|
|
|
|
noal
Sep 22, 2003, 1:25 PM
Post #51 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 22, 2002
Posts: 185
|
In reply to: There is no such thing as over moderation at RC.com. There is only moderation per se. Rockclimbing.com is perhaps best viewed as Disneyland--a family oriented site. Other sites (b.com, perhaps) are more like Sodom and Gomorrah--no holds barred. There is certainly room enough for both on the internet. Curt
Isn't Curt the same guy who accused Trevor of being a dictatorial tyrant who was out of control running his own Kingdom, just because curt locked or moved one of his posts or something? Now he's spraying at people who think RC is over moderated, and leaves that thread to Cuss at someone who called his hypocracy? Don't get all ruffled about this Curt, you just seem to have diverse personality conflicts online, and somewhat of an aggression problem...I'm sure your a great guy in person aside from the fact that you look like a postal worker who had one too many cups of coffee grabed his hunting rifle and headed for the nearest roof top in your picture! But hey man if you need to talk or vent, we're here to listen, I tell you what, why don't you in your next post here just let it out, vent away man, get it all off your chest. Just don't want to hear about another sniper in the news when you can just vent on me here!!! :cry:
|
|
|
|
|
pato
Sep 22, 2003, 1:58 PM
Post #52 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2003
Posts: 75
|
In reply to: Hey asshole, I mean grommet as in gremmie in the climbing context. I may not climb 5.13+ anymore but I have certainly bouldered V10 in this calendar year. If you would like to challenge this assertion, please feel free to take up bvb on his wager. He has offered a $500 bet to anyone who can follow me on my bouldering circuit in Arizona. Put up or STFU asswipe. Curt
ok, i'll bet i could do it, i'll be there in december, just let me know the area, cause i've never been to arizona!!!
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Sep 22, 2003, 4:50 PM
Post #53 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
Hehe, managed to hook a few. This trolling could become fun. Hehe.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
climbingjunky
Sep 22, 2003, 5:13 PM
Post #54 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2002
Posts: 407
|
First of all what's the matter with being a number chaser? Not that I ma in climbing. But as an ex hockey player, I loved the sport but i also enjoyed setting a goal to score 20+ goals in a season. It's something that I challenged myself with and look forward to doing? This doesn't mean I don't enjoy the sport for what it is. I know looking at gradings is not the only way to reference your progress but is it not safe to say that a climber sending v5/6 is most likely better than someone sending v0s or v1s? Am I totally out of whack in saying this? Generally is does take more technique and strength to climb higher grades. That's all I'm saying. Geesh! :?
|
|
|
|
|
tenn_dawg
Sep 22, 2003, 5:35 PM
Post #55 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2002
Posts: 3045
|
curt,
This damn wager that bob's got going is getting my interest. It seems like everyone is just being a blow hard, and never really standing behind their BS.
I'm going to try and come through your neck of the woods in the early summer of '04, and if by some incredible fluke in the banking system, or by robbing a convenience store, I manage to scrape together $500 of disposable income, I just may be tempted.
I'll probably just put a bottle of whiskey down as my bet though. I'll be going through the RRG, before then, I can stop in Bourbon, county KY and pick up something for the wager...anything you would prefer?
Travis
|
|
|
|
|
mreardon
Sep 22, 2003, 5:39 PM
Post #56 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 1337
|
In reply to: Hehe, managed to hook a few. This trolling could become fun. Hehe. Curt
Hey Dickweek - the quote is "I'll be your huckleberry." :lol: Wow, it is fun to troll! Where's that Kalcario.... BTW - I didn't know $500 was on the line! I should have gone to AZ after all!
As for the original question, I can fall on all ratings, and once in a while I make it to the anchor or mantel out. Sometimes those ratings are considered stout.
|
|
|
|
|
rocknalaska
Sep 22, 2003, 5:46 PM
Post #57 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 19, 2002
Posts: 129
|
Everyone gets their panties in a bunch here becase some people tell themselves the reason they climb is for the spiritual aspect, when really they are closet ego-maniacs and chase numbers like everyone else. All they really need is to look a little closer at themselves and relax. I chase numbers, but not exclusively. I'm proud that I chase numbers. And yes even trad, alpine, ice, old-school, and new-school all chase numbers. Maybe not in the same fashion, but still numbers.
