|
rufusandcompany
Oct 4, 2005, 5:17 AM
Post #51 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 4, 2005
Posts: 2618
|
In reply to: People care if others free solo because climbing related deaths can be a huge hinderance to access to crags. Non-Climbers dont know the difference between different types of climbing, it all the same.
That type of statement is almost certain to get you flamed, because it's clear you pulled it out of a dark place. The serious free solo climbers in this country make up less than a fraction of a percent of the total climbing population.
|
|
|
|
|
maman
Oct 4, 2005, 7:04 AM
Post #52 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 8, 2005
Posts: 11
|
clmbnski wrote:
In reply to: Soloing is also the ultimate acceptance of responsibility. Acknoledging that a fall will kill you and still continuing, represents a real dedication to your reasons for climbing.
I'm very curious about your reasons for climbing. Putting your life at risk and feeling like a warrior are two reasons we can ascertain from your post.
I've soloed. I've had one bad experience out of about 100. I've walked around feeling like a badass from the times I did well. I've also gotten pretty sketched soloing (onsight and off route on Spooky, on a windy day), and it taught me the only lesson worth learning from soloing: that it's not worth risking your life for.
I had the same attitude that all the other soloers here seem to have, that is, that I was so in control, on ground that was so easy, that I couldn't possibly fall. But on that day, I went from fearless warrior-dude, to quaking, sniveling wierdo in the space of a minute.
Think it can't happen to you?
Have you ever seen someone fall while soloing? I have. It is one of the worst things you can see, especially when it is someone you know and care about.
So why do you solo? Do you honestly acknowledge that you could lose your life? Is the feeling you get from soloing more precious than your life? If so, doesn't that make you wonder about how much value you place on your existance?
|
|
|
|
|
maman
Oct 4, 2005, 7:07 AM
Post #53 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 8, 2005
Posts: 11
|
clmbnski wrote:
In reply to: Soloing is also the ultimate acceptance of responsibility. Acknoledging that a fall will kill you and still continuing, represents a real dedication to your reasons for climbing.
I'm very curious about your reasons for climbing. Putting your life at risk and feeling like a warrior are two reasons we can ascertain from your post.
I've soloed. I've had one bad experience out of about 100 good ones. I've walked around feeling like a badass from the times I did well. I've also gotten pretty sketched soloing (onsight and off route on Spooky, on a windy day), and it taught me the only lesson worth learning from soloing: that it's not worth risking your life for.
I had the same attitude that all the other soloers here seem to have, that is, that I was so in control, on ground that was so easy, that I couldn't possibly fall. But on that day, I went from fearless warrior-dude, to quaking, sniveling wierdo in the space of a minute.
Think it can't happen to you?
It's happened to most of our soloing heroes.
Have you ever seen someone fall while soloing? I have. It is one of the worst things you can see, especially when it is someone you know and care about.
So why do you solo? Do you honestly acknowledge that you could lose your life? Is the feeling you get from soloing more precious than your life? If so, doesn't that make you wonder about how much value you place on your existance?
|
|
|
|
|
maman
Oct 4, 2005, 7:43 AM
Post #54 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 8, 2005
Posts: 11
|
In reply to: A little indian brave who before he was ten, Played wargames in the woods with his indian friends And he built up a dream that when he grew up He would be a fearless warrior indian cheif Many moons past and more the dream grew strong until Tomorrow he would sing his first warsong and fight his first battle But something went wrong, surprise attack killed him in his sleep that night And so castles made of sand melts into the sea, eventually
Jimi Hendrix
|
|
|
|
|
ajkclay
Oct 4, 2005, 10:06 AM
Post #55 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2002
Posts: 1567
|
In reply to: A few things to think about. We all tend to judge something without knowing that something. The book is bad because we don't like the cover or because of what someone else said about it. If we choose to criticize, do the work to find out the truth. In this case, solo or be quiet. We tend to object to situations or experiences that we fear. Is soloing crazy or are we just afraid of it? This view has nothing to do with US engaging the activity ourselves. It is simply a willingness to look inside ourselves for why WE are resistant to someone else doing something like soloing.
a great big shiny gold trophy
|
|
|
|
|
cruzit
Oct 4, 2005, 12:16 PM
Post #56 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 2, 2003
Posts: 56
|
Interesting thread. I don't know that I necessarily agree with the generic all soloing is bad. In the area I climb (Oklahoma), many, many of the leads were put up by ironman climbers (Duane Raleigh, Tony Mayes, Russ Hooper). The first bolt on many of these climbs is 40 or 50 feet above the ground. A leader fall from that height would surely not be good.
