|
|
|
|
angry
Sep 11, 2007, 4:56 PM
Post #1 of 317
(58405 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
Many many times I've come out against tick marks. Everyone says that it's fine as long as they get brushed off.
Not a bad arguement except that no-one ever brushes them off. In my life, I've never seen a tick mark brushed off by someone who placed one.
My latest example, Pervertical Sanctuary 10c, Longs Peak. It's got more ticks than the Black Canyon in the spring. Not a chalky hold mind you, a big thick tick on every single nub or edge. Ticked like a gym climb.
This is on a 10c (possibly up to 11a depending on who you ask) that doesn't have a hidden or devious move anywhere on it. I'm relatively certain that these ticks were put there by a big name climber who soloed the route last week. Fine, tick the route to keep your career alive (god knows your husband's is in the toilet) but rap the fucking thing and clean up your mess. You are a pro climber, you've got nothing but time. It's not like you don't have the extra half day to tidy up.
If it's not you, sorry. Doesn't change my point, don't tick a route you can't or won't clean.
|
|
|
|
|
drjghl
Sep 11, 2007, 5:32 PM
Post #2 of 317
(58351 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 9, 2002
Posts: 135
|
Why do climber's place chalk on features to locate them? This mindset is kind of odd to me. Kind of transforms a climb into a gym route and who wants that.
Working a route, going up and down, searching for holds, resting and firing a sequence is one of the great pleasures of climbing. Putting pieces of tape on features (oh I mean ticking features) seems to be a mindset that hopefully does not continue to grow and eventually fades away into oblivion.
|
|
|
|
|
jt512
Sep 11, 2007, 5:35 PM
Post #4 of 317
(58341 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 12, 2001
Posts: 21904
|
drjghl wrote: Why do climber's place chalk on features to locate them?
Why do climber's place chalk on features? To locate them.
Jay
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Sep 11, 2007, 5:42 PM
Post #5 of 317
(58321 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
Oh, but how will my clients ever find their way without tic marks? I guess I'll have to just yell more and louder to help them out on every move.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Sep 11, 2007, 6:09 PM
Post #6 of 317
(58293 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
jt512 wrote: drjghl wrote: Why do climber's place chalk on features to locate them? Why do climber's place chalk on features? To locate them. Jay
How would one locate the hold in order to tick it in the first place then? There must be a way to see a hold without a tickmark on it.
|
|
|
|
|
bent_gate
Sep 11, 2007, 6:54 PM
Post #7 of 317
(58220 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 1, 2004
Posts: 2620
|
Chalk is an eyesore. Even without tick marks, there is still way too much chalk that is left behind by climbers and not brushed off. People seem to think that leave no trace doesn't apply to this.
The only chalk marks that should be left behind are "x"s on deathblocks. And that is a safety issue.
What percent of climbers give a crap about this? Probably about 20%
|
|
|
|
|
CinnamonJohnson
Sep 11, 2007, 6:59 PM
Post #8 of 317
(58212 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 4, 2007
Posts: 88
|
Who is the big name climber?
|
|
|
|
|
knieveltech
Sep 11, 2007, 7:02 PM
Post #9 of 317
(58204 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 2, 2006
Posts: 1431
|
CinnamonJohnson wrote: Who is the big name climber?
No doubt. Inquiring minds (read bored at work) want to know! Name drop! Name drop! Name drop!
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Sep 11, 2007, 7:08 PM
Post #10 of 317
(58189 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
Read my original post nice and slowly, it's no mystery.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Sep 11, 2007, 7:09 PM
Post #11 of 317
(58188 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
You should be able to work it out with the not-so-subtle hints Angry sprinkled over his post, hehe.
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
wonderwoman
Sep 11, 2007, 7:10 PM
Post #12 of 317
(58184 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 14, 2002
Posts: 4275
|
knieveltech wrote: CinnamonJohnson wrote: Who is the big name climber? No doubt. Inquiring minds (read bored at work) want to know! Name drop! Name drop! Name drop!
Here's a hint:
angry wrote: Fine, tick the route to keep your career alive (god knows your husband's is in the toilet)
(This post was edited by wonderwoman on Sep 11, 2007, 7:12 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
knieveltech
Sep 11, 2007, 7:16 PM
Post #13 of 317
(58164 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 2, 2006
Posts: 1431
|
angry wrote: Read my original post nice and slowly, it's no mystery.
Yeah I figured as much. Sadly I'm not up to speed on elite climber circles and was hoping you'd just toss it out there for the cheap seats. I suppose I could get off my ass and figure it out myself though.
Edited to add:
Gotcha. Nothing a quick google session couldn't put to rights.
