|
crackmd
Jul 10, 2006, 9:17 PM
Post #1 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2002
Posts: 444
|
I had an interesting dilemma recently in classifying some ascents. I jumped on a bolted face route and got it Onsight. Shortly after, I jumped on another bolted face route that shared the first four bolts as the first route. I did the second route clean without falls or hangs. The crux of the first route was within the first four shared bolts while the crux of the second route was above the shared section. I figure all the trad guys are rolling their eyes at this dilemma and getting ready to flame me as a sport weeine. I am just curious to know how people would classify my ascent of the second route. My finace thinks I should claim an onsight, but she is obviously biased.
Oh, and by the way, I am a serious trad climber as well. Just thought I'd throw that one in to hopefully mitigate that flaming I've set myself up for.
|
|
|
|
|
rjtrials
Jul 10, 2006, 9:32 PM
Post #2 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2002
Posts: 342
|
The first route, since you had no prior knowledge, was definately an onsight.
The second route can be classified as a "flash" if it, and the crux, is three letter grades harder than the first route. If the routes are any closer in difficulty, it is a redpoint.
RJ
|
|
|
|
|
scrapper
Jul 10, 2006, 9:33 PM
Post #3 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 10, 2004
Posts: 69
|
You sent the 2nd route, onsighting the parts that were different.
|
|
|
|
|
sidepull
Jul 10, 2006, 9:37 PM
Post #4 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2001
Posts: 2335
|
:twisted: [smart]I generally consult my finances before determining if a send is OS, F, or RP. The market these days is so bullish.[/smart] :twisted:
Honestly, if you spend a bit more time "communicating" then people are far less likely to flame you, but seeing as how you're asking for it and you even threw in some weenie-itis for good measure then you deserve everything you're going to get: compliments, compliments, and compliments (plus endorsements)!!!
:roll:
|
|
|
|
|
scrapper
Jul 10, 2006, 9:38 PM
Post #5 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 10, 2004
Posts: 69
|
In reply to: The second route can be classified as a "flash" if it, and the crux, is three letter grades harder than the first route. If the routes are any closer in difficulty, it is a redpoint.
Also, did the climbs share the same movement over the first 4 bolts? Or merely the same protection system? If the movement was different, then you got 2 onsights (or flashes... you can quibble over that all you want).
In any case, sounds like you had a fun session of improvisational climbing.
|
|
|
|
|
trenchdigger
Jul 10, 2006, 9:42 PM
Post #6 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 9, 2003
Posts: 1447
|
In the end, call them what you want. If you call them both Onsight ascents, I wouldn't hesitate to accept that. If anyone asks (likely nobody will care) explain the details of the ascent. But for the sake of simply describing the ascents, I would consider "Onsight" to be the most accurate description.
|
|
|
|
|
rjtrials
Jul 10, 2006, 9:46 PM
Post #7 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2002
Posts: 342
|
In reply to: In reply to: The second route can be classified as a "flash" if it, and the crux, is three letter grades harder than the first route. If the routes are any closer in difficulty, it is a redpoint. Huh? Also, did the climbs share the same movement over the first 4 bolts? Or merely the same protection system? If the movement was different, then you got 2 onsights (or flashes... you can quibble over that all you want). In any case, sounds like you had a fun session of improvisational climbing.
Here is the scenerio...
Already climbed a significant portion of route #2 (four bolts worth) via route #1. That means it cannot be another "onsight."
Lets say, for arguments sake, route #1 weighs in at 5.12a. That means you could theoretically flash route #2 if it is 5.12d or harder, since you have already climbed through a .12a crux.
If route #2 is only .12b or .12c, then the flash is blown. The prior knowledge of the lower crux negates the slightly harder crux that you encounter later. The sequence used on the lower portion has no bearing whatsoever.
RJ
|
|
|
|
|
crackmd
Jul 10, 2006, 9:47 PM
Post #8 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2002
Posts: 444
|
In reply to: In reply to: The second route can be classified as a "flash" if it, and the crux, is three letter grades harder than the first route. If the routes are any closer in difficulty, it is a redpoint. Huh? Also, did the climbs share the same movement over the first 4 bolts? Or merely the same protection system? If the movement was different, then you got 2 onsights (or flashes... you can quibble over that all you want). In any case, sounds like you had a fun session of improvisational climbing.
The second route was only one letter grade harder than the first, although I don't know if I buy the less than three letter grades thing either.
The movement over the first four bolts was exactly the same.