I recently led a a 5.6 where the first bolt was 50 feet above a heinous boulder field and the second bolt was 40 feet above that. What is that but a solo. I went back and soloed the route, and felt the same as when I lead it because the worst fall potentional occurs before you are protected. Anyone who leads is essentially soloing to some degree. That's why we generally lead at a couple of levels lower than we can comfortably climb.
I think the point Arno is trying to make is essentially you have to be comfortable and accepting of the level of risk you are taking every time you climb.
|
|
|
|
|
cfnubbler
Oct 4, 2005, 1:46 PM
Post #57 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2003
Posts: 628
|
Wasn't it Bridwell who when asked about soloing, said (and I'm going on a none-to-clear memory), something like "So little to gain, so much to lose"?
That about sums it up for me, and yes, I've done my fair share of soloing.
But as a daddy, I'm done with it. I hope.
It's an inherently selfish act, and I no longer have the luxory of that sort of brazen selfishness. I intend no judgement of others who choose differently, I'm just calling it like I see it.
DMT, I appreciate your honesty in speaking honestly about the internal dilemmas and paradoxes of being a truly committed climber and parent. I'm in the same boat and know exactly what you mean. Everytime I push the boat out a little too far, usually inadvertently these days, and pull it off, the ego-driven climber in me gloats. And the dad in me despises the climber. The internal dialog is like that scene in Animal House, where the devil is on one shoulder and an angel on the other. If you've been there, you know what I mean.
-Nubbler
-Nubbler
|
|
|
|
|
arnoilgner
Oct 4, 2005, 2:15 PM
Post #58 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 8, 2003
Posts: 366
|
One other tendency I didn't mention, that seems to drive some of these posts, is how we relate to death.
Our beliefs tend to be driven by how we understand death and our fear of it. This is again usually an unconscious process. But, what drives most of our resistance to soloing is that we think people shouldn't die and that if you solo you are increasing your chances of dying.
First, solo accidents are a small percentage of total climbing accidents. You can check through "Accidents in North American Mountaineering" and check this out. True, there is a greater percentage of solo accidents in mountaineering and ice climbing, but that part of climbing has always included speed as a safety aspect versus going slow and subjecting yourself to more objective dangers. But, in pure rock climbing the percentage is lower.
Second, this may sound way off track but what is wrong if someone dies, even if they leave loved ones behind? Remember, Allison Hargraves? She was hailed as a woman doing great things as long as she summitted mountains but when she died on one she was criticized about being selfish, leaving kids and a husband behind.
So, how do you relate to death? Should you live your life in your comfort zone just so your loved ones will always have you there? Can you even live there? Isn't life about growth and if you don't align with growth you're on your way toward death anyway? What kind of message does striving for the comfort zone send to those kids? How about, "get a secure job; strive for money because that will make you comfortable; etc".
Life is to be lived, not for anyone else but for yourself, but from genuine motivation that is deep inside. Getting to that deep motivation (which by the way is a motivation driven by valuing learning) takes time--thus each experience taking us in that direction is also learning. We should value life. This is not about taking a cavalier approach saying "well, gotta die sometime" or that sort of thing. Each person has to decide for him/herself what risks are appropriate for his/her particular path.
We've all experienced ego motivation and probably soloed driven by it. If we die because of that then that's just the way that experience goes. If we have a close call because of it then we have an opportunity to learn. An alignment with learning will do a lot to change our perceptions of death.
arno
|
|
|
|
|
cfnubbler
Oct 4, 2005, 2:55 PM
Post #59 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2003
Posts: 628
|
In reply to: Life is to be lived, not for anyone else but for yourself
Do you really believe that? Really and truly? That sort of complete egotism is a common developmental stage, but is usually left behind pretty early in life. If as an adult you really believe it, I'm sad for you and those that love you. It must be a very lonely and frustrating experience.