I've climbed with alot of people, and my own perspective on this is simple. I like to climb things that are difficult for me. So yes I chase numbers because they tend to indicate how difficult something will be for me. I also love to climb lines that are aesthetic. A proud line is always inspiring. So I climb these as well. The climbs that I really love are the ones that entail both. I also love to climb anything. I love climbing, so when I run out of steam on the hard stuff, I'll do as much easier climbing as I can.
Now back to the Original post. Yes I climb at both of those levels. I've been climbing since '95. I hope to progress beyond that level soon, but I am limited by family, location, job,etc. so it may take longer than I would like. I am not genetically gifted. I weigh about 195 and am 5'10". On the heavy side for my size. I am very analytical and physics based for beta. I think the biggest problem that holds people back in climbing is mental. I think alot of climbers either have too big of an ego, or not enough. You have to be confident, but not overly confident. Over-confidence leads to carelessness, which generally leads to failure.
anyway, flame away,
Todd
|
|
|
|
|
godsmybelayer
Sep 23, 2003, 1:41 AM
Post #58 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 11, 2003
Posts: 117
|
When called on something, claim trolliness! :roll:
|
|
|
|
|
tenn_dawg
Sep 23, 2003, 2:01 AM
Post #59 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2002
Posts: 3045
|
What kind of whiskey curt?
I'm thinking if I manage to follow you I'll take a bottle of that scotch you and bvb are always jawing about.
I could pick up a handle of makers mark select. I always was rather fond of that stuff, but hell, I'm just a binge drinking college boy. What would I know about fine whiskey?
Hahahaha
Travis
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Sep 23, 2003, 2:14 AM
Post #60 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: What kind of whiskey curt? I'm thinking if I manage to follow you I'll take a bottle of that scotch you and bvb are always jawing about. I could pick up a handle of makers mark select. I always was rather fond of that stuff, but hell, I'm just a binge drinking college boy. What would I know about fine whiskey? Hahahaha Travis
No offence, but I'm not a big fan of Kentucky/Tennessee Bourbon whisky. I would definately go for a bottle of fine single malt, however. Macallan works for me. Lagavulin, Edradour, Glenfarclas or a number of others will be considered acceptable substitutes. Let me know when you are coming, sounds like we've got a deal. Hehe.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Sep 23, 2003, 2:22 AM
Post #61 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: When called on something, claim trolliness! :roll:
godisyourproctologist,
Give me a break. I am an old and infirm gent (probably the same age as your father) who has to prop his walker up gently against the boulder prior to attempting anything these days. And, I don't do sit-down problems because I realize full well I couldn't get back up without assistance. Just ask anyone who has climbed with me. Now sod off.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
tenn_dawg
Sep 23, 2003, 2:35 AM
Post #62 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 14, 2002
Posts: 3045
|
Ahhhhh, I gotcha.
I haven't been able to aquire a taste for scotch. Not for lack of trying, but I kind of prefer the sharp taste of Makers Mark, or even something like Jim Beam. I think scotch is more about the after taste, but as I drink whiskey with lots of ice, I always feel like I'm watering down the taste of scotch, which to me, seem watery tasting already.
Of course, the nicest scotch I've ever had was that Johnny Walker Gold label stuff, which I don't think is as nice as Macallan, since it's a blended whiskey. It cost me dearly though, that stuff was steep, thank god for girlfriends with credit cards...
Regardless, taking on an old man on his home turf...this ain't going to be easy. How many problems? 20 or so? I'm guessing V4 through around V8...Harder? Hmmm, this is going to be fun. It's on Curt, I'm looking forward to it!
I can't believe none of the blow hards have stepped up with the cash yet. Certainly someone has the disposable income out there? Hahaha.
Travis
|
|
|
|
|
teddy
Sep 23, 2003, 3:32 AM
Post #63 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 2, 2003
Posts: 137
|
hell you pay for my trip to america and food and ill give u $500 , although i know i wouldn't be able to keep up with you. Im a youngun and ive been climbing a MASSIVE 4 months
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Sep 23, 2003, 3:37 AM
Post #64 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: That is the problem with grading climbs or boulder problems--especially when you try to divide the grades too finely. By definition, the more finely you try to grade things, the greater the innaccuracy of the ratings.
