|
socceronly
Apr 13, 2011, 9:42 PM
Post #1 of 38
(16715 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Apr 13, 2011
Posts: 1
|
I have the possibility of getting a great deal on a space that is reasonably large with 13ft ceilings.
I was wondering what a bouldering only gym would be like. Just a place to work out essentially that was really cheap.
|
|
|
|
|
justroberto
Apr 13, 2011, 10:30 PM
Post #2 of 38
(16695 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 21, 2006
Posts: 1876
|
socceronly wrote: I have the possibility of getting a great deal on a space that is reasonably large with 13ft ceilings. I was wondering what a bouldering only gym would be like. Just a place to work out essentially that was really cheap.
This should do it.
|
|
|
|
|
gosharks
Apr 13, 2011, 10:50 PM
Post #5 of 38
(16679 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 7, 2004
Posts: 268
|
socceronly wrote: I have the possibility of getting a great deal on a space that is reasonably large with 13ft ceilings. I was wondering what a bouldering only gym would be like. Just a place to work out essentially that was really cheap.
13ft is really low. You're going to lose at least a foot or two from flooring and pads alone.
http://www.frontslc.com/
|
|
|
|
|
climber49er
May 9, 2011, 5:06 PM
Post #7 of 38
(16229 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 8, 2003
Posts: 1404
|
I've climbed in several places that were bouldering only. 13 ft does seem a bit short even then. You'll be able to build some nice cave type stuff, but the lack of top outs will be a real downer, as mantles/top outs are a pretty integral part of bouldering.
|
|
|
|
|
cacalderon
May 10, 2011, 1:38 AM
Post #8 of 38
(16191 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 10, 2006
Posts: 150
|
yes, bouldering only gyms do exist.
I agree with other posts, 13 ft seems too low though and would make the gym monotonous.
|
|
|
|
|
rhythm164
May 10, 2011, 3:00 AM
Post #9 of 38
(16173 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 28, 2005
Posts: 964
|
http://www.slo-opclimbing.org/
http://www.thecircuitgym.com/
http://www.brooklynboulders.com/
|
|
|
|
|
jbro_135
May 12, 2011, 3:44 PM
Post #11 of 38
(16072 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 15, 2009
Posts: 662
|
socceronly wrote: I have the possibility of getting a great deal on a space that is reasonably large with 13ft ceilings. I was wondering what a bouldering only gym would be like. Just a place to work out essentially that was really cheap.
13 ft would be pretty low, you'd probably want at least 15, 20 if you want to top out. Keep in mind also that getting membership could be tough if you're in a small market, and you won't get any birthday party revenue as everyone wants to get on a rope.
|
|
|
|
|
rtwilli4
May 13, 2011, 8:48 AM
Post #12 of 38
(16049 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 14, 2008
Posts: 1867
|
Yep, plenty of bouldering gyms, but none of them have 13 foot ceilings. Not gonna work, for sure not gonna work.
|
|
|
|
|
djlachelt
May 16, 2011, 4:17 AM
Post #13 of 38
(15994 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 26, 2005
Posts: 261
|
jbro_135 wrote: ... Keep in mind also that getting membership could be tough if you're in a small market, and you won't get any birthday party revenue as everyone wants to get on a rope.
Actually, talk with the guys from The Circuit in Portland. I think they don't have any trouble getting b-day parties (at least a couple of years ago they said that).
|
|
|
|
|
ceebo
May 19, 2011, 11:13 AM
Post #14 of 38
(15906 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 9, 2009
Posts: 862
|
Not being to top out means nothing really. Most dedicated bouldering gyms i have visited had no top outs, yet people i met their are still climbing v5-12 when they venture outdoors.
The biggest issue you will have with such a low ceiling will be the lighting. It will be very warm, sticky and uncomfortable near the top. The holds once chalked up and acquiring some traffic (sweat) will become greasy as hell very fast as they will constantly be under warm conditions.
On the other hand as somebody already suggested it would be a good advertising point if it were filled with lots of cave/roof bouldering so long as the lighting is not of the super heat type. That would mainly appeal to good climbers though.. and the market is better fit for casual's from a profit perspective.
Would i personally visit such a gym?.. same as any gym, depends on how many routes/styles are at my training levels.
|
|
|
|
|
robx
May 19, 2011, 11:28 AM
Post #15 of 38
(15902 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 11, 2011
Posts: 108
|
even without a top out option, 13 feet is low enough that in order to have good sequences, every route would either be a sit start or a traverse. I don't love sit starts, and I don't love traverses. the ability to just about jump to the last hold in every route just doesn't appeal to me.