In reply to: We've all experienced ego motivation and probably soloed driven by it. If we die because of that then that's just the way that experience goes.
How naive. Look, I'm not down on egotism or soloing. But lets call a spade a spade here. If you die during an ego-driven solo, or for any other reason at all, that may well be "just the way that experience goes" for you. You've checked out, and your worries are over. But the experience for those that care for you is just beginning, and believe me, it's not a happy one. Sadly, I've watched it play out more than once after climbing fatalities. Surely you have too, Arno?
I also don't believe one should always live "in the comfort zone", and the choices I've made in life reflect this. But you seem to be implying that the only way to move beyond one's comfort zone is through ego-driven, danger-ridden pursuits. There are of course other ways to push one's envelope. I submit that many people, and certainly many climbers, find facing physical danger considerably less scary then the emotional dangers of meaningful relationships. That would certainly describe me in my 20s and early 30s. On some days, it still does.
But I do believe that if one chooses, of their own free will and volition, to establish meaningful relationships with other human beings, then one accepts a responsibility to consider the impact of one's actions on those people. Now we might argue that as long as one is honest and up front about one's passions and needs from the outset, it is fair and reasonable to pursue them even in the context of relationships. I would agree. But this convenient out breaks down when one chooses to have kids, or when one is less then completely honest from day 1 in another meaningful relationship. My little girl didn't choose to have a climber-daddy, she got stuck with one. And since I chose to bring her into this world, I also chose a responsibility to act with her needs in mind. Life, even for committed climbers, is not all about ego. I eat, breathe, live and dream about climbing. I'm a lifer. If I have me way I'll be climbing whatever I can drag my old bones up when I'm 80. But it's not the only thing in my life.
Solo if you will. But when deciding to do so, look the consequences square in the eye, and remember that it ain't all about you, whether you want it to be or not.
-Nubbler
|
|
|
|
|
glacierskilledmyclimbing
Oct 4, 2005, 2:59 PM
Post #60 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 3, 2005
Posts: 9
|
I have just been reading this thread and don't quite understand the mindset of soloing. I have soloed myself only 3 times and have vowed never to do it again (unless it's deep water soloing :D ). I realize that I perhaps CAN solo a 5.6 or 5.7 but what's the point? I can do the same climb with a rope and be sure that I am safer than when soloing. I just think that maybe people should be a bit more careful with their lives? I don't know, but for me if there's protection there, I'm going to use it.
I don't think all soloists are idiots or anything and in fact I have great respect for their skills. But to me it all comes down to the issue "Is a mountain worth your life?" Just something to think about.
Keep Rockin in the free world!
|
|
|
|
|
cruzit
Oct 4, 2005, 3:08 PM
Post #61 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 2, 2003
Posts: 56
|
In reply to: So, how do you relate to death? Should you live your life in your comfort zone just so your loved ones will always have you there? Can you even live there? Isn't life about growth and if you don't align with growth you're on your way toward death anyway? What kind of message does striving for the comfort zone send to those kids? How about, "get a secure job; strive for money because that will make you comfortable; etc".
Exactly. So many people go through life worried about dying that they forget to live. Truth is, everyone is going to die. So essentially how well you live may be your ultimate statement. Live every day as if it is your last one on earth, because it may be.
All of my three children have told me at one time or another that they admire us (their step-dad and I) because we "do stuff." My oldest daughter, who has terminal cancer, was recently interviewed for an article about our family in the local paper. She told the reporter that her step-dad and I were her heros and inspiration because we live every moment and that living every moment is what she aspires to do.
I do not have a death wish. I carefully assess the level of inherent risk for any given activity and accept or reject the activity based on the risk level I am willing and comfortable taking.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Oct 4, 2005, 3:09 PM
Post #62 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: Should you live your life in your comfort zone just so your loved ones will always have you there?
In a comfort zone? Depends upon the zone I guess. I sorta kinda like the g'American middle class' confort zone, for example. Never could go the dirt bag route.
In reply to: Can you even live there? Isn't life about growth and if you don't align with growth you're on your way toward death anyway?
Well my friend, not as fast as 32 feet per second per second, that's for sure.
In reply to: What kind of message does striving for the comfort zone send to those kids? How about, "get a secure job; strive for money because that will make you comfortable; etc".
