|
|
|
|
jacques
Mar 2, 2015, 7:32 PM
Post #1 of 49
(23954 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2008
Posts: 318
|
Before clean protection, we used piton and the older will remember how difficult it was to drive them in a crack. some times, they broke the rock and do scarce like in serenity crack in Yosemite.
As we don't have crack why couldn't we drill a hole and drive a piton in it (done in certain places). The problem was that the piton fall easily in a hole. It was the beginning of bolt with expansion. So, the bolt are just an amelioration of the piton.
As a trad leader, we had to place the pro bottom up because the ethic was that a trad climber decide of his safety. After the first attempt, the route was still without rest, but a bolt will stay in the cliff to protect a dangerous move, not to hang up to try do to the move after many repetition.
On an other way of thinking, one must say that protecting the pitch, trusting our capacity is not in the trad ethic. One most think that the top, what ever style you used, prove that you are good. They won't try to understand why it is challenging to trust your own judgment with the risk of making a mistake. Just clip a bolt and do it.
Although it was done with very good climber who want to free a route or by boulder climber who want to protect a move too high to be done safely, the evolution of bolt in trad and the evolution of bolt in sport are quite different.
As a proof, take times to meet people doing ice climbing with a back ground of sport and a back ground of hiker. You will see that one will do a flag in a place where he can kill himself and the other will stay on his two feet, with minor risk of injury. The distinction between the evolution of piton to bolt and the used of bolts to climb hard is a question of safety, not of results
|
|
|
|
|
JimTitt
Mar 3, 2015, 1:03 PM
Post #2 of 49
(23848 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002
|
Don´t worry, we were resting on pegs and slings, dogging and top-roping the shit out of stuff long before nuts were in use. Sport climbing derived from working the moves and free-climbing existing aid routes. Bolts are just better pitons.
|
|
|
|
|
jacques
Mar 3, 2015, 3:50 PM
Post #3 of 49
(23820 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2008
Posts: 318
|
JimTitt wrote: . Bolts are just better pitons.
As the definition of sport is: Bolt clippers' heaven
and trad is:Love to plug protection?
And that trad plug piton, or more recently bolt, we can understand that the definition of both ethic are not good enough to understand the difference between the two ethic for a beginner and often for an advanced sport climber.
Saying that without saying that one is better than the other.
|
|
|
|
|
JimTitt
Mar 3, 2015, 6:28 PM
Post #4 of 49
(23793 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002
|
Neither are an "ethic", they are a style. The difference in the style is the mental approach to achieving a succesful ascent, sport climbing accepts working all the moves repeatedly culminating in a clean ascent as objective, trad climbing looks on a clean onsight ascent as being the objective.
The protection used is irrelevant and purely incidental.
|
|
|
|
|
jacques
Mar 4, 2015, 12:03 AM
Post #5 of 49
(23764 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2008
Posts: 318
|
JimTitt wrote: The protection used is irrelevant and purely incidental.
As we saw some climber using draw and saying that they are sport, and some climber using cam with a sport style...clipping there pro as it was bolt.
can we avoid accident by making a more useful distinction between sport and trad explaining the mental approach and the goal of each style?
|
|
|
|
|
6pacfershur
Mar 4, 2015, 4:25 AM
Post #6 of 49
(23728 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 23, 2010
Posts: 254
|
JimTitt wrote: ..... trad climbing looks on a clean onsight ascent as being the objective....
does "onsight" mean the same in Germany as it does in the US?
|
|
|
|
|
jacques
Mar 5, 2015, 3:24 AM
Post #7 of 49
(23628 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2008
Posts: 318
|
6pacfershur wrote: does "onsight" mean the same in Germany as it does in the US?
I don't know.
I know that in sport style or ethic, two ro three time is still an on sight.
