|
caughtinside
Mar 10, 2010, 1:46 AM
Post #1 of 168
(12664 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 8, 2003
Posts: 30603
|
This question has been posed on this website numerous times. Some have said as long as you never weight the rope, you can downclimb and return with your onsight intact. Others have said you get one shot, and if you come down for any reason, that's it.
Well Dave Macleod just did some gnarly M9 in Scotland. After a 2.5 hour lead, he found himself 6 meters from the top with no gear that would work. He downclimbed the entire route, removing his gear as he went down, came back the next day to top out and claim the onsight.
Here it is in his own words:
http://davemacleod.blogspot.com/...mpest-in-teacup.html
personally, I am more impressed by the ability to downclimb M9 after a 2.5 hour lead than the actual onsight!
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Mar 10, 2010, 2:35 AM
Post #2 of 168
(12637 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
Answer to your question: Yes.
What grays the subject is the day between attempts. Personally, I say "fine, record the onsight", and I also agree that downclimbing that rig is more impressive.
Climbers utilize downclimbing ALL the time to preserve an onsight. Like I said the only thing that makes me question it is leaving and then coming back.
On the other hand, what if a climber is going for an onsight and there is a ledge half way up. The climber sits on the ledge until he feels fully rested. How is that different than going home, resting up and returning to send. You might say that is harder, because now you have to do the entire climb.
All that matters to me is that people don't misrepresent themselves. Dave explains exactly how it went down. That is fine with me. I say call it an onsight.
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Mar 10, 2010, 2:40 AM
Post #3 of 168
(12624 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
blueeyedclimber wrote: Answer to your question: Yes. What grays the subject is the day between attempts. Personally, I say "fine, record the onsight", and I also agree that downclimbing that rig is more impressive. Climbers utilize downclimbing ALL the time to preserve an onsight. Like I said the only thing that makes me question it is leaving and then coming back. On the other hand, what if a climber is going for an onsight and there is a ledge half way up. The climber sits on the ledge until he feels fully rested. How is that different than going home, resting up and returning to send. You might say that is harder, because now you have to do the entire climb. All that matters to me is that people don't misrepresent themselves. Dave explains exactly how it went down. That is fine with me. I say call it an onsight. Josh
Completely agree. Especially with climbers' don't misrepresent yourself.
|
|
|
|
|
davidnn5
Mar 10, 2010, 2:50 AM
Post #4 of 168
(12611 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 8, 2009
Posts: 348
|
This is another example of where I find climbing terminology nonsensical. Onsight (on-sight) - climbing something as soon as you see it. Not climbing something the second time you laid eyes on it?
In the end, I think the issue is people caring how others climb. You know exactly how you get to the top of any particular climb, and whether that then qualifies you (in terms of skill, ability to place pro, general rock sense etc) to climb harder routes, similar routes, or easier routes.
I'm interested to know someone spend 2.5 hours going up and had to downclimb before coming back up with more gear (epic!); I don't care whether he tells me it's an onsight, redpoint, flash or bugaboo.
|
|
|
|
|
johnwesely
Mar 10, 2010, 4:12 AM
Post #5 of 168
(12537 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2006
Posts: 5360
|
davidnn5 wrote: I'm interested to know someone spend 2.5 hours going up and had to downclimb before coming back up with more gear (epic!); I don't care whether he tells me it's an onsight, redpoint, flash or bugaboo.
When I read his blog entry, I was kind of underwhelmed, but if he had said it was a bugaboo, I would've jumped for joy as if Sharma had climbed a new route.
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Mar 10, 2010, 4:31 AM
Post #6 of 168
(12518 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
davidnn5 wrote: This is another example of where I find climbing terminology nonsensical. Onsight (on-sight) - climbing something as soon as you see it. Not climbing something the second time you laid eyes on it?
Terminology helps clarify the message. Like any sport or industry, climbing has jargon (Slang)
In reply to: In the end, I think the issue is people caring how others climb. You know exactly how you get to the top of any particular climb, and whether that then qualifies you (in terms of skill, ability to place pro, general rock sense etc) to climb harder routes, similar routes, or easier routes.