Yeah, how about that? What is wrong with a good job, warm house, loving family and a couple of cars in the driveway? Is that really such a bad thing?
Does a climber need to shed her attachments to reality, ie job, home, family, in order to free herself from fear? Is having nothing left to lose the only way to do this?
Maybe I have it wrong. But a few close calls got me to thinking, on balance, my daughters are better off with me than without. Deciding not to incur certain kinds of risk is not necessarily a step toward the permanent couch in the sky. It can simply be a step toward responsibility and taking care of those who cannot yet take care of themselves.
Course, ascending 6 fixed ropes without a backup the other day certainly qualifies as unnecessary risk in most normal people's books I guess.
Cheers
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
sspssp
Oct 4, 2005, 3:23 PM
Post #63 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 2, 2003
Posts: 1731
|
In reply to: Wasn't it Bridwell who when asked about soloing, said (and I'm going on a none-to-clear memory), something like "So little to gain, so much to lose"? ... It's an inherently selfish act, and I no longer have the luxory of that sort of brazen selfishness. I intend no judgement of others who choose differently, I'm just calling it like I see it.
Except for gyms and well bolted overhanging sport routes, isn't this true of most climbing? Are you really safer picking your way through some loose, alpine 5.8 route because you are tied into a rope (nevermind that your last piece is in a hollow flake 30 feet below you) then you are soloing a clean 5.6? Or you've lead 100' from the belay, but you are 30' above a ledge with your last piece 15 feet below you?
I don't see it.
For those with that attitude, I suggest reading more back issues of Accidents in North American Mountaineering.
peace
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Oct 4, 2005, 3:32 PM
Post #64 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
In reply to: I had the same attitude that all the other soloers here seem to have, that is, that I was so in control, on ground that was so easy, that I couldn't possibly fall.
That's the rationalization we use to put the word 'acceptable' in front of the word 'risk.'
Most of my honest to god free soloing has been in the alpine environment as opposed to the crag. I have NEVER HONESTLY FELT, not once in ANY of the unroped climbing that I have done, that I couldn't possibly fall. I have never once successfully deluded myself into this sort of thinking.
In reply to: But on that day, I went from fearless warrior-dude, to quaking, sniveling wierdo in the space of a minute. Think it can't happen to you? It's happened to most of our soloing heroes.
I suspect you are right. But oddly, and I bet you take some measure of self satisfaction from it, you are still with us. You suffered the breakdown and summoned the necessary control to recover. So while you've decided to no longer that that sort of risk, deep down, where it counts the most, right next to your heart, you know, YOU KNOW, you can find the necessary reserve to keep your shit together when it all truly falls apart.
The lessons of a bad solo may be the most telling of all... assuming we survive to learn them?
Cheers
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
crimpandgo
Oct 4, 2005, 4:48 PM
Post #65 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 15, 2004
Posts: 1005
|
In reply to: Interesting thread. I don't know that I necessarily agree with the generic all soloing is bad. In the area I climb (Oklahoma), many, many of the leads were put up by ironman climbers (Duane Raleigh, Tony Mayes, Russ Hooper). The first bolt on many of these climbs is 40 or 50 feet above the ground. A leader fall from that height would surely not be good. I recently led a a 5.6 where the first bolt was 50 feet above a heinous boulder field and the second bolt was 40 feet above that. What is that but a solo. I went back and soloed the route, and felt the same as when I lead it because the worst fall potentional occurs before you are protected. Anyone who leads is essentially soloing to some degree. That's why we generally lead at a couple of levels lower than we can comfortably climb. I think the point Arno is trying to make is essentially you have to be comfortable and accepting of the level of risk you are taking every time you climb.
Why? What's the point? All they have done is set up dangerous climbs for others to follow.
Probably would have been better not to bolt it at all. Then only the He-men would attempt it and get hurt when they fell.
|
|
|
|
|
rockkid55
Oct 4, 2005, 5:19 PM
Post #66 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 16, 2005
Posts: 40
|
Someone in here said, earlier, that everyone's first trad lead is a solo. That's definitely true. When you're learning to lead trad, every climb is a solo. If you're unlucky enough to fall on your first lead climb, you'll most likely die, because, honestly, that nut really didn't fit in that part of the crack . . .