In purest trad, on sight means doing a route the first time without any information
But there is more differences between sport and trad.
|
|
|
|
|
rocknice2
Mar 5, 2015, 12:49 PM
Post #8 of 49
(23583 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 13, 2006
Posts: 1221
|
jacques wrote: 6pacfershur wrote: does "onsight" mean the same in Germany as it does in the US? I don't know. I know that in sport style or ethic, two ro three time is still an on sight. In purest trad, on sight means doing a route the first time without any information But there is more differences between sport and trad.
Jacques, descendre la tribune. Qui vous a énervé tellement de grimpeurs sportifs. Votre information est erronée et fausse.
A vue est a vue, indépendamment quel pays vous visitez ou quelle discipline vous pratiquez
|
|
|
|
|
jacques
Mar 5, 2015, 2:17 PM
Post #9 of 49
(23565 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2008
Posts: 318
|
jacques wrote: can we avoid accident by making a more useful distinction between sport and trad explaining the mental approach and the goal of each style?
I think that we saw more accident by people who think that because they take cam instead of clipping piton...they climb trad.
As Jim Tite wrote: "The protection used is irrelevant and purely incidental" As it is incidental, we most change our definitions of sport and trad to understand the differences and stop insulting commentary like the one of rocknice.
I begin to identify accident that are more associated with sport climber with a rack than to the mental approach of the trad style/ethic. Inversely, there is also accident in sport route associate with trad climber trying to be as good as sport climber.
Having a clear distinction doesn't means that one is better than the other. When you drive a car and a 18 wheeler...you are still a driver. But if you want to speed, the wheeler is not the good one and if you want to transport thousand of boxes, the car is not useful.
so, just make a clear distinction so we don''t see sport climber having accident and saying that it is trad ethic because they don't know all safety rules associate with the style/ethic.
|
|
|
|
|
sbaclimber
Mar 5, 2015, 2:52 PM
Post #10 of 49
(23558 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2004
Posts: 3118
|
rocknice2 wrote: jacques wrote: 6pacfershur wrote: does "onsight" mean the same in Germany as it does in the US? I don't know. I know that in sport style or ethic, two ro three time is still an on sight. In purest trad, on sight means doing a route the first time without any information But there is more differences between sport and trad. Jacques, descendre la tribune. Qui vous a énervé tellement de grimpeurs sportifs. Votre information est erronée et fausse. A vue est a vue, indépendamment quel pays vous visitez ou quelle discipline vous pratiquez 
|
|
|
|
|
jacques
Mar 5, 2015, 3:59 PM
Post #12 of 49
(23535 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2008
Posts: 318
|
camhead wrote: You may be thinking this because sometimes, in some European areas, climbers consider a "first go" ascent to be their first serious attempt after inspecting a route, either by rapping it or hangdogging it.
don't remember the book, but I know that it is north american one and that it was clearly define on-sight level as given six to eight try. Climbing 5.12 or higher, by two climber. it was wrote in US.
It surprise me too as many other things that sport do in trad route, even if they are good climber.
(This post was edited by jacques on Mar 5, 2015, 6:07 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Mar 5, 2015, 6:33 PM
Post #13 of 49
(23515 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
jacques wrote: camhead wrote: You may be thinking this because sometimes, in some European areas, climbers consider a "first go" ascent to be their first serious attempt after inspecting a route, either by rapping it or hangdogging it. don't remember the book, but I know that it is north american one and that it was clearly define on-sight level as given six to eight try. Climbing 5.12 or higher, by two climber. it was wrote in US.
|
|
|
|
|
jacques
Mar 5, 2015, 10:12 PM
Post #14 of 49
(23490 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2008
Posts: 318
|
jacques wrote: can we avoid accident by making a more useful distinction between sport and trad explaining the mental approach and the goal of each style?
Still, the exactitude of a definition is really important. For me, an on-sight is without previous knowledge.
That doesn't change the fact that the definition of sport and trad climbing is wrong actually because we use bolt in trad climbing too, because someone can use cam and climb sport.
