|
mountainrat
Nov 22, 2001, 8:34 PM
Post #1 of 4
(1576 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Nov 22, 2001
Posts: 416
|
What is the difference between 5.1 and 5.9? How do you rate climbs? I have climbed one pitch so far, and I wonder how it rates. Thanks
|
|
|
|
|
saltspringer
Nov 22, 2001, 11:13 PM
Post #2 of 4
(1576 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Oct 12, 2001
Posts: 274
|
maybe there are actually only two ratings:
5.yes & 5.no...
|
|
|
|
|
kunzie
Jun 16, 2002, 4:32 AM
Post #3 of 4
(1576 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Sep 18, 2001
Posts: 388
|
The difficulty
|
|
|
|
|
apollodorus
Jun 16, 2002, 4:58 AM
Post #4 of 4
(1576 views)
Shortcut
Registered: Feb 18, 2002
Posts: 2157
|
5.1 means almost anybody can climb it. 5.9 means that almost nobody can climb it. Basically, the harder the climb, the higher the decimal point. A 5.8 is harder than a 5.6, etc.
Ratings are based on people who are climbing actively, though. If you go to do a climb and have never climbed, then the rating means nothing. But, if you climb a certain area and can get up a 5.7, then you can probably climb a 5.8, but would maybe be out of your league on a 5.9, and definitely would not be able to do a 5.11.
The ratings are also relative to the type of climbing. "5.7" by itself means nothing. Go do the 5.7 on Snake Dike. You'll see for yourself. That 5.7 is a friction move with almost nothing to stand on. I've done easier 5.7, like the Harry Daley route on the Glacier Point Apron. The 5.8 of the Bishop's Terrace hand crack was WAY easier for me than the 5.7 of the Snake Dike. But, for me a hand crack is easier than smearing on a slab.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