Sidepull, I don't understand the "communication" flame. I thought I communicated the question pretty well.
|
|
|
|
|
scrapper
Jul 10, 2006, 10:00 PM
Post #9 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 10, 2004
Posts: 69
|
In reply to: Lets say, for arguments sake, route #1 weighs in at 5.12a. That means you could theoretically flash route #2 if it is 5.12d or harder, since you have already climbed through a .12a crux. If route #2 is only .12b or .12c, then the flash is blown. The prior knowledge of the lower crux negates the slightly harder crux that you encounter later. The sequence used on the lower portion has no bearing whatsoever. |
|
|
|
|
krusher4
Jul 10, 2006, 10:02 PM
Post #10 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 17, 2005
Posts: 997
|
If I climb a route that shares an anchor with another route, onsight of course. Then onsight with takes the route next door on TR is that an onsight? :lol:
|
|
|
|
|
rockprodigy
Jul 10, 2006, 10:11 PM
Post #11 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2002
Posts: 1540
|
Very interesting and pointless question, but I'll add my thoughts anyway.
They say that if you were to sample the moves by climbing up, then climbing down free, without weighting the gear, that does not invalidate the OS. So what if you downclimb via other terrain? For example, what if you had free-soloed the first route, then down-climbed off the back side? Would that still make the OS of the second route valid? Since you didn't weight the rope until the climb was "over", maybe it's the same as that.
|
|
|
|
|
styndall
Jul 10, 2006, 10:20 PM
Post #12 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2002
Posts: 2741
|
In reply to: In reply to: In reply to: The second route can be classified as a "flash" if it, and the crux, is three letter grades harder than the first route. If the routes are any closer in difficulty, it is a redpoint. Huh? Also, did the climbs share the same movement over the first 4 bolts? Or merely the same protection system? If the movement was different, then you got 2 onsights (or flashes... you can quibble over that all you want). In any case, sounds like you had a fun session of improvisational climbing. Here is the scenerio... Already climbed a significant portion of route #2 (four bolts worth) via route #1. That means it cannot be another "onsight." Lets say, for arguments sake, route #1 weighs in at 5.12a. That means you could theoretically flash route #2 if it is 5.12d or harder, since you have already climbed through a .12a crux. If route #2 is only .12b or .12c, then the flash is blown. The prior knowledge of the lower crux negates the slightly harder crux that you encounter later. The sequence used on the lower portion has no bearing whatsoever. RJ
This is more than a bit silly. What if the route only shares three bolts? Can I generalize and say that you can onsight a route that shares bolts with a route you've already climbed is (number of shared bolts - 1) letter grades harder than the pre-climbed route? That way, if your route only shares two bolts, then your new route only needs to be one letter grade harder for you to have the chance of onsight.
This is an excellent system.
Oh, wait. It's bullshit contrived sport wankery. 8a.nu needs us both!
|
|
|
|
|
sidepull
Jul 10, 2006, 10:38 PM
Post #13 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2001
Posts: 2335
|
In reply to: Sidepull, I don't understand the "communication" flame. I thought I communicated the question pretty well.
Find two friends. Have friend A read your explanation verbatim to friend B and then ask friend B to explain the situation. Note: for this experiment to work, try to avoid interrupting with explanation or excuses, flagrant facial expressions, or pantomime.
Enough off-topicness, flame on!
|
|
|
|
|
crackmd
Jul 10, 2006, 10:40 PM
Post #14 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 24, 2002
Posts: 444
|
In reply to: Very interesting and pointless question, but I'll add my thoughts anyway. They say that if you were to sample the moves by climbing up, then climbing down free, without weighting the gear, that does not invalidate the OS. So what if you downclimb via other terrain? For example, what if you had free-soloed the first route, then down-climbed off the back side? Would that still make the OS of the second route valid? Since you didn't weight the rope until the climb was "over", maybe it's the same as that.
Pointless?
My point in this is that IMHO onsighting is the purest ascent achievable and is my main motivation for training hard (physically and mentally). Some people like to redpoint insanely hard routes; I like to save my best efforts for onsight attempts. To each his own.
My concern here is that I blew the onsight without actually climbing the route. Perhaps that is something I should think about next time I am doing routes that share terrain. My point was to get a consensus of how my climbing peers view this situation.
|
|
|
|
|
rjtrials
Jul 10, 2006, 10:53 PM
Post #15 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2002
Posts: 342
|
In reply to: This is more than a bit silly. What if the route only shares three bolts? Can I generalize and say that you can onsight a route that shares bolts with a route you've already climbed is (number of shared bolts - 1) letter grades harder than the pre-climbed route? That way, if your route only shares two bolts, then your new route only needs to be one letter grade harder for you to have the chance of onsight. This is an excellent system. Oh, wait. It's s--- contrived sport wankery. 8a.nu needs us both!
The number of bolts that the climbs share is completely meaningless.
In reply to: The crux of the first route was within the first four shared bolts while the crux of the second route was above the shared section.
The meat of the debate is not how much ground the two routes share, but that the first "crux" has already been climbed.
I will concede that the "three grade variation" rule is slightly obtuse and contrived. My personal ethics differ slightly, but that is what the international community has sorta agreed upon.