Well, you could achieve 100% accuracy only by classifying every problem the same. Where do you draw the line?
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Sep 23, 2003, 3:56 AM
Post #65 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
In reply to: In reply to: That is the problem with grading climbs or boulder problems--especially when you try to divide the grades too finely. By definition, the more finely you try to grade things, the greater the innaccuracy of the ratings. Well, you could achieve 100% accuracy only by classifying every problem the same. Where do you draw the line? -Jay
Jay,
Since my wife is an attorney, I will use the vernacular of her trade. You draw the line at a point where a reasonable person, skilled in the art, would be able to determine that climbs of the same numerical grade are indeed of similar difficulty. If that definition is not clear, you can pay Lisa $200/hour to explain it to you. Hehe. You don't actually take issue with my original point, do you? That is--the more finely divided you try to grade things, the greater the inaccuracy? I would hope not.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
cgranite
Sep 23, 2003, 4:01 AM
Post #66 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 5, 2003
Posts: 366
|
the rating system is good for reference, but it's really screwy sometimes. I know what some of you mean. this isn't a good example, but this just reminds me of how I was reading a mag and this route saws 5.13c, the next day I'm in the book store reading a guidebook and the route says 5.13d. It just made me think about how you can take a bunch of 6'2+ climbers that have thin fingers up a REACHY pin scar climb and have them all say it was 5.11a, then you take another climber (same ability level on average) who is very short with thick fingers> how hard will it be for him? thats my thoughts, the system isn't perfect, so just climb-Its fun to ignore numbers sometimes...I promise
|
|
|
|
|
climbthedj
Sep 23, 2003, 5:30 AM
Post #67 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 4, 2002
Posts: 108
|
In reply to: godisyourproctologist, Give me a break. I am an old and infirm gent (probably the same age as your father) who has to prop his walker up gently against the boulder prior to attempting anything these days. And, I don't do sit-down problems because I realize full well I couldn't get back up without assistance. Just ask anyone who has climbed with me. Now sod off. Curt
It's true, It's true! Except that his walker is pretty sick.. It's got GPS, bumpin' speakers and a cup - er I mean beer-holder! Rock on, Curt!
He may not do sit-down starts, but I definitely witnessed a dyno this past weekend.
Cheers,
-C
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Sep 23, 2003, 5:36 AM
Post #68 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: That is the problem with grading climbs or boulder problems--especially when you try to divide the grades too finely. By definition, the more finely you try to grade things, the greater the innaccuracy of the ratings. Well, you could achieve 100% accuracy only by classifying every problem the same. Where do you draw the line? You draw the line at a point where a reasonable person, skilled in the art, would be able to determine that climbs of the same numerical grade are indeed of similar difficulty.
I think that definition only changes the semantics of the problem: At what point do climbs become sufficiently dissimilar in difficulty to be assigned different numerical grades? Furthermore, any single individual could probably rank order many of his recently done climbs of similar difficulty, scoring few of them as pure ties, so if left to an individual, you could have a finely divided scale indeed.
The bigger problem, though, is that individuals would disagree on the rank ordering, with no possibility of consensus, since each individual would be correct according to his own strengths and weaknesses. Thus the problem of producing any sort of objective difficulty scale for routes becomes a statistical one, requiring some sort of averaging of the opinions of a panel of climbers. Indeed, a method for producing such an objective difficulty scale has been developed, but surprisingly, has not yet seen universal acceptance. Form a post of mine on rec.climbing:Good idea to use a logistic model of the odds of success, conditioned on the rating of the climb. Since the probability of success at a given rating depends on the climber's level of skill, incorporating terms for skill level and the interaction between skill level and rating generalizes the model. I suggest on-sight level be the skill variable, since redpointing doesn't translate well to trad climbing.
Sticking with the logistic model, but standardizing the notation and adding the skill variable:
Let:
i = 1 to n index n climbers
j = 0 to m index m YDS ratings
Yij = 1 if the attempt by the ith climber on the jth rated route is a success,
or 0 if it is a failure.