What could be a definition of trad and sport that evolve with the new reality of climbing...or are we going to stay with the old stereotype of the 1980...1990....2000
|
|
|
|
|
sbaclimber
Mar 6, 2015, 9:10 AM
Post #15 of 49
(23428 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2004
Posts: 3118
|
jacques wrote: That doesn't change the fact that the definition of sport and trad climbing is wrong actually because we use bolt in trad climbing too, because someone can use cam and climb sport.
This is why Jim pointed out that for many (i.e. UK) climbers "trad climbing" means a style of climbing not just a style/method of protection.
If you read the first sentence of the wikipedia entry for "Sport climbing", you will read a very north american comparison of sport vs. trad climbing.
If you read the same entry in german, you will realise that the Germans don't really even have a term for "trad" climbing. Pretty much any sort of cragging is sport climbing, regardless of how the climb is protected.
|
|
|
|
|
jacques
Mar 6, 2015, 3:00 PM
Post #16 of 49
(23389 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2008
Posts: 318
|
sbaclimber wrote: "wrong" is relative. Sport and trad climbing mean different things to different climbers in different areas.
I agree that it is relative But to avoid accident, we most have an evolution of the definition of both style and clarify the ethic of each of them.
Even if wiki is not a trust reference, they describe sport and trad in that ways:
"Since the need to place protection is virtually eliminated, sport climbing places an emphasis on gymnastic-like ability, strength, and endurance, whereas traditional climbing emphasizes adventure, risk (I will say avoiding the risk) and self-sufficiency."
So, one day you wear slings and you are a specialist in gymnastic and the other you where cams and you are a specialist to avoid risk. I am not sure that, if I work a move for five hours, I will know the rope management and, inversely, if I work five hours to avoid the risk, I will be able to red point 5.12.
The actual definition is a dynosaures of 1984 where sport want to have a place as a sport in itself, not just a cheating approach of trad climbing. As much we have to present sport climbing at is value, we have to present trad as a style where we most see the danger to be able to avoid it in a natural environment...we most avoid that a sport climber wear a rack of sling to be a trad climber and that a trad climber thing that he his good because he climb an expose route
a cooperation between different use for a same environment
|
|
|
|
|
6pacfershur
Mar 6, 2015, 3:29 PM
Post #17 of 49
(23379 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 23, 2010
Posts: 254
|
6pacfershur wrote: JimTitt wrote: ..... trad climbing looks on a clean onsight ascent as being the objective.... does "onsight" mean the same in Germany as it does in the US?
well played, JT
|
|
|
|
|
JimTitt
Mar 6, 2015, 5:14 PM
Post #18 of 49
(23359 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 7, 2008
Posts: 1002
|
6pacfershur wrote: 6pacfershur wrote: JimTitt wrote: ..... trad climbing looks on a clean onsight ascent as being the objective.... does "onsight" mean the same in Germany as it does in the US? well played, JT
I was hoping Jacques would tell us, even my brother has a different definition than I do.
|
|
|
|
|
jacques
Mar 6, 2015, 6:40 PM
Post #19 of 49
(23345 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2008
Posts: 318
|
JimTitt wrote: I was hoping Jacques would tell us, even my brother has a different definition than I do.
ordinarly, the fact that there is many definition is a good indication that some thing most be done.
If you take many definition and sort it, you will find similarity between some of them. In statistic, there is a way to determine when to stop your search of data and have a good idea of the population you are studying.
bad luck, take the risk...are not trad words. Bad luck happen very rarely...when you climb and there is a party above you that you can't see from the bottom. Other way, it is always the fault of the leader.
In the gunks the women did the route previously and thing that she will be able to red point it in one pitch. She free the bottom because it was under her belt, she felt an died.
This kind of accident is purely sport accident. A trad climber never trade safety of protecting a 5.6 pitch to the performance of doing a 5.11. but a trad climber can decide to do a run out if his chance of major injury in a fall is acceptable by his technique of falling.
There is less people who love to climb with friends like going to a hike where you go where nobody had gone before. where you are your own master of your destiny. it could be a 5.6 or a 5.10...who care. It is a kind of sport where the personnal development is more important than the social hierarchie. Where you leave the world of work to have plain joy.