Your personal ethics might differ as well, but to claim a hard ascent, its best to stick to the generally agreed upon rules.
RJ
|
|
|
|
|
devils_advocate
Jul 10, 2006, 11:06 PM
Post #16 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 18, 2006
Posts: 1823
|
In reply to: Already climbed a significant portion of route #2 (four bolts worth) via route #1. That means it cannot be another "onsight." Lets say, for arguments sake, route #1 weighs in at 5.12a. That means you could theoretically flash route #2 if it is 5.12d or harder, since you have already climbed through a .12a crux. If route #2 is only .12b or .12c, then the flash is blown. The prior knowledge of the lower crux negates the slightly harder crux that you encounter later. The sequence used on the lower portion has no bearing whatsoever. RJ
Ok... for the sake of my understanding of this important topic, lets review a couple more hypothetical situations. Similar setup: take those two routes with a 2 grade difference, say 15a and 15c, they both share the first 4 bolts.
BUT, in-between climbing the first and second routes the hanger on the fourth bolt broke, and you had to sling a micronut wire on the bolt to send the second route... do you still get the flash? No?
OK, what if, in addition to the above, you only used 63.7% of the holds used on the first route to send the second. And... and, hear me out: 24.6% of them were sidepulls and since you were coming from a different angle you grip them completely differently. So how bout now, that has to be a flash? Right?
Ok then, what if... in addition to all of the above, you were gay?
|
|
|
|
|
sidepull
Jul 11, 2006, 1:02 AM
Post #17 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 11, 2001
Posts: 2335
|
sexual orientation aside, we've ommitted a huge variable here: the ratio of shared to independent bolts. To be two separate onsites the shared bolts must account for less than 39.46% of the route before we can even begin to consider the grade disparity or gender orientation (BTW, if he's wearing Madrock Hotties then you have your answer).
|
|
|
|
|
petertherock
Jul 11, 2006, 2:44 AM
Post #18 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 17, 2006
Posts: 72
|
Clearly, somebody who first climbs route #2 has it harder than somebody (you) who first climbed route #1 with a common section and now knows that common section when climbing route #2. This gets into semantics, what is a route and what is a variation. I'd guess that the route #2 was done later, it should be a variation of route #1.
What you did with the 2nd route was onsighting the variation, red pointing the common section.
That said, the real question is, can you climb onsight a route that is just next to a route you climbed before and therefore you saw it?
|
|
|
|
|
squamishdirtbag
Jul 11, 2006, 3:19 AM
Post #19 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 18, 2005
Posts: 115
|
heres an interesting thought no ones mentioned ...
who cares!
|
|
|
|
|
squamishdirtbag
Jul 11, 2006, 3:19 AM
Post #20 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 18, 2005
Posts: 115
|
heres an interesting thought no ones mentioned ...
who cares!
|
|
|
|
|
speedywon
Jul 11, 2006, 3:33 AM
Post #21 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 5, 2005
Posts: 182
|
In reply to: heres an interesting thought no ones mentioned ... who cares!
Someone please give this a trophy! :wink:
|
|
|
|
|
ajkclay
Jul 11, 2006, 3:37 AM
Post #22 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2002
Posts: 1567
|
I would say that if the local community has accepted them as two distinct routes, and as the cruxes are not shared you'd claim onsight for both.
As long as you didn't inspect the holds or moves of the second route while on the first
Cheers
Adam
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Jul 11, 2006, 3:52 AM
Post #23 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
In reply to: In reply to: Very interesting and pointless question, but I'll add my thoughts anyway. Pointless? My point in this is that IMHO onsighting is the purest ascent achievable and is my main motivation for training hard (physically and mentally). My concern here is that I blew the onsight without actually climbing the route. Perhaps that is something I should think about next time I am doing routes that share terrain. My point was to get a consensus of how my climbing peers view this situation.
You "blew" the official onsight of the route. What I don't understand is why you care. You seem to be judging your performance by outside standards, which is at odds with my perception of you based on the interaction (albeit minimal) that we have had.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
njb
Jul 11, 2006, 3:56 AM
Post #24 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 8, 2005
Posts: 38
|
Dude. Just call it whatever you need to get the ladies. If you're going for badass, you onsighted them and they were freakin' easy. If you're going for humble-and-sensitive, then you went out climbing the other day and did a few routes. If you're going for incredibly-awesome, then the 5.13's you onsighted were too damn easy, so you decided to redpoint the 5.14d next to 'em.
Seems simple to me.
|
|
|
|
|
fracture
Jul 11, 2006, 4:15 AM
Post #25 of 25
(3413 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 13, 2003
Posts: 1814
|
I'd call it a redpoint. (And I'd say the same for rockprodigy's hypothetical.)
If you're feeling like spraying (or if someone asks), you can say you redpointed it first go.
|
|
|
|
|
|
