|
hugepedro
Mar 28, 2008, 5:58 AM
Post #76 of 93
(1123 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875
|
Heh heh
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Mar 28, 2008, 3:25 PM
Post #77 of 93
(1086 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
dingus wrote: That was beautiful, thanks. He climbed in a very dynamic style. I was mesmerized. Thanks again DMT
Mezmerizing to me too. In the biography of Hans Kraus: Into the Unknown: The Remarkable Life of Hans Kraus, Kraus is quoted as saying something along those same lines. He was really in awe of Comici's style. Only I never thought I'd get to see what Kraus was talking about with my own eyes. God, youtube is amazing.
And in a way I can't put my finger on, I feel as though part of RG's point is made by that video, too. The beautiful climbing, with practically no safety net of any kind, is obviously on display in all its joyous splendor in that video. The way they traded belays at times was almost a dance. Contrast that to the clusterfuckage RG describes on that belay/rappel ledge. All I can say is that the more I think about it, the more I think the answer to the OP just might be yes.
Still, I'm a product of my age, and I wouldn't have it any other way. But it's amazing to look back, and I can recognize the worth of what was. And to take it one step further. I think it's possible (and valuable!) to try to incorporate some that into my climbing - at the very least on a cultural level, if not on the level of the specific widgets I use to climb with.
Oh, and as for the statistics of risk... I'd say that today, most climbers probably climb in a gym, and occasionally boulder outside. For those climbers, the risk of falling off the side of a cliff to their death is exactly zero. So I can confidently say that the risk of that particular event for that large portion of climbers, has definitely shrunk from a non-zero quantity to a zero quantity.
GO
|
|
|
|
|
uhoh
Mar 28, 2008, 3:43 PM
Post #78 of 93
(1083 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 11, 2007
Posts: 2281
|
a.frosch wrote: Why do you think he's still alive?
Because he rocks the god mode h4x.
|
|
|
|
|
k.l.k
Mar 28, 2008, 4:30 PM
Post #79 of 93
(1072 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2007
Posts: 1190
|
He's using a Dulfer. There is one shot where he may have actually tied off, just for the purpose of the shot, but most of it is just a Dulfer. You can see it more clearly in the stills from the movie that are printed in Spiro Dalla Porta Xidias's biography.
But don't get too misty-eyed over Emilio Comici. He was involved in some fairly nasty stuff. The Fascists set him up in his climbing/ski school in Groeden after the Italians had commandeered all the huts that used to belong to the Austrian and local mountain clubs.
There's a monument to him just a short walk from the B&B I stayed in last summer.
|
|
|
|
|
leinosaur
Mar 28, 2008, 7:53 PM
Post #80 of 93
(1042 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 690
|
a reminder how little politics and climbing ability/style have to do with one another.
he climbed like he meant it!
btw no way pedro & ptpp are the same dude - pedro just explained in detail, without all the self-serving bluster that ptpp used to put into it.
|
|
|
|
|
DenverBouldering
Mar 28, 2008, 8:05 PM
Post #81 of 93
(1040 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 27, 2008
Posts: 47
|
It seems like there is more safety. But new boulder problems seem to push the limit on height. It seems to be more common to go up near 20 feet. The new highballs in Hueco and Colorado push the limits. DWS also has a lot of risks that people do not think of at first.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Mar 28, 2008, 8:23 PM
Post #82 of 93
(1036 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
DenverBouldering wrote: It seems like there is more safety. But new boulder problems seem to push the limit on height. It seems to be more common to go up near 20 feet. The new highballs in Hueco and Colorado push the limits. DWS also has a lot of risks that people do not think of at first.
Pads and spotting were nearly non-existant prior to the 90s. The consequences of high balling changed significantly, and the hard boys and girls upped the ante as a result - god bless em!
dmt
|
|
|
|
|
hugepedro
Mar 29, 2008, 12:09 AM
Post #84 of 93
(998 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 28, 2002
Posts: 2875
|
leinosaur wrote: btw no way pedro & ptpp are the same dude - pedro just explained in detail, without all the self-serving bluster that ptpp used to put into it.
Dammit, I knew I was forgetting something! I thought about PTPP when I was bolding all those words, but not in a ghey way.
Como estas, Roberto?
|
|
|
|
|
leinosaur
Mar 29, 2008, 3:45 AM
Post #85 of 93
(976 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 690
|
In reply to: hubgepedro wrote: Como estas, Roberto?
Muy bien, amoeba!
I didn't catch the boldness as the basis for the ptpp reference, but now I'm harkened back. An interesting phenomenon, if nothing else.
Regarding the OP,
As risk is so easily re-introduced into one's own climbing experience, the question appears to center around whether an elusive "community ethic" has swung too far in the candy-assed direction.
I would say, no: as long as tricky trad and sparsely-protected climbs remain unadulterated, not only opportunity but also motivation abound for climbers to steel their cojones in the finest old-school tradition.
That is to say, as long as you have to sack up to get on the best climbs, climbing on actual rock will retain a reasonably vibrant level of risk.
I may be assuming too much, in thinking that most climbers will eventually wish to become "all-arounders," but what I've seen of the kids who have only climbed sport is that most of them get starry-eyed at the sight of gear, and given the opportunity would gladly earn their trad chops with the best of 'em.
I have witnessed this first-hand in the last few weeks. A kid I'd never met asked me, right after he redpointed a project of mine, if I wouldn't want to come out and climb trad with him, as he was just getting into it.