As we saw sport accident in trad climbing site falling like apple from a three...people who associate accident with trad will be more numerous and climbing will be a sport like skating whit a rank and competition.
(This post was edited by jacques on Mar 7, 2015, 8:07 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
sbaclimber
Mar 6, 2015, 7:21 PM
Post #20 of 49
(23338 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2004
Posts: 3118
|
jacques wrote: This kind of accident is purely sport accident.
She made the exact same decision that scores of "trad" climbers make every day / climb. The fact that she might not have had the experience or smarts to make the right decision has nothing to do with whether or not she might have been trying to climb "sport" or "trad". Any climber, climbing any style can still make the same mistake. It comes down to experience and personal choice, not a word...
(This post was edited by sbaclimber on Mar 6, 2015, 7:47 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
marc801
Mar 6, 2015, 7:32 PM
Post #21 of 49
(23330 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 1, 2005
Posts: 2806
|
jacques wrote: This kind of accident is purely sport accident. A trad climber never trade safety of protecting a 5.6 pitch to the performance of doing a 5.11. but a trad climber can decide to do a run out if his chance of major injury in a fall is acceptable by his technique of falling.
|
|
|
|
|
sbaclimber
Mar 6, 2015, 8:09 PM
Post #22 of 49
(23326 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2004
Posts: 3118
|
I am going to go (waaaaaaaaayyyyyyyyy) out on a limb here and take a shot a knowing where you are coming from...
...if based on nothing else than rather frequent reports of "newbie" climbers f'ing up and getting themselves hurt, both in- and outdoors.
When I started climbing 20+ years ago in the 'dacks region in NY, there were gyms for "sport" climbing, but just about everything outside was still "trad" (in the american sense of the words). It was simply a given, that if you wanted to climb outdoors you either toproped or placed your own pro...period.
20 years later, there are definitely many more climbers coming out of the gym and climbing real rock than before, and many more without the basic understanding that outside there is often not a bolt every 4', which *can* lead to accidents (although, I think, there are fewer caused by this reason than you think). But....IMO, a discussion about what is "sport" and what is "trad" will not lead to a solution. Beyond saying, "this climb is bolted like a gym climb" vs "this climb is not", there isn't much you can give the gumby in information that will help him/her decide whether or not to climb a route. They need to know what the beta means before embarking, or find it out (unfortunately, sometimes, the hard way) themselves.
(This post was edited by sbaclimber on Mar 7, 2015, 7:24 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
6pacfershur
Mar 7, 2015, 2:29 AM
Post #23 of 49
(23276 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 23, 2010
Posts: 254
|
sbaclimber wrote: jacques wrote: This kind of accident is purely sport accident. BS......
you actually understand what this thread is about??
|
|
|
|
|
sbaclimber
Mar 7, 2015, 7:23 AM
Post #24 of 49
(23242 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 22, 2004
Posts: 3118
|
6pacfershur wrote: sbaclimber wrote: jacques wrote: This kind of accident is purely sport accident. BS...... you actually understand what this thread is about?? 
|
|
|
|
|
jacques
Mar 7, 2015, 8:30 AM
Post #25 of 49
(23223 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 14, 2008
Posts: 318
|
sbaclimber wrote: She made the exact same decision that scores of "trad" climbers make every day / climb.
She decided to not protect the first pitch to avoid the rope drag that pull her when she will do the 5.11 pitch. It is a good sport decision.
In trad, the guide book suggest that the person do two pitches...and protect the first pitch.
The fact is that she didn't really decide. She did what it was most accept by the people around her...mostly sport climber.
I was climbing Disney land at the gunks with two beginner in three pitches. One party did it in one, clipping old piton, placing my party in danger and his life in danger. It is sport ethic. Disney land is a 5.6 and for some one who never did a standing belay at three person on an anchor, it took time to be able to relax We were fast, and my partner like the game of being relax in a scary position more than making a hard move. It is trad ethic.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