And as far as making a habit of soloing . . . it IS about you and the rock. It's a selfish thing, just like climbing, more or less, is a selfish sport. (I'm not saying that's a bad thing, mind you . . .) So if you're gonna solo, you'd better not have a wife and kids or anyone else financially dependent on you; or else you're just an A-hole. That's my humble opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
forkliftdaddy
Oct 4, 2005, 5:22 PM
Post #67 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 3, 2003
Posts: 408
|
C+G, Big run outs to the first bolt can be a good thing. I doubt that many step up to an obvious 50 ft. grounder unaware of the consequences, He-men or no. In fact, that distance to the first bolt makes makes the level of risk all the more apparent to the leader. Imagine if you climbed 15 ft. to the first bolt and then got a 40 ft. run out. Yikes!
|
|
|
|
|
crimpandgo
Oct 4, 2005, 5:28 PM
Post #68 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 15, 2004
Posts: 1005
|
In reply to: Someone in here said, earlier, that everyone's first trad lead is a solo. That's definitely true. When you're learning to lead trad, every climb is a solo. If you're unlucky enough to fall on your first lead climb, you'll most likely die, because, honestly, that nut really didn't fit in that part of the crack . . . And as far as making a habit of soloing . . . it IS about you and the rock. It's a selfish thing, just like climbing, more or less, is a selfish sport. (I'm not saying that's a bad thing, mind you . . .) So if you're gonna solo, you'd better not have a wife and kids or anyone else financially dependent on you; or else you're just an A-hole. That's my humble opinion.
That attitude is what is getting noob trad leaders killed. And its no more than an excuse for not spending the time to learn from people that know what they are doing. There are plenty of ways to learn good trad placements without putting you life on the line. Do a search through this web site if you value your life.
|
|
|
|
|
rockkid55
Oct 4, 2005, 5:45 PM
Post #69 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 16, 2005
Posts: 40
|
CrimpAndGo,
I totally agree that it's a bad attitude to have. But there's no way around it. I haven't been leading trad for very long, but I followed a shitload before I attempted to lead. So I had a pretty good idea of what to do.
Still doesn't change the fact that, like anything, you're only gonna get good at it if you try it.
And trying usually means messing up. That's why you start leading on easy 5.6 and below. That way, it's okay to mess up, because you're 99% guaranteed not to fall. If you're part of that 1%, well . . . maybe you shouldn't have pissed God off by doing whatever it is you did.
|
|
|
|
|
cfnubbler
Oct 4, 2005, 5:52 PM
Post #70 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 31, 2003
Posts: 628
|
In reply to: CrimpAndGo, I totally agree that it's a bad attitude to have. But there's no way around it. I haven't been leading trad for very long, but I followed a s--- before I attempted to lead. So I had a pretty good idea of what to do. Still doesn't change the fact that, like anything, you're only gonna get good at it if you try it. And trying usually means messing up. That's why you start leading on easy 5.6 and below. That way, it's okay to mess up, because you're 99% guaranteed not to fall. If you're part of that 1%, well . . . maybe you shouldn't have pissed God off by doing whatever it is you did.
Please don't try and rationalize your position. It's absurd and only makes you look more foolish than you already have. The only reasons for one's first leads to effectively be solos are ignorance (a curable condition) or stupidity (permanent, I'm afraid).
-Nubbler
|
|
|
|
|
rufusandcompany
Oct 4, 2005, 6:00 PM
Post #71 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 4, 2005
Posts: 2618
|
In reply to: CrimpAndGo, I totally agree that it's a bad attitude to have. But there's no way around it. I haven't been leading trad for very long, but I followed a s--- before I attempted to lead. So I had a pretty good idea of what to do. Still doesn't change the fact that, like anything, you're only gonna get good at it if you try it. And trying usually means messing up. That's why you start leading on easy 5.6 and below. That way, it's okay to mess up, because you're 99% guaranteed not to fall. If you're part of that 1%, well . . . maybe you shouldn't have pissed God off by doing whatever it is you did.
