|
whistleblower
Nov 15, 2003, 5:02 PM
Post #26 of 35
(3260 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2003
Posts: 41
|
In reply to: ...Mutant kids seem to pop up everywhere including Daniel woods the 14 year old pulling 14's!...thoughts??
I saw Daniel Woods in Eldorado Canyon this summer working on The Monument (a 5.12c overhanging climb).
Later that day he was requesting tension while trying to climb the Bastille Crack which is 5.7. Well... I guess I can't blame him - the Bastille Crack requires placing your own gear.
|
|
|
|
|
valeberga
Nov 15, 2003, 5:08 PM
Post #27 of 35
(3260 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2003
Posts: 434
|
In reply to: I bet he rates his next project a 5.15d, then next a 5.16a, etc etc every time he finishes a new climb. The entire rating system is useless if you keep changing it every year. Pretty soon there will be 247 distinct difficulty levels, the vast majority of them "featherbagged" or whatever you grade freaks call it. What do we rate an old-school 5.9 now? 5.12b? Here's a thought: next time you go climbing, instead of looking at the rating, just tell yourself it's a 5.6 and that you are a pathetic weak gumby with a whole lot more work to do. You'll gain back the humility you started with and you'll become a better climber.
I don't think anything should be rated above 5.15a because of the reasons I stated earlier. I also think I read somewhere that the idea behind even having a 5.15 rating, is that it is supposed to be temporary until the climb can be given a suitable 5.14 grade.
The problem is, every time this guy, or others of his caliber, finish another climb, they are going to think it was a little harder and give it the next "highest rating ever climbed." I think this is irresponsible because down the road we get ratings like "5.37q" or what not. Come on guys we already have plenty of grades to work with here:
5.1 to 5.9 -- 9 grades
+
5.10a to 5.15a -- 21 grades
=
30 grades. Just fit the new climbs into this system. I know that might necessitate the reversal of a whole lot of featherbagging that's happened in the past 30 years, but tough. After all, 5.9 was a lot harder back in the old days, wasn't it? Show some respect for the old-timers.
|
|
|
|
|
socalbolter
Nov 15, 2003, 5:09 PM
Post #28 of 35
(3260 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 27, 2002
Posts: 796
|
rating systems have always been open-ended, and in my opinion always should be. just about every season people are getting stronger and realizing new techniques to climb what was once deemed "impossible."
i've been climbing long enough that i can remember when you were one of the best climbers around if you sent a 5.9. as mentioned earlier in this post, the initial reluctance to rate anything harder than this led to many extremely sandbagged routes and a real confusion within that grade. when the 5.10 rating was first introduced many of these same arguments appeared, only to fade away once the real need for it was realized. this will happen in this case as well.
if the system had a definite top end limit, every time a new hardest route was put up the entire system would have to re-adust down to the bottom to keep it all relative. this would cause many more problems than the occasional inaccuracies of the current system.
every time a new grade is proposed its accuracy is questioned. it's only with subsequent redpoints that a consensus is arrived at and a true rating can be assumed. until then the rating is only a suggestion based on the developers thoughts and comparisons to other routes he/she's climbed. bottom line, any rating is only a suggestion and should be taken as such by you when you choose to attempt the climb. it's really just a guide and so much weight and emphasis should not be placed on it.
as for the future. i strongly believe that 5.17 and V18 are feasible in time.
|
|
|
|
|
socalbolter
Nov 15, 2003, 5:19 PM
Post #29 of 35
(3260 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 27, 2002
Posts: 796
|
In reply to: I saw Daniel Woods in Eldorado Canyon this summer working on The Monument (a 5.12c overhanging climb). Later that day he was requesting tension while trying to climb the Bastille Crack which is 5.7. Well... I guess I can't blame him - the Bastille Crack requires placing your own gear.
unless i'm missing some sort of subtle inuendo here, this post seems way off topic. not only that, but the kid (although strong) is only 14 and probably did not grow up climbing cracks and developing skills like jamming. the climbs he's succeeded on have probably fit his body type and style of climbing while the Monument may not.
not everyone climbs their best on a given day (i'm sure this is even true for you) and this post can only be seen as spiteful and perhaps even a bit driven by jealousy (i can't climb what he can - so why not attack a little and bring him closer to my level).
how about a little mutual respect and support out there?!
|
|
|
|
|
valeberga
Nov 15, 2003, 5:31 PM
Post #30 of 35
(3260 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2003
Posts: 434
|
In reply to: as for the future. i strongly believe that 5.17 and V18 are feasible in time.
I'm sure someone will claim to have climbed a "5.17" soon enough. I just have strong doubts that it will deserve that rating. There is a HUGE difference in difficulty between 5.13 and 5.10. I'd say most climbers spend their whole lives trying move up just those three grades, and a good lot of them never even do so. Will there be such a big difference between 5.17 and 5.14? I doubt it.