I warned him that I wasn't quite the sage old tradster that my age (nearly twice his) and beat-up rack might imply, but anyway we swapped numbers and have since begun a mutual learning process, each benefiting from the other's greater experience in one of the many facets of "today's climbing."
In general, I'd say we're in good shape, risk-wise, as a "pursuit." We can train in relative safety, if we wish, but are still encouraged to learn to develop and trust that safety to none but our own devices and those of trusted compadres.
Even within this forum, bold trad holds pride of place as the most highly-respected form of climbing, wouldn't you say?
|
|
|
|
|
tolman_paul
Mar 31, 2008, 6:21 PM
Post #86 of 93
(921 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 22, 2005
Posts: 385
|
Looks like I completely flubbed up what I was trying to say. I guess my mindset is a bit different from most in that my profession is to design industrial fire detection and supression systems. In a sense climbing equipment serves exactly the same purpose. But I look at the equipment as the last rung in the safety and risk mitigation ladder, not the only rung, and not an infallible rung.
My point is, you can't simply say a sport route with bolts every 6' is risk free, and free soloing is highly risky.
The sport climber who has the mindset that climbing is always safe, doesn't think twice about constrantly falling, can easily put him/herself at risk. Let's say he blows the second clip, grounds and breaks his ankles. Vs. the soloist who has routinely been 100's of feet of the ground, but doesn't fall.
I've been climbing a bit over 20 years, and I don't think climbing is any more or less risky as it was when I started climbing. I've always fealt that I was ultimately in control of the risk I put myself in, whether soloing, leading, or top roping.
Climbing equipment is but one facet in mitigating risks. The most effective means of assessing and mitigating risks is right between your ears.
|
|
|
|
|
drljefe
Mar 31, 2008, 6:32 PM
Post #87 of 93
(912 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 7, 2007
Posts: 119
|
"I remember the days when sex was safe and climbing was dangerous. Nowdays..."
Always loved this qoute but can't recall who said it.
|
|
|
|
|
styndall
Mar 31, 2008, 7:23 PM
Post #88 of 93
(898 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2002
Posts: 2741
|
uhoh wrote: a.frosch wrote: Why do you think he's still alive? Because he rocks the god mode h4x.
IDDQD
|
|
|
|
|
a.frosch
Mar 31, 2008, 7:33 PM
Post #89 of 93
(891 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jun 15, 2007
Posts: 69
|
styndall wrote: uhoh wrote: a.frosch wrote: Why do you think he's still alive? Because he rocks the god mode h4x. IDDQD
I was thinking more along the lines of good judgement and a cool head, but whatever floats your boat.
Also, I have no idea what that means.
|
|
|
|
|
styndall
Mar 31, 2008, 7:41 PM
Post #90 of 93
(886 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 29, 2002
Posts: 2741
|
a.frosch wrote: styndall wrote: uhoh wrote: a.frosch wrote: Why do you think he's still alive? Because he rocks the god mode h4x. IDDQD I was thinking more along the lines of good judgement and a cool head, but whatever floats your boat. Also, I have no idea what that means.
IDDQD was the code for 'never take damage' in the Doom games.
|
|
|
|
|
cracklover
Apr 1, 2008, 5:27 PM
Post #91 of 93
(853 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 14, 2002
Posts: 10162
|
tolman_paul, I don't think it's so much that you didn't make your argument well, I think the problem is that your argument has little merit.
tolman_paul wrote: My point is, you can't simply say a sport route with bolts every 6' is risk free, and free soloing is highly risky. The sport climber who has the mindset that climbing is always safe, doesn't think twice about constrantly falling, can easily put him/herself at risk. Let's say he blows the second clip, grounds and breaks his ankles. Vs. the soloist who has routinely been 100's of feet of the ground, but doesn't fall.
The sport climber you are describing is perhaps a little arrogant and complacent. Any time you ignore the risks inherent in your activity, you display those faults. So what? Soloists get arrogant and complacent, too. When they survive, sometimes you get to read about it, as we have recently on both rc.com and supertopo.
But the fact that humans in any activity can fall prey to the same errors in judgement and character does not mean that the risks they face are the same!
I think a good way of thinking about risk might be some combination of:
- Opportunities for screwing up/complexity of task
- Forgiveness factors
- Consequences of your screwup if you're not lucky
- objective hazards
GO
|
|
|
|
|
someishhh
Apr 3, 2008, 7:16 PM
Post #92 of 93
(756 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 3, 2008
Posts: 3
|
you're an idiot. climbing is still dangerous, there are ways it can be done with more safety than other ways. as far as the issue of there being too much risk taken out of it have you thought that maybe the pioneers of the rockclimbing world wanted safety but could not find efficient ways as to provide such safety? if you think that tying a bowline around your waist is as safe as wearing a harness secured with a figure 8 then go take a 30 foot fall on a ten mil line tied with a bowline around your waist and let me know how comfortable your wheelchair or coffin is.
|
|
|
|
|
dingus
Apr 3, 2008, 7:37 PM
Post #93 of 93
(752 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17398
|
Why is he an idiot?
Interesting discussion about GENUINE, real, might-actually-die sort of risk, by folks far more capable than I (or most of us for that matter):
Be prepared to have your assumptions challenged! Its heavy reading though.
http://www.supertopo.com/...html?topic_id=566859
DMT
|
|
|
|
|
|