I think climbing a route without falling is better style than climbing the same route after numerous attempts. Takes more skill. My best on0-sght is 5.12c but my best red-point is 13b. A climber once mentioned to someone I was climbing with that I can climb 5.13, I clarified it by saying I red-pointed a couple of 5.13 after several attempts.
Onsight means you did the route without hanging or falling off on the first attempt. In the case of this post, the climber had not reached the top when he started to don climb, so he still had no knowledge of what was up there. In my view, he still onsighted the line. Even more important, he was very honest in reporting his style of ascent. I went up, I down climbed, I came back another day.
In reply to: I'm interested to know someone spend 2.5 hours going up and had to downclimb before coming back up with more gear (epic!); I don't care whether he tells me it's an onsight, redpoint, flash or bugaboo.
2.5 hours going up, I wonder how long he took coming down. Talk about endurance. Inspirational.
|
|
|
|
|
skiclimb
Mar 10, 2010, 4:55 AM
Post #7 of 168
(12487 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 11, 2004
Posts: 1938
|
OMFG ...
How many angels can dance on the head of a pin...
I've done shit you can't imagine doing...and guess what.. you don't care..
same as i don't f'ing care whether you onsighted a damn thing ..including..well...anything
nobody else does either.
I don't care about this dave guy's onsight rules or M9.. i'll respect the fact that it takes some serious skill and respect more that he set a challenge for himself and adhered to it.. but I don't give a damn otherwise.
Here is what I actually do care about.. I want you to have a blast out there..i want you to stay healthy and alive.
So get good at down=climbing.. it's a skill most climbers including myself don't spend eno8ugh time working on.
It will save your ass though in a serious situation.
(This post was edited by skiclimb on Mar 10, 2010, 5:03 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Mar 10, 2010, 5:33 AM
Post #9 of 168
(12451 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
skiclimb wrote: OMFG ... How many angels can dance on the head of a pin... I've done shit you can't imagine doing...and guess what.. you don't care.. same as i don't f'ing care whether you onsighted a damn thing ..including..well...anything nobody else does either.
While I am not one of them, some people do care. It the big picture of professional climbing, it does make a difference.
In reply to: I don't care about this dave guy's onsight rules or M9.. i'll respect the fact that it takes some serious skill and respect more that he set a challenge for himself and adhered to it.. but I don't give a damn otherwise.
In reply to: Here is what I actually do care about.. I want you to have a blast out there..i want you to stay healthy and alive.
B.S. You don't even know me, what do you care about my enjoyment.
In reply to: So get good at down=climbing.. it's a skill most climbers including myself don't spend eno8ugh time working on.
In reply to: It will save your ass though in a serious situation.
Maybe, maybe not.
|
|
|
|
|
davidnn5
Mar 10, 2010, 6:11 AM
Post #10 of 168
(12422 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 8, 2009
Posts: 348
|
Obviously every sport/industry has jargon. I just can't think of many that have such whacky jargon 
What about something that is red or pointy indicates completing a climb having attempted it before? Deadpoint - killing pencils or other pointy things? Flash - the process of showing the rock your genitals? Free solo - the art of climbing by oneself without having to pay money for the privilege?
That sir, is NOT clarification!
If I want style, I'll go to a fashion parade. I got into climbing because I enjoy the process of making my way up and/or reaching the top of climbable objects. The rest of it is just mental and physical games aimed at making the process harder. As long as we can have multiple attempts and live (i.e. those nifty ropes and belay devices and such), the majority of us will redpoint hundreds or thousands of times learning to be the best we can be. On-sights are therefore like a hole in one - people brag about them simply because they're rare. They don't necessarily reflect a different level of skill from finishing the hole on par...
A caveat I didn't make earlier though: these things obviously become important when climbing with someone new. "Oh yeah, i can onsight 5.14 (i once looked at a 5.4 and cried)"
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Mar 10, 2010, 6:51 AM
Post #11 of 168
(12399 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
davidnn5 wrote: Obviously every sport/industry has jargon. I just can't think of many that have such whacky jargon
All industry has wacky jargon. Every language has idioms that don't mean anything related to the words.
In reply to: What about something that is red or pointy indicates completing a climb having attempted it before? Deadpoint - killing pencils or other pointy things? Flash - the process of showing the rock your genitals? Free solo - the art of climbing by oneself without having to pay money for the privilege?