(This post was edited by knieveltech on Sep 11, 2007, 7:19 PM)
|
|
|
|
|
j_ung
Sep 11, 2007, 7:19 PM
Post #14 of 317
(58156 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 21, 2003
Posts: 18690
|
Steph Davis
(Not that I'm accusing her of anything. I'm just saying that's who angry's referring to.)
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Sep 11, 2007, 7:19 PM
Post #15 of 317
(58153 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
I can't help you then. Maybe it wasn't her, the coincidence though makes me think that things are "not all roses".
|
|
|
|
|
knieveltech
Sep 11, 2007, 7:20 PM
Post #16 of 317
(58148 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 2, 2006
Posts: 1431
|
j_ung wrote: Steph Davis (Not that I'm accusing her of anything. I'm just saying that's who angry's referring to.)
Roger that. Looks like googling "dean potter's wife" was the correct guess on my part.
|
|
|
|
|
campo
Sep 11, 2007, 7:25 PM
Post #17 of 317
(58131 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 19, 2004
Posts: 212
|
Dean Potter's career is in the toilet? Did I miss something in the last ten years? 
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
Sep 11, 2007, 7:38 PM
Post #19 of 317
(58101 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
well, shit.
the r&i photo of Dean Potter's new testpiece at Indian Creek contained more than a dozen tick marks within eight feet of climbing.
if you want to use chalk or tick in the desert, fine. just clean up your damn mess. it's really quite simple.
*more pro-climbers should start going chalkless when crack climbing, just to set an example.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Sep 11, 2007, 7:51 PM
Post #20 of 317
(58066 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
camhead wrote: well, shit. the r&i photo of Dean Potter's new testpiece at Indian Creek contained more than a dozen tick marks within eight feet of climbing. if you want to use chalk or tick in the desert, fine. just clean up your damn mess. it's really quite simple.
I understand how he'd be ticking the route. It's a testpiece. He's hanging on it a lot.
But I don't get why Angry would assume that Steph would be making tic marks on a free solo. I've not done a lot of soloing, but when I have, I don't spend a lot of time hanging out, marking holds. Not saying she did or didn't, or making any judgment about either - just not clear on why a free-soloist would be a likely candidate to point the finger at? Seems like a free soloist would be the least likely, no?
GO
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Sep 11, 2007, 7:54 PM
Post #21 of 317
(58051 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
And now that I think of it, camhead, what makes you think he didn't clean it up afterward? If the photo was of Dean working the route, it makes sense he might be ticking it with the intent of cleaning it after, no?
GO
|
|
|
|
|
zeke_sf
Sep 11, 2007, 8:03 PM
Post #22 of 317
(58021 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 28, 2006
Posts: 18730
|
Dammit, Angry! You almost made me listen to Odub. Fortunately, my work computer's volume is down.
|
|
|
|
|
angry
Sep 11, 2007, 8:10 PM
Post #23 of 317
(58000 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jul 22, 2003
Posts: 8405
|
I assume it was her because of the route itself.
Most people don't just hang out and get 10c (or 11a) ruthlessly wired at 13,000+ feet. They get on the route and climb on. If they fall or take, no biggie, keep moving cause the lightning could come any time. I highly doubt that the average climber (and this is an average climbers route) would lower off a pitch, tick it up, and try to resend it. This is alpine.
Now imagine you want to solo this route and have all the time in the world. Go up there one day with a partner and rehearse the moves, not because it's hard but because it's for a solo and you don't want to screw up. Pro's are chalk fucking crazy and even worse with ticks, so bam the route get ticked up. She comes back the next day with the solo.
Your logic follows if it were an onsight free solo or an impromtu thing. That may have been the case and I may be pointing at the wrong person, given the situation, I bet I'm not.
|
|
|
|
|
sed
Sep 11, 2007, 8:27 PM
Post #24 of 317
(57968 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 3, 2003
Posts: 356
|
i agreed tix suck. there's so much talk about how unsightley bolts are and yet tick marks and chalk are rarely questioned, accepted as part of the sport. I don't know why poeple use so much of it, seems like most climbers just chalk up so they have something to focus on when they are freaking out. It's not magic dust and for the average 5.10 climber is rarely necessary.
S
|
|
|
|
|
camhead
Sep 11, 2007, 8:45 PM
Post #25 of 317
(57943 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 10, 2001
Posts: 20939
|
cracklover wrote: And now that I think of it, camhead, what makes you think he didn't clean it up afterward? If the photo was of Dean working the route, it makes sense he might be ticking it with the intent of cleaning it after, no? GO
you're right, Gabe.
tell you what, I'll hike up to hong Kong Phooey next week with a pair of binocs and let you know whether he cleaned the ticks or not.
care to make any predictions?
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
