Maybe I should have added that the part about if it's not safe to fall a leader always maintains an exit strategy and if it's not safe to fall don't get in a situation where you can't downclimb.

No, I disagree. If you can do the move the first time, you already knew what to do. The move was more a test of your skill than a learning experience. Sure, you still learn this way: you may be applying current knowledge to a new situation, and thereby broadening your knowledge. Still, restricting yourself to moves, or routes, you can do on the first attempt is an inefficient way to learn to climb.


But that is precisely how we do learn! How do you learn a new boulder problem, by getting all the moves the first time? Of course not. You learn by making mistakes and correcting them. There is no reason to restrict this approach to bouldering.

-Jay

I've knowingly put myself in climbing situations that I couldn't have reversed even though a fall would have meant injury. For instance, I've dynoed with full knowledge that if I missed the dyno, I'd break my ankle(s). Why? Because I was confident I could do the move, and therefore was willing to accept the risk. So, it's not just the consequences of a fall that matter, but also your ability to judge how well you will perform while climbing in the risky situation.

-Jay

Really trying is not conductive to working the moves after a hang.

Why not? I try really hard before and after falling.

Are you saying that Chris Sharma and Tommy Caldwell didn't try hard after hanging on what are considered the hardest free climbs in the world.

But Jay aren't you implying (by the fact that you were confident you could do the move) that the dyno was not at your limit? And thus does not really adddress the learning at the limit question.

There must be some sort of expected value formula that relates the consequences of a fall with the probability of that fall. After all I've been on well maintained hiking trails where the consequences of a fall were catastrophic.

But Jay aren't you implying (by the fact that you were confident you could do the move) that the dyno was not at your limit? And thus does not really adddress the learning at the limit question.

There must be some sort of expected value formula that relates the consequences of a fall with the probability of that fall. After all I've been on well maintained hiking trails where the consequences of a fall were catastrophic.

No, I disagree. If you can do the move the first time, you already knew what to do.

RG. you still have not responded to the question about how Lynn scooped you guys on Vandals by hangdogging to work the crux moves. she credited this a breakthrough technique that helped her take her climbing to a whole new level.

What I am saying is that there is a difference between a redpoint burn and a hangdog burn.

If I go for a redpoint(or onsight) burn and fail, then usually I will lower and rest for an hour or more before trying again.

You learn just as much from succeeding first try as on the 20th try, except perhaps for knowing 19 things that don't work.

You learn just as much from succeeding first try as on the 20th try, except perhaps for knowing 19 things that don't work.

Curt

I saw you posted this earlier. FYI, Lynn did not do the first lead ascent of Vandals. Jeff Gruenberg did.

I agree with this, and this is also a key concept of Ilgner's Rock Warrior's Way. The critical skill are: (1) your ability to accurately judge the consequences of the fall and (2) your ability to assess your skills wrt the climb and the potential fall. If you judge the risk acceptable, you climb with complete focus through the risk. The result will either be that you make it through the risk or you fall. If the consequences of the fall are acceptable to you, then backing down, even if the moves seem improbable, teaches you nothing; you simply have lost a learning opportunity.
-Jay

Wasn't she the first to crack the hard opening moves?

Is this your understanding too, or not?

What I’m asking is what can be learned from learning how not to fall as I work my trad chops up to the 5.10ish level?

This had direct application for me. For example, I feel pretty confident in my gear placement. But I’ve never taken a fall on it. I’ve been leading 4’s, 5’s and a 6. Should I jump up to my 5.9 gym level where I am sure to fall and skip 5.7 and 5.8?

But that argues against the "practice falls" that Ilgner recommends. Or does it?

For 90% of the people out there: their time would be better spent climbing mileage instead of hangdogging and or falling. Hangdogging can be a useful tool, but calling it the best (or better) way to learn to climb is silly.

I agreed with everything you said until this:


I've knowingly put myself in climbing situations that I couldn't have reversed even though a fall would have meant injury. For instance, I've dynoed with full knowledge that if I missed the dyno, I'd break my ankle(s). Why? Because I was confident I could do the move, and therefore was willing to accept the risk. So, it's not just the consequences of a fall that matter, but also your ability to judge how well you will perform while climbing in the risky situation.

-Jay

But I’m not talking about that. What I’m asking is what can be learned from learning how not to fall as I work my trad chops up to the 5.10ish level? This had direct application for me. For example, I feel pretty confident in my gear placement. But I’ve never taken a fall on it. I’ve been leading 4’s, 5’s and a 6. Should I jump up to my 5.9 gym level where I am sure to fall and skip 5.7 and 5.8? Is there something more to learn about “keeping the balls in the air” at those levels that I haven’t already learned? My guess is that there is. My guess is that there is a lot more to learn and that’s why Goldstone’s, “slow down and learn the fine art of failure (at the sub 5.10 level), so that when tomorrow comes, you'll still be around for another try“ resonates so strongly. But that argues against the "practice falls" that Ilgner recommends. Or does it?

No. I am saying that you learn more by actually doing the move than you do by falling off of it (i.e. failing to do the move.) Unless, of course, what you are interested in "learning" is what not to do.

Curt