X1i = the climber's on-sight level at the time of the attempt
X2j = the route's rating, rescaled in some sensible way
P(Yij) = probability of success of Yij
logit(Yij) = log-odds of Y(ij)
Then:
P(Yij)/[1-P(Yij)] = exp(a + b1*X1i + b2*X2j + b3*Xli*X2j)
logit(Y) = a + b1*X1i + b2*X2j + b3*X1i*X2j
In reply to: You don't actually take issue with my original point, do you? That is--the more finely divided you try to grade things, the greater the inaccuracy? I would hope not.
The way you've stated it, I'm not sure. If you mean that the greater the number of categories, the greater will be the percentage of climbs that will be misclassified, then yes I agree with you. Nonetheless, I would argue in favor of the current ~16-point V-scale over something along the lines of the older ~3-point B-scale. In spite of having more misclassifications, the more finely divided V-scale is more informative than the B-scale.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
alpnclmbr1
Sep 23, 2003, 6:53 AM
Post #69 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 10, 2002
Posts: 3060
|
The above system could quantify grades by and for a particular area’s locals.
How would you define a persons on-sight level? To define this you would have to have a reliable grading system. Suppose you can quantify the on-sight level on the basis of probability of success, then how do you correlate this to an arbitrary difficulty scale?
How would you account for the following variables?
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Type/Style of climbing VS your relative strengths
sport: steep, vert, scary. technical, powerful, length
Trad: crack, offwidth, slab, amount of pro,quality of pro, steepness, length
Familiarity with the particular climbing area in question
On-sight level: particular area, type of climbing, route that stresses your strengths or weaknesses
Height, ape factor, scrunch factor
Hold size / crack size versus hand size
=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-
The best you can hope for is a consensus of the locals that have spent enough time at a particular area to be able to compare different routes relative to each other.
Throw in the rest of the factors and different areas into the equation and it quickly becomes hopeless as evidenced by the disparity in grades between different areas.
A definitive grading system is a pipedream.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Sep 23, 2003, 3:37 PM
Post #70 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
Jay,
In reply to: Nonetheless, I would argue in favor of the current ~16-point V-scale over something along the lines of the older ~3-point B-scale. In spite of having more misclassifications, the more finely divided V-scale is more informative than the B-scale.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
mreardon
Sep 23, 2003, 5:55 PM
Post #71 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 17, 2002
Posts: 1337
|
Is this a shoe thread?
|
|
|
|
|
cass
Sep 23, 2003, 6:11 PM
Post #72 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 5, 2001
Posts: 1956
|
pffft - grades - just climb
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Sep 23, 2003, 9:06 PM
Post #73 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: Jay, In reply to: Nonetheless, I would argue in favor of the current ~16-point V-scale over something along the lines of the older ~3-point B-scale. In spite of having more misclassifications, the more finely divided V-scale is more informative than the B-scale. I would maintain that the "V" system is not necessarily "more informative" and has a very low signal to noise ratio.
I can't believe its signal-to-noise ratio is that low. Giving a problem a rating on a 0-15 scale surely tells you more about its difficulty than giving it a rating on a 1-3 scale.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
drkodos
Sep 23, 2003, 9:09 PM
Post #74 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 21, 2002
Posts: 2935
|
You guys think this is non-sense....
try grading Diamonds :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Sep 23, 2003, 9:14 PM
Post #75 of 88
(5106 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: The above system could quantify grades by and for a particular area’s locals. How would you define a persons on-sight level? To define this you would have to have a reliable grading system. Suppose you can quantify the on-sight level on the basis of probability of success, then how do you correlate this to an arbitrary difficulty scale?
I'd use the climber's current hardest on-sight level using the existing YDS rating scale. Improvement in the accuracy of the modeled ratings could be accomplished iteratively by updating the climbers' on-sight level using the modeled ratings, and rerruning the model, continuing the iterations until the convergence was obtained.
In reply to: How would you account for the following variables? =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Type/Style of climbing VS your relative strengths sport: steep, vert, scary. technical, powerful, length Trad: crack, offwidth, slab, amount of pro,quality of pro, steepness, length Familiarity with the particular climbing area in question On-sight level: particular area, type of climbing, route that stresses your strengths or weaknesses Height, ape factor, scrunch factor Hold size / crack size versus hand size
The conceptually simplest way to take care of these factors would be to use a large, random sample of climbers, so that their effects would average out. Alternatively, some factors could be controlled by including them as covariates in the model.
-Jay
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