Uh Oh!!! I was wondering how long it would be before someone brought God into it.
|
|
|
|
|
crimpandgo
Oct 4, 2005, 6:02 PM
Post #72 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 15, 2004
Posts: 1005
|
In reply to: CrimpAndGo, I totally agree that it's a bad attitude to have. But there's no way around it. I haven't been leading trad for very long, but I followed a s--- before I attempted to lead. So I had a pretty good idea of what to do. Still doesn't change the fact that, like anything, you're only gonna get good at it if you try it. And trying usually means messing up. That's why you start leading on easy 5.6 and below. That way, it's okay to mess up, because you're 99% guaranteed not to fall. If you're part of that 1%, well . . . maybe you shouldn't have pissed God off by doing whatever it is you did.
I think it might be prudent for you to define what "easier" means. My defintion of "easier" is not the Grade. My definition is based on the protection quality.
|
|
|
|
|
cruzit
Oct 4, 2005, 6:10 PM
Post #73 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 2, 2003
Posts: 56
|
In reply to: Why? What's the point? All they have done is set up dangerous climbs for others to follow.
You are talking about climbing ethics which is another topic in and of itself. What you and I consider dangerous is not necessarily dangerous to all. I wouldn't presume to make that decision for anyone else.
In reply to: And as far as making a habit of soloing . . . it IS about you and the rock. It's a selfish thing, just like climbing, more or less, is a selfish sport. (I'm not saying that's a bad thing, mind you . . .) So if you're gonna solo, you'd better not have a wife and kids or anyone else financially dependent on you; or else you're just an A-hole. That's my humble opinion.
If you fall on lead and your protection pulls, you'll likely be just as dead as if you had soloed the route. There are inherent risks to the sport of climbing. Some are manageable, some are not. The lone truth is that you can do absolutely everything right (zip up a climb, never climb above your comfort level) and something you can't control (rock fall, weather, etc.) may kill you. With that logic, anyone who climbs is an A-hole.
Ask yourself if there wasn't a time you thought people climbing sick run out alpine stuff were crazy. Has your opinion changed about what you consider acceptable and unacceptable risk as your experience and skill level changes??? As with any activity, you assess your ability and your risk comfort level and make a decision based on that.
|
|
|
|
|
alpinerock
Oct 4, 2005, 6:13 PM
Post #74 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 17, 2003
Posts: 600
|
In reply to: I think it might be prudent for you to define what "easier" means. My defintion of "easier" is not the Grade. My definition is based on the protection quality.
Easier is protection quality? routes like Rubies Cafe must be a hike for someone like you then :wink: .
Point taken though, Trad climbing especially when first starting out is mostly a mental game, even after years of following and knowing what a good placement is totally different than completely trusting a placement, its kinda like falling with a slack in a toprope to learn how to take lead falls, its just not the same. Which is what i think that rockkid is trying to get at, not that your first lead is like soloing in that the placements aren't solid, but that you don't quite trust them yet, so in your head its still "leader must not fall".
|
|
|
|
|
crimpandgo
Oct 4, 2005, 7:01 PM
Post #75 of 88
(16739 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 15, 2004
Posts: 1005
|
In reply to: In reply to: I think it might be prudent for you to define what "easier" means. My defintion of "easier" is not the Grade. My definition is based on the protection quality. Easier is protection quality? routes like Rubies Cafe must be a hike for someone like you then :wink: . Point taken though, Trad climbing especially when first starting out is mostly a mental game, even after years of following and knowing what a good placement is totally different than completely trusting a placement, its kinda like falling with a slack in a toprope to learn how to take lead falls, its just not the same. Which is what i think that rockkid is trying to get at, not that your first lead is like soloing in that the placements aren't solid, but that you don't quite trust them yet, so in your head its still "leader must not fall".
I am not sure what your point is about Rubies cafe. That is a 5.12 or 5.13 in Utah isn't it? I hardly think that is considered a climb a noob would think about starting out on.
My point was placement quality does not always factor into the climb rating. Noobs should considered the quality of the placements as well as the ease of climbing moves.
As for your analysis of rockkid's intentions. You are probably correct. But , I just have a sneaky suspicion the mind set "This is so easy I won't fall" is too prevalent. As the climbing population grows you read more articles about people getting injured in situations that clearly indicate a little knowledge and education and a little common sense would have prevented.
Just my take.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
