a feet over the other on slab, mantle or roof.

It is the same with the over all difficulty of the climb. One can be good at the hardiest move and have bad technique in route finding, placing pro and run out, rope management, protecting his second, etc...

So, NCCS was made by comparing similar difficulty for different climb all over the area. If you climb a 5.10, it is not wrote if it is a slab, face or diedral. In the same way, the NCCS told you what will be the highest move, but don't told you if the problem is route finding, placing pro or other thing.

The use of time can be questionable, after thought, I think that I understand why they used it and why they use different other system for protection rating.

First page Previous page 1 2 3 Next page Last page  View All

Forums : Climbing Information : Beginners

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?
$40.46 (10% off)
$47.66 (10% off)
$17.95 (10% off)
$33.26 (10% off)



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook