/ Peak District, make up your mind.

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Andy Moles - on 29 Mar 2012
It's only the most popular climbing area in Britain. Font or V, makes little difference, just flip a coin or something - at least have the same system for each crag.

Burbage South boulders, OK: http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/crag.php?id=9732

Burbage Bridge boulders, bad: http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/crag.php?id=1874

If you don't know how to convert the grades from one to the other, just have a guess - no one expects bouldering grades to be right.
Lew13 - on 29 Mar 2012
In reply to Andy Moles:

Who goes bouldering anyway!
Monk - on 29 Mar 2012
In reply to Andy Moles:

The problem is that there are so many guides to the Peak and they use different systems. Moderators are instructed to use the grades from the latest definitive guide - I would say that would be the BMC guides, but others may argue that the bouldering guide is the correct resource for boulders. Then there is the problem of different names/problems in different guides (hell, I still use Rockfax09 with B grades!). It's not a simple situation at all, but it will get better in future when the Font grade becomes standard.

The final straw is the work involved - the crags are updated by volunteers. Just tidying up the Avon crags took me a few evenings' work. Sorting out all the bouldering in the peak will be a mammoth undertaking.
Andy Moles - on 29 Mar 2012
In reply to Stewy12:
> Who goes bouldering anyway!

Probably the same eejits that read the bouldering forum.
Fluvial - on 29 Mar 2012
In reply to Andy Moles:
> It's only the most popular climbing area in Britain. Font or V, makes little difference, just flip a coin or something - at least have the same system for each crag.
>
> Burbage South boulders, OK: http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/crag.php?id=9732
>
> Burbage Bridge boulders, bad: http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/crag.php?id=1874
>
> If you don't know how to convert the grades from one to the other, just have a guess - no one expects bouldering grades to be right.


Those grades are woefully crap. Who put them in? since when was a V8 6c and a V6 6b all of them are rubbish. It means Bluebrad (The moderator) has to sift through them and sort them out... If people want to upload them they could at least get that right.

BTW I did a V87 5a last Sunday I should get that in
Si dH - on 29 Mar 2012
In reply to fozmeister:
Um, fairly obviously a V8 is almost always 6c and a V6 is almost always 6b - those are UK tech grades. In Font terms they'd be Ft 7b and Ft 7a.

Font grades are better than V grades and have become almost universally accepted and used by boulderers in the peak as far as I can tell. I havent heard anyone using V grades for a couple of years, except where referring to the BMC guides, which still have them.
hoodmonkey - on 04 Apr 2012
In reply to Si dH:

Seconded. They're clearly not Font equivalences!
Offwidth - on 04 Apr 2012
In reply to Si dH:

What about Rockfax, they use V?

Anyway as someone above pointed out there is absolutely no difference between grading systems and since bouldering grades are usually more morpho than UK tech the absolute accuracy is less critical.

V with UK tech is easier to use for the majority of folk who boulder occasionally (as bouldering grades and translation is difficult if you dont do it much...UK tech is the benchmark for these people) and hence IMHO is still best for mixed guides with bouldering and trad. Font is best for the specialists (but only through familiarity and a good deal of stuburness ... never seen an expert who couldn't translate easily ;-). All this stuff about low grade font helping beginners is bullshit as the grades are all over the place below Font 6a (especially in Font). There are way more occasional boulderers than experts... something that mixed use guidebook producers need to think about in terms of sales. My advice remains if producing a specialist bouldering guide to use Font but for mixed guides use V with UK tech.
johnboybuchan - on 04 Apr 2012
In reply to Andy Moles:

Surely this will be adressed by the new UKC and p grading system?
Hidden Logbook 7 on 04 Apr 2012
In reply to Si dH: I disagree with the view there is a 'concensus' on font being the best system. Font is rubbish in the lower grades and the majority of boulderers aren't supermen climbing f7b. Unfortunately my native North Yorkshire has turned everything to font. The preferences of the few who climb hard in the area obviously over-ride what is best for everyone else. We have gone from an established grading system, it has its problems but works, to a system where the grades are all over the place. People who are grading these problems haven't been to font, they are basing there grading on comparisons with other dubiously graded problems.
Depending on your style, preference, height etc you will find some things easier or harder than others. If we move to a system with more levels to it surely there can only be more of a discrepancy between how hard people find it. Do you really think you can grade a bit of rock that accurately? I don't!
Fluvial - on 04 Apr 2012
In reply to Andy Moles:

I started out using the V system and found it OK never had an issue however now I climb around f6a I find the font system better to break down the grades further, though I do reference in the V grade sometimes to double check.

I like font and prefer it to V but font isn't good lower down as already pointed out but better higher up and I also take the point about dubious grading by people who have never been to font.
I have never been and so can't comment on that. Though as a tall bloke I can do f6c sometimes due to my height but can also fail f5+ because I of heightism - that is just something I have to live with - much like I have to live with most shops stopping at 34" leg, X factor and the apprentice.
Monk - on 04 Apr 2012
In reply to fozmeister:

> I like font and prefer it to V but font isn't good lower down as already pointed out but better higher up

Really? V grades are pretty crap below about UK 5b without some serious fudging. (The fact that I really like the fudging done in the peak is neither here nor there - what we use in the peak is not what they use in the states.) Font grades can easily be extended downwards, and just because they are wildly inaccurate in font, doesn't mean we can't use them properly here.

> I also take the point about dubious grading by people who have never been to font.

This is a strawman argument. Sure, some of the graders in the UK might not have been to font, but only a tiny minority will have been to Hueco to sample true V grades, therefore font grades are more likely to be accurate.

Personally, I'm not bothered which grade we use - they are basically just the same grade written different ways. A little familiarity and you can convert them in an instant.

This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.