UKC

In reply to The Pylon King: if you can fall off it with only minor injury then it's a boulder problem.

In reply to Strife:



>Giving a trad grade to a 6m route is ridiculous in my opinion.



Why? If its got gear (no matter how poor) people will still want to climb it as a trad route with no mats & the landing might be gash!

I did a new route in Froggatt Woods thats about six metres - landings awfull and I did it with two crappy side nuts - no mats... it never entered my head to give it a bouldering grade!! (it came out as E1 5b) If you wanted to build a patio of Mats - strap down a few spotters to some tree's you might just be able to high ball it!

Bit like the 'The Swooper' at Stanage - but not as hard...

;0)

Thats why Grimer's article should be read - its the philosophy of the Peak Guide Team - thats not to say it's spot on - but it makes sense I guess!

si

In reply to Simon:

It's been done to death before that johnny cum lately.

In reply to The Pylon King: You could take the Javu approach and just give it an english tech grade... i.e. 6a and avoid the whole argument altogether, seems to make sense to me.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:


True - but its no harm in doing it again for these folks today ey Mick?

You have a lot of yoofs on here and they can always learn from the BMC Johnnies!

;0)

In reply to The Pylon King:
I'd generally say that if you used a bouldering pad, give it a bouldering grade, if you lead it, give it a lead grade

In reply to pottsworth:
So if you lead The Indian Face with mat at the bottom what does it get?

In reply to Simon:

Cut the smileys Simon. They suck.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:



Cut the American Slang Mick. Its Crap.

;0)

In reply to james oswald: You'll more than likely get a darwin award!

In reply to Alasdair Fulton: Until comparatively recently a route had to be 8mts to gain route status in the BMC guides, before that it was 20ft.

In reply to Al Evans:


yeah but until comparatively recently werent routes climbed in nailed boots?

In reply to The Pylon King: I think at least firés had already come about at the time I'm talking about, cetainly post 1990 as some of the BMC guides were still in ft then. The Staffs guide '89 was mts the Kinder guide '90 was still in ft.

In reply to The Pylon King: IMO anything that is remotely worth V3 as a boulder problem with a moderately high crux is worth at least E2.

We need to remember that E-grades are for ONSIGHT ascents. I'm a pretty well-rounded climber and I onsight a similar percentage of E3s as I do V3s. Anyone who is consistently flashing V3 but not onsighting E2 is doing something wrong.

Those that are stating HVS 6a as an option are talking bollocks. That grade is pretty much never justified except where the 6a move is straight off the ground. And even then a grade like V2 6a with a guidebook comment like VS or HVS to top out, is far a better option.

In reply to Mark Stevenson:


Is that official?

In reply to The Pylon King:

Were it the first ascent, I'd write it up for the style in which it was done Vx if bouldered, HVS/Ex if lead. Were I just writing it up for a guide/topo I'd give both assuming it makes sense to climb it in either style (worthwhile runners for leading and acceptable height/landing for bouldering to feel comfortable).

E grade without runners... I always find 5a moves with feet at 4m much scarier than 6a moves with feet at 2m so I guess it'd very much depend on the exact nature of the route/problem and how it feels. Also, insecure moves or very powerful moves where you will explode off in a surprised flurry of limbs are much scarier than the same grade straight-down edge pulling.

jk

In reply to The Pylon King: It's quite hard to describe the difficulty of highballs using the various grading systems on offer (not that I'm suggesting we have an H-grade). I like what the BMC guides are doing, giving both in various combinations of brackets.

The thing that bothers me is:

a) flashing a strenuous sit-start lowball V3 and thinking "that has added next to nothing to my experience of climbing" and then

b)slapping, heart-in-mouth, for the top of a sustained, teetery highball V3 with a slightly iffy landing, and thinking "oh my god, that was an incredible experience I will never forget"

and being told that these are "worth" the same in terms of difficulty. Highball V3 can't generally be climbed by anyone with a lowball bouldering limit of V3. How many V3 boulderers who have never led an E1 would get up Pig's Ear or DIY, for example?

Equally, onsighting a proper E3 is much different to bouldering out a highball, falling/jumping off onto pads from gradually higher up until you eventually get to the top.

So, in answer to the orginal question, I support "E1 6a (highball V3)".

Or we could just go back to how it used to be, and grade every single one HVS 5c regardless of difficulty (more Stanage examples: Not to be taken away, Love Handles, DIY, Mating Toads, etc etc).

P.S. If anyone would like to tell to try climbing somewhere else other than Stanage, I tried the other day at Slipstones, but it was covered in snow.