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
May 21, 2011, 1:59 AM
Post #16 of 38
(15827 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
robx wrote: even without a top out option, 13 feet is low enough that in order to have good sequences, every route would either be a sit start or a traverse. I don't love sit starts, and I don't love traverses. the ability to just about jump to the last hold in every route just doesn't appeal to me.
|
|
|
|
|
robx
May 21, 2011, 5:39 AM
Post #17 of 38
(15803 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 11, 2011
Posts: 108
|
spikeddem wrote: robx wrote: even without a top out option, 13 feet is low enough that in order to have good sequences, every route would either be a sit start or a traverse. I don't love sit starts, and I don't love traverses. the ability to just about jump to the last hold in every route just doesn't appeal to me. You've got a hell of a vertical.
not even. If you are around 6 ft tall and your arms extend another 2 feet above your head, that's more than half way up the wall right there.
|
|
|
|
|
ceebo
May 21, 2011, 5:32 PM
Post #18 of 38
(15758 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 9, 2009
Posts: 862
|
robx wrote: spikeddem wrote: robx wrote: even without a top out option, 13 feet is low enough that in order to have good sequences, every route would either be a sit start or a traverse. I don't love sit starts, and I don't love traverses. the ability to just about jump to the last hold in every route just doesn't appeal to me. You've got a hell of a vertical. not even. If you are around 6 ft tall and your arms extend another 2 feet above your head, that's more than half way up the wall right there.
Its about training moves, not climbing high.
|
|
|
|
|
robx
May 21, 2011, 5:38 PM
Post #19 of 38
(15757 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Jan 11, 2011
Posts: 108
|
I get that, but if it's not high you can't put that many climbing moves into one problem without it just turning into a traverse or a 2-3 move problem.
|
|
|
|
|
ceebo
May 22, 2011, 9:11 PM
Post #20 of 38
(15671 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 9, 2009
Posts: 862
|
robx wrote: I get that, but if it's not high you can't put that many climbing moves into one problem without it just turning into a traverse or a 2-3 move problem.
That is why roof/ severe overhanging walls was suggested. Even if not, having multiple crux moves at your fingertips can't be all that bad.
Maybe it would get boring, guess it depends how much you want to get better at hard moves over the raw enjoyment of continues climbing.
|
|
|
|
|
rtwilli4
May 22, 2011, 10:36 PM
Post #21 of 38
(15665 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 14, 2008
Posts: 1867
|
There is a reason why there are no bouldering gyms with ceilings this low. 13 feet isn't high enough. It's just not.
The gym would be hot, cramped, poorly lit and there would only be enough space for cave routes which don't appeal to most climbers.
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
May 23, 2011, 6:20 AM
Post #22 of 38
(15630 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
robx wrote: spikeddem wrote: robx wrote: even without a top out option, 13 feet is low enough that in order to have good sequences, every route would either be a sit start or a traverse. I don't love sit starts, and I don't love traverses. the ability to just about jump to the last hold in every route just doesn't appeal to me. You've got a hell of a vertical. not even. If you are around 6 ft tall and your arms extend another 2 feet above your head, that's more than half way up the wall right there.
Yeah, and then he's only got to jump ~three feet higher than the average NBA vertical (28", for the curious).
Regardless, climbing distance is doubled on a 60 degree overhang. On a 45 degree overhang it is about one and half times as far.
Taking out a foot for pads/landing, and two feet for lights/fans, he can still realize between 14 and 20 feet of climbing. Certainly seems like plenty of climbing to me.
Certainly 45 and 60 degree overhanging climbing isn't for everyone. Would this work better as a small co-op between friends not organized as a real business? Yeah, probably.
Add on some massive volumes and you have a sick bouldering area.
And: http://www.flickr.com/...66877/in/photostream
|
|
|
|
|
climber49er
May 27, 2011, 10:50 PM
Post #23 of 38
(15497 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Mar 8, 2003
Posts: 1404
|
I don't see how anyone could get a real clientele with 45 and 60 overhangs all over the place.
|
|
|
|
|
spikeddem
May 28, 2011, 12:51 AM
Post #24 of 38
(15485 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Aug 27, 2007
Posts: 6319
|
climber49er wrote: I don't see how anyone could get a real clientele with 45 and 60 overhangs all over the place.
See my post above:
Spikeddem wrote: Certainly 45 and 60 degree overhanging climbing isn't for everyone. Would this work better as a small co-op between friends not organized as a real business? Yeah, probably. |
|
|
|
|
ajkclay
May 28, 2011, 4:54 AM
Post #25 of 38
(15469 views)
Shortcut
Registered: May 9, 2002
Posts: 1567
|
There's one about to open here in Adelaide.
One big advantage is lower insurance premiums... lower ongoing costs too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
