Sport climbing is "cheating?" You'll have to remind me what page of the rule book that is in. Oh, wait, there is no rule book. Fair enough, then it must be cheating because that is the consensus of the climbing community, except that Curt seems to be the only remaining member of the climbing community to consider it so.

-Jay

If you try the route again you are not missing anything, for that matter you learn more by climbing more of the climb again.

The goal is to learn how to climb the route.
You learn how to climb the route by climbing it.

< Do you actually lower to the ground every time you fall?>

Indeed, the lowest common denominator does get to make the rules--that's the way majority rule works.

I have absolutely no doubt that "working hard routes" (i.e. sport climbing or cheating) can make someone strictly better at trad climbing as Rich asserts. I have exactly as much respect for these people as those who similarly use steroids, use blood doping, use hold chipping or any other nefarious means to succeed.

Except that it is more efficient to spend more time on the parts you can't do than the parts you already can.

When I choose to work a route I am cheating NO ONE. You have nothing to do with my climbing and therefore your definition of cheating is rejected.

And to equate hang dogging to blood doping and steriod use is lame. If hang dogging (a rope trick and nothing more, a freaking ROPE TRICK) is cheating then so too are SLCD's, chalk, polypro clothing and sticky rubber. In fact, if you are equipped with any more technology than the Ice Man, arguably the oldest known mountaineer yet found, you are cheating the Old School.

Cheating in our sport should be viewed as representing an ascent as something other than what it really was, ie saying you trad free climbed a pitch when in fact you hang dogged it.

Cheers,
DMT

When I choose to work a route I am cheating NO ONE. You have nothing to do with my climbing and therefore your definition of cheating is rejected.

And to equate hang dogging to blood doping and steriod use is lame. If hang dogging (a rope trick and nothing more, a freaking ROPE TRICK) is cheating then so too are SLCD's, chalk, polypro clothing and sticky rubber. In fact, if you are equipped with any more technology than the Ice Man, arguably the oldest known mountaineer yet found, you are cheating the Old School.

Cheating in our sport should be viewed as representing an ascent as something other than what it really was, ie saying you trad free climbed a pitch when in fact you hang dogged it.

Cheers,
DMT

Shazzam Joe, good call. You don't need any of those things to boulder harder.

Moral certitude is rarely attractive, but it is interesting, in a car crash sort of way: Swaggart, Bennet, Limbaugh. Will someone now capture curt on film "cheating"? Ahh, I'll still give him a belay afterwards.

So why do you use them (chalk, sticky shoes)? Do you need spotters, pads, brushes, chalk, shoes etc... Your a cheater for using sticky shoes on Gill problems. Go use old RD, RR or PA's Curt, don't talk from both side of your face... :o

Are these following folks cheaters? Jim Ercikson, Roger Briggs, John Long. Chris Sharma, Tommy Caldwell, The Huber's Brothers, Ron Kauk. They all sport-climb. Yes or no!

I hate to bust your bubble but no aspect of this sport is close to being pure.

It is the revenge of the "cheaters" to outdo the "purists" at their own game, and it is a phenomenom that has characterized the passing of every climbing generation. This is the essence of progress, and to refuse to celebrate it is to forget the details of your own history, something we old guys are fond of doing when we try to rationalize why we can't keep up with the youngsters.

bobd1953 wrote:
Quote:
Shazzam Joe, good call. You don't need any of those things to boulder harder.


So why do you use them (chalk, sticky shoes)? Do you need spotters, pads, brushes, chalk, shoes etc... Your a cheater for using sticky shoes on Gill problems. Go use old RD, RR or PA's Curt, don't talk from both side of your face...


Actually, as you are well aware, I have done a hell of a lot of bouldering without any of those things, except chalk.

bobd1953 wrote:
Are these following folks cheaters? Jim Ercikson, Roger Briggs, John Long. Chris Sharma, Tommy Caldwell, The Huber's Brothers, Ron Kauk. They all sport-climb. Yes or no!


That is clearly something for each of them to decide for themselves. What do I really think about sport climbing? That's easy--I don't. I don't care if you do it or even if everyone else does it.

bobd1953 wrote:
I hate to bust your bubble but no aspect of this sport is close to being pure.


Perhaps not, except by degree.

Curt
_________________

The most difficult things for a man to do are to climb a wall leaning towards you, to kiss a girl leaning away from you, and to make an after dinner speech. - W.S. Churchill

I doubt if she was family.

What do I really think about sport climbing? That's easy--I don't. I don't care if you do it or even if everyone else does it.

Boring day at work so I will keep it going. To what degree are you talking about. A cheat is a cheat. Right? A liar is a liar. George Bush lie about the war. What degree is he a liar?

Not caring about something (sport-climbing) is your right and maybe quite noble on your part. Calling most of the people on this site cheaters because they sport climb, now that a whole new game.

Do you bend your degree of cheating when doing a new boulder problem? Do the brushes come out, the sticky shoes get put on and do you use a pad if it's a highball? Climbing ethics are a mere matter of bending them to fit your style at the time.

I have seen you bouldered and like most who have climb with you came away impressed. Rock-on-brother

Are these following folks cheaters? Jim Ercikson, Roger Briggs, John Long. Chris Sharma, Tommy Caldwell, The Huber's Brothers, Ron Kauk.

By the way, this same retard routinely engages in wholesale bashing of bouldering at every opportunity. Since you are a boulderer too, why don't you respond to his bouldering bashing the same way you respond to my sport climbing bashing?

Not necessarily. Most times, doing the route is as much about doing the lower or upper part of the route efficiently as it is being able to do the crux part efficiently.

Bunch of republicans on this thread. Only one way to do it. MY way.

Now this something worth fighting over. Dude, don't ever call me one of them.

If hang dogging…is cheating then so too are SLCD's, chalk, polypro clothing and sticky rubber. In fact, if you are equipped with any more technology than the Ice Man, arguably the oldest known mountaineer yet found, you are cheating the Old School.

If your goal is to get the redpoint as quickly as possible, then the harder the section is, the more time you should spend on it. For instance, say a one-pitch climb has a 5.11c section at the bottom, a 5.12a section midway up, and another 5.11c section at the top; and let's say that the this route is near the climber's redpoint limit. Climbing fresh, he can probably get the 5.11c sections in 1 to 3 tries, but it'll take him longer to get the 5.12a section. Now, when he does his redpoint attempt, he will be fresh for the first 5.11c section, but not for the second 5.11c section. Therefore, the order of difficulty of the sections, from hardest to easiest, will be: the 5.12a, the top 5.11c, and the bottom 5.11c. And so, he should spend the most time working the 5.12a section and the least time working the bottom 5.11c section.

This clearly shows how inefficient it would be to lower after each fall on the 5.12a section. The climber will have made as many runs on the bottom 5.11c section as he will have on the 5.12c section; worse yet, when he finally climbs through the 5.12c crux, he'll be faced with having to on-sight the second 5.11c section in a fatigued state, something he's unlikely to accomplish. If he sticks to his ground up "ethic," on each subsequent attempt, he will continue to face the second 5.11c section, whose moves he still hasn't figured out, while fatigued.

Well, that was explaining the obvious in detail.