The problem is, the people who are making up these new highest ratings are just the people who I wouldn't trust to be objective. It's in their personal interests to tell themselves that they are the best climber in the world, and the attention one gets from claiming a yet nonexistant grade is sure to benefit their status for sponsorship. Like I said before, it's a pissing contest that makes a mockery of our rating system. But we don't have any "grade police" so why should I even complain.
This may or may not illustrate my point, but how many climbs exist that are rated 5.14a? 5.14b? 5.14c? 5.14d? The sum total? I'm willing to bet surprisingly few. I don't agree that a new grade should be invented for every new "hardest" climb. I think the 5.14 grade should have a good 50 or 100 climbs in it before we even think about cracking open 5.15.
|
|
|
|
|
curt
Nov 15, 2003, 5:55 PM
Post #31 of 35
(3260 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2002
Posts: 18275
|
I don't have any problem with a ratings scale for climbing or bouldering being open ended. But, I think the continual grade inflation that has occurred over the last 20 or so years is ridiculous.
Climbs that were rated 5.10 when the grade was originated are damned hard. If you don't believe me go and do Coexistence, Fat City, Matinee or Stirrup Trouble in the Gunks. Or go climb Count Dracula, Clean and Jerk, Rubicon or O'Kelly's Crack at Joshua Tree. Routes put up in newer areas are almost always "softer" that what 5.10 originally represented.
In bouldering the same thing has happened. Additionally, as John Sherman has pointed out, those people seeking "fame" are continually slicing the loaf thinner and thinner in order to establish bigger numbers. As an example, there are unrepeated boulder problems from 20+ years ago that used to be designated V10. Now V15 supposedly exists, but these problems remain unrepeated.
Curt
|
|
|
|
|
socalbolter
Nov 15, 2003, 6:38 PM
Post #32 of 35
(3260 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 27, 2002
Posts: 796
|
In reply to: I think the 5.14 grade should have a good 50 or 100 climbs in it before we even think about cracking open 5.15.
apparently you haven't been paying attention. easy to do as several of these routes are unreported or lie in newer areas where there are not yet guidebooks. i'd venture a guess that there are somewhere around 500 climbs of this grade in north america. i know of a couple dozen in southern california alone. if you enlarge the focus to the world, i'm sure that you would be talking about 2000 or more.
while i'm sure that there is some "fluffing" of the grades to impress sponsors or other climbers, some of these newer high-end 5.14 sport climbs really are that much harder. as for the 5.15's, i can't speak for them as i've yet to see or get on one.
i think many of the climbs that are truly overrated will settle into their accurate ratings in the near future. this is always the case whether we're talking about 5.10's or harder routes.
|
|
|
|
|
valeberga
Nov 15, 2003, 6:59 PM
Post #33 of 35
(3260 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 2, 2003
Posts: 434
|
Well if you're right then I have grossly underestimated. I just hope that these climbs get settled into the grades they belong too before "we" (certainly not I) start tacking on more grades.
|
|
|
|
|
karlbaba
Nov 15, 2003, 7:11 PM
Post #34 of 35
(3260 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 10, 2002
Posts: 1159
|
Mozart wrote symphonies as a child. When the next climbing Mozart comes along 5.16 could come along no problem.
Objections to higher ratings were raising at the advent of 5.10, 5.11, 5.12 and so on, for the same reasons stated on this threah. EVERY TIME! Experience has shown me that these objections are short sighted at best.
I can easily understand the gradations within the ratings in the realm that I climb in. To assume they don't exist within the higher realm of more skilled and experienced climbers is silly. I have yet to hear one honemaster say "5.13, 5.14 it's all the same" so speculation about ratings fluff at levels you can't climb is just that, speculation and spray.
As for the 5.15c claim. If you look into the details of how the guy did it, it seems possible although I'm bummed he wouldn't repeat it for witnesses. If I worked a route every day for years I could send 4 letter grades harder than my previous numbers.
Peace
Karl
|
|
|
|
|
socalbolter
Nov 15, 2003, 7:33 PM
Post #35 of 35
(3260 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 27, 2002
Posts: 796
|
valeberga -
not only do i think my estimates are accurate, but i think they might be conservative.
you are not alone in your concerns and, as karlbaba pointed out, this happens with every new grade.
as i said there is some fluffing occuring, but most guys i know developing harder routes do their best to rate accurately. in fact, some even sandbag a bit to avoid this type of controversy. another thing that you might be interested in knowing (not to single you out, just to respond to some of your comments) is that not all 5.14 climbers are sponsored and have monetary incentives to climb harder. there are many "regular joes" out there who've put in their time and are now reaping the fruits of their hard work and beginning to succeed at this level.
hopefully whatever overgrading is occurring will stay the exception and not become the rule.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