Actual, when you know the history of red-point, it clarifies the meaning. Comes from France. Climbers use to add a red dot att he bottom of routes when the first ascent had been done. (Now we put a piece of tape on the first hanger until the route is completed.
Of course, I remember when dry tooling meant you were home without a date on Friday night.
In reply to: That sir, is NOT clarification! If I want style, I'll go to a fashion parade. I got into climbing because I enjoy the process of making my way up and/or reaching the top of climbable objects.
In reply to: The rest of it is just mental and physical games aimed at making the process harder.
Climbing is only physical and mental. It's the rest, it's the whole thing.
As for style, if your only goal is to reach the top without dying, why don't you just walk around back. As long as we can have multiple attempts and live (i.e. those nifty ropes and belay devices and such), the majority of us will redpoint hundreds or thousands of times learning to be the best we can be. On-sights are therefore like a hole in one - people brag about them simply because they're rare. They don't necessarily reflect a different level of skill from finishing the hole on par...
Here, I don't agree completely. On-sights are not like a hole in one to me, although I don't play golf.
On-sighting means you can read sequences, figure out how to move, and hold on while doing it. Another words, you can do it on the first try without relying on the rope to rest of figure things out.
If on-sighting were not harder than red-pointing, than we would all on-sight and red-point at the same level.
I have climbing partners who only climb routes they honestly believe they will on-sight. I climb more routes on-sight than not on-sight personally. I also don't brag about my on-sights, nor do most of my partners.
In reply to: A caveat I didn't make earlier though: these things obviously become important when climbing with someone new. "Oh yeah, i can onsight 5.14 (i once looked at a 5.4 and cried)"
Climbing with someone new, I don't see how this changes anything at all. These things become important when you decide they are important to you, no other time.
Brad is a good climber. Because he is a professional and full time climber, the differentiators between an on-sight and red-point is important. Media and sponsors.
Happy trolling.
(This post was edited by guangzhou on Mar 10, 2010, 6:54 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
davidnn5
Mar 10, 2010, 6:58 AM
Post #12 of 168
(12391 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 8, 2009
Posts: 348
|
I think you missed my point. You redpoint up until you can onsight a certain level. It's like any other "sport"; you keep trying to get the 200 km/h serve in tennis until you can do it all the time, and that becomes your new "onsight" level. Then you want to hit 220 km/h serves. It's only rare because people always want to progress and attain new levels - understandably. Similarly, if you keep hitting the ball near to the hole (practising) then you will become more and more likely to hit a hole in one. Then if you hit 1 hole in one per 1000 holes, you'll want it to be 1 in 500.
As for trolling, it seems the denizens of this forum use the term to refer to anyone who attempts to engage in conversations. I don't much care what you call me - I've had some interesting conversations lately, many of them not related to climbing. Perhaps that's unsurprising given the level of debate here (low to middling, honestly).
|
|
|
|
|
guangzhou
Mar 10, 2010, 7:13 AM
Post #14 of 168
(12373 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 27, 2004
Posts: 3389
|
I agree that you can use red-pointing to improve, but not everyone does. Some people use a pyramid system to improve. Instead of getting on something slightly to hard for the their on-sight ability, they climb loads and load of routes at heir onsight limit so onsighting that grade becomes easier and the next grade becomes onsightable too.
Again, I don't think on-sights are uncomon. Actually, in America, I would say most people are scared of falling, so avoid redpointing tactics more then the building a pyramid. (really depends on where they learn to climb.)
Even when I climbed in the Blue Mountains, people were scared of falling and tended to climb routes they were confident they wouldn't fall on.
Genrally, trad climbers are more likely to go with the pyramid, sport climbers more likely to go with red-pointing to improve. (In general, but not true of all)
Onsighting requires more skill and techniques than red-pointing the same grade.
Red-pointing requires more patience.
(This post was edited by guangzhou on Mar 10, 2010, 7:18 AM)
|
|
|
|
|
I_do
Mar 10, 2010, 7:45 AM
Post #15 of 168
(12348 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 2, 2008
Posts: 1232
|
caughtinside wrote: This question has been posed on this website numerous times. Some have said as long as you never weight the rope, you can downclimb and return with your onsight intact. Others have said you get one shot, and if you come down for any reason, that's it. Well Dave Macleod just did some gnarly M9 in Scotland. After a 2.5 hour lead, he found himself 6 meters from the top with no gear that would work. He downclimbed the entire route, removing his gear as he went down, came back the next day to top out and claim the onsight. Here it is in his own words: http://davemacleod.blogspot.com/...mpest-in-teacup.html personally, I am more impressed by the ability to downclimb M9 after a 2.5 hour lead than the actual onsight!
Well it's not an onsight to me. But it really doesn't matter because the Mac,as always, is clear as to what went down. Inspitational climber, both in performance and in reporting about his achievments.
|
|
|
|
|
mr.tastycakes
Mar 10, 2010, 2:26 PM
Post #16 of 168
(12295 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 10, 2008
Posts: 310
|
If the only requirements for an onsight are that you can't get any beta, and you can't weight the rope, pull on gear or fall, is it an onsight if I up and down climb multiple times over multiple days, dialing in sequences with each attempt and finally send? If you start to stretch the "onsight rules" you get pretty far from the essence of the onsight.
For pro climbers reporting high end ascents I think the important thing is to report honestly, which Dave did. Respect. For the rest of us...well, no one really cares about our ascents so call it what you want. You can write "flashed it this season, after 2 tries last season" on your 8spray scorecard, no one really cares.
|
|
|
|
|
gmggg
Mar 10, 2010, 3:09 PM
Post #17 of 168
(12267 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 25, 2009
Posts: 2099
|
caughtinside wrote: This question has been posed on this website numerous times. Some have said as long as you never weight the rope, you can downclimb and return with your onsight intact. Others have said you get one shot, and if you come down for any reason, that's it. Well Dave Macleod just did some gnarly M9 in Scotland. After a 2.5 hour lead, he found himself 6 meters from the top with no gear that would work. He downclimbed the entire route, removing his gear as he went down, came back the next day to top out and claim the onsight. Here it is in his own words: http://davemacleod.blogspot.com/...mpest-in-teacup.html personally, I am more impressed by the ability to downclimb M9 after a 2.5 hour lead than the actual onsight!
Too bad he didn't down climb it the second time, he could have had two on-sights of the same route!
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Mar 10, 2010, 3:11 PM
Post #18 of 168
(12264 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
A few points:
1. Although a lot of us don't care what you call it, it DOES matter if you are a pro climber. If I call something an onsight, someone might say "cool", others may ask for more info, but in the end, I can show my face at work and no one will be the wiser. A pro climber's rep could be at stake, not to mention future articles, advertisements, etc... depending how it's reported. Most of us can't relate to that.
2. Like I said in my first post, it is a gray area leaving and then coming back. I will let the rest of the internet jockeys debate it like it's black and white.
3. My final point is that I am proposing a new term. A lot of us have agreed that to spend 2.5 hours on a route and then down climb the entire thing (except for the last portion) is impressive, never mind at that grade.
Down-sight; adj. - style of ascent in which you down climb a route first go.
 Josh
|
|
|
|
|
ClimbTheCrag
Mar 10, 2010, 3:16 PM
Post #19 of 168
(12255 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 25, 2009
Posts: 16
|
caughtinside wrote: This question has been posed on this website numerous times. Some have said as long as you never weight the rope, you can downclimb and return with your onsight intact. Others have said you get one shot, and if you come down for any reason, that's it. Well Dave Macleod just did some gnarly M9 in Scotland. After a 2.5 hour lead, he found himself 6 meters from the top with no gear that would work. He downclimbed the entire route, removing his gear as he went down, came back the next day to top out and claim the onsight. Here it is in his own words: http://davemacleod.blogspot.com/...mpest-in-teacup.html personally, I am more impressed by the ability to downclimb M9 after a 2.5 hour lead than the actual onsight!
My opinion is if you could have climbed the route without a rope or any type of protection or falling to the ground, or without beta, it's a onsight, even if you downclimb.
|
|
|
|
|
lena_chita
Moderator
Mar 10, 2010, 3:28 PM
Post #20 of 168
(12236 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 27, 2006
Posts: 6087
|
blueeyedclimber wrote: 3. My final point is that I am proposing a new term. A lot of us have agreed that to spend 2.5 hours on a route and then down climb the entire thing (except for the last portion) is impressive, never mind at that grade. Down-sight; adj. - style of ascent in which you down climb a route first go. Josh
I like that term! Down-climbing is my strong point, and my downfall (pun intended), so I woud like to say that I down-onsighted something. LOL, on Sunday clamheads yelled at me for attempting to down-climb-- so loudly that other friends heard it on the other side of the crag. 
Yelling helped-- I didn't give up. Down-climbing helped, too-- I found a good sequence and flashed the route...
As to your original question, I think it is not an onsight, because on the second day, when he had completed the route, he presumably knew the sequence of moves down low somewhat better, after having climbed it a day before, knew the gear, knew what else he had to bring along for the top, etc. and one could make a case for those things making it possible for him to actually complete the climb.
I would call it a flash or a redpoint myself.
But since there is absoutely no confusion about what he did, I do not think it matters really. And yes, regardless of what you call it, it was an impressive feat to down-climb the route.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Mar 10, 2010, 4:08 PM
Post #21 of 168
(12194 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
mr.tastycakes wrote: If the only requirements for an onsight are that you can't get any beta, and you can't weight the rope, pull on gear or fall, is it an onsight if I up and down climb multiple times over multiple days, dialing in sequences with each attempt and finally send?
Yes.
|
|
|
|
|
bigjonnyc
Mar 10, 2010, 4:15 PM
Post #22 of 168
(12180 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 17, 2004
Posts: 369
|
Why didn't he just down-climb, gather his gear from below, and continue back up placing it more sparsely through the sections he now knew he could do? Don't get me wrong, what he did was impressive, but something about gathering knowledge about the climb and then getting to rest a night before doing it bottom to top seems to negate the onsight to me.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Mar 10, 2010, 4:16 PM
Post #23 of 168
(12175 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
blueeyedclimber wrote: 2. Like I said in my first post, it is a gray area leaving and then coming back.
That's only a gray area to you. Most everyone else who thinks there is a gray area thinks it's whether you can touch the ground again after you've started. Once you've decided it's ok to touch the ground, what difference does an intervening night make. According to you, if I try a climb at 7 a.m., down climb, rest for eight hours and try again before dinner, and succeed, it's an onsight; but if I make my first attempt before dinner, down climb, and succeed the next morning, with the exact same amount of time between attempts, it's not. There is no gray area there. Those are exactly the same conditions, just shifted by 12 hours. Clearly, either both must be onsights or neither.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
blueeyedclimber
Mar 10, 2010, 4:32 PM
Post #25 of 168
(12143 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 19, 2002
Posts: 4602
|
jt512 wrote: blueeyedclimber wrote: 2. Like I said in my first post, it is a gray area leaving and then coming back. That's only a gray area to you. Most everyone else who thinks there is a gray area thinks it's whether you can touch the ground again after you've started. Once you've decided it's ok to touch the ground, what difference does an intervening night make. According to you, if I try a climb at 7 a.m., down climb, rest for eight hours and try again before dinner, and succeed, it's an onsight; but if I make my first attempt before dinner, down climb, and succeed the next morning, with the exact same amount of time between attempts, it's not. There is no gray area there. Those are exactly the same conditions, just shifted by 12 hours. Clearly, either both must be onsights or neither. Jay
I am not looking for an argument here. Apparently at least one pro climber feels it's an onsight. I was clear in my post that I don't care whether he calls it an onsight or not. Whether it's a gray area or not, I also don't care. If it was me, I would NOT call it an onsight, then again, I could never see myself doing what he did (meaning down climb, just to preserve an "onsight"), so I never really thought about it before.
And btw you are putting words in my mouth. In your examples, whether there was a day in between was irrelevant. The gray area for me was leaving and then coming back. It had nothing to do with doing it the same day or the next. My example used a route with a large rest on it, that you could rest as long as you wanted and go when you are ready as opposed to leaving, resting, then coming back.
My use of the terminology is used only for MY record keeping, not to spray to others. Some of my terminology may be used loosely. I am ok with that. I am not trying to get published in a magazine.
Josh
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
. Definitely cooler than onsiting. 
1
