UKC

Someone gave me some old SMC journals the other day and it reminded me of that enigmatic grade Scottish VS!
This prompted me to think about the history of grading.
So UKC experts here are three questions.
1. What was the first ever climb to be graded HVS?
2. What was the first XS?
3. When did E grades first appear?

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

have a read of http://bobwightman.co.uk/climb/article.php?p=uk-grades

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

Doug has linked to the page on my site (thanks) but as quick answers:

1. Possibly Central Buttress
2. This will be a lot earlier than you think - Exceptionally Severe was one of O.G. Jones' original grades but I don't know what routes were given that grade.
3. E grades were introduced by Pete Botteril in the Lakes in 1976

In reply to Bob:
Thanks for this contribution and I enjoyed your article on grades. However you indicate that OG Jones went from Difficult to Exceptionally Severe. I thought CB was probably a milestone when it was climbed but what grade was it given by the first ascentionists?
I would still like to know what was the first XS. It may be that a guidebook editor reviewed the climbs in an area and wanted to go one further than HVS or was it that people filled in the gaps to OG Jones original Exceptionally Severe which I recall as ES in some old guidebooks (Quietus on Stanage?)

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

I shall have to investigate They weren't so obsessed about grades in the early days: the grades were basically a seriousness rating so exceptionally severe was intended to warn people off as much as anything.

I'm in the process of updating the website so will sort it out then.

In reply to Bob:

I remember the Mick Fowler interpretation of the grading system. He didn't bother with E-grades. It was simply objective danger:

MXS - no death potential

XS - death potential for the leader

HXS - death potential for all members of the party (this usually meant the rock was so bad that everything, including the belays, could rip out.)

For tech grades he went by the High Rocks standard of the day which usually meant nothing was graded above 5c.

In reply to Bob:

They were not so obsessed or beta and tech grades didnt exist in the early days. Some early descriptions read like a join the dots climbing. The modern trad ethic/grade combo is very much that (ie pretty modern).

In reply to Offwidth:

Perhaps a better comparison for early rock-climbing is with cave diving: it was really serious, the kit wasn't designed for shock loads, come to think of it - it wasn't designed. Belaying systems hadn't developed and the seriousness was more related to how many of the party would survive following a fall similar to Mick Fowler's XS grade.

Not a huge amount changed until after the second world war, even then the grades were more about warning rather than analysing difficulty. The current fine grained system only really started in the mid to late 1960s, finally sorting itself out with the marrying of the Crew-Wilson numeric tech grade and the Botteril open ended adjectival grade in 1976.

In reply to Bob:

I think we modify our behaviour according to risk so was early climbing really that bad or did climbers have tactics to deal with the extra risk by climbing more within their capabilities and having maxims that the leader must not fall etc. So were the fatality rates really that much higher then on british rock? Cave Diving had ridiculous fatality rates at one time, higher probably than himalayan climbing, and as such might be a flawed comparison.

In reply to Offwidth:

The comparison was more about the consequences of a mistake - pretty unforgiving - rather than actual injury/fatality rates.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

I've always understood that the first use of the XS grade in modern times was by Peter Harding in the 'forties with Goliath's Groove at Stanage and Suicide Wall at Cratcliffe which he graded "Exceptionally Severe". I thought too that he'd used it in his Llanberis guide book of 1950. I no longer have a copy (pity!) but think it might have been on at least one route more innocuously graded today - Sickle? Spectre?

In reply to Martin Bennett:

I seem to recall Brant Direct getting an "E" in the early days and the reason I remember that is because I'm fairly sure it was my first E tick. Misguided, perhaps, to think I had done a "real Extreme" but it seemed to do the trick at the time.

In reply to GridNorth:

Indeed, you can discuss the first grade 'X' either as the first route to be given that grade or the first route currently assigned that grade. These may or may not be the same.

At some point the grading system used in the UK changed from being one expressly indicating seriousness to one indicating difficulty (but also including an element indicating seriousness)

In reply to Martin Bennett:


Spectre I think

In reply to Martin Bennett:

There was Extremely Severe and then there was Exceptionally Severe - two separate grades. The Thing on the Cromlech got Exceptionally Severe in the early 70's I recall (Sin at Stoney Middleton did as well in the old Graham West guide!). You probably knew that......

Blackshaw (1965) refers to the fact that 'some of the Climber's Club's guide-books have used Extremely Severe and Exceptionally Severe, the latter being reserved for the most serious climbs of the day'.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

HVS, like HS, first appeared as a colloquialism among climbers. It was never formally "invented" like the Crew-Wilson system or the E-grades. I remember reading something in the sixties along the lines of "...Hard Very Severe now seems to have become a grade in its own right...". Everybody knew what it meant, so the guidebook writers just adopted it.

In reply to Andy Say:


Interesting view and could well be the case, but I'd thought of them as being synonymous, having, back in the sixties, noted the use of "Exceptionally" in Peak District and N Wales guides, but "Extremely" in The Lakes - starting with Allan Austin's Langdale guide of 1967.

In reply to Martin Bennett:

The Peter Harding guide to Llanberis had both "Exceptionally" and "Extremely" severe

In reply to Doug:


Ah. That blows my long held idea and means Andy Say has it right. Thanks.

In reply to Martin Bennett:


Mais oui! Merci.

It was that Llanberis North guide that first introduced me to the concept of something 'harder' than Extremely Severe. If I remember correctly it was explained in the guide that the 'Exceptionally Severe' grade was reserved for technically Extreme routes with poor protection and poor rock. I'm pretty sure that the subsequent Pete Crew guide to Llanberis South used the same system. Don't know when those miscreants of the FRCC did anything similar though.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

In 1950 Peter Harding used Extremely Severe and Exceptionally Severe in his Llanberis Pass guide. One year earlier in 1949 he had used the grade Exceptionally Severe in his guide to Black Rocks and Cratcliffe tor.

In reply to GridNorth:


It was my first extreme tick as well, probably for loads of people as it was a soft touch I guess. But then in big boots and with three nuts it would probably be E3 nowadays!

In reply to jimtitt:

You've got three nuts? No wonder you went for a bridging route.

In reply to Andy Say:

Learnt to climb at Swanage, bridging and adequate equipment are de-rigeur there!

In reply to jimtitt:

In order to defend my integrity I have to say I didn't know it was a soft touch at the time which was in the mid to late 60's. Later, that same week, I tried Cenotaph Corner which made me realise, quite dramatically, that perhaps I wasn't as ready as I thought I was. Another route around that era which fooled me into thinking I had made the grade was The Mall on Millstone Edge. I wouldn't want to bet on it but I have a feeling that may have got an Extreme tag at some point.

In many ways however these routes helped me to break the huge psychological barrier that existed back then when striving to climb what were the higher grades of the day.

In reply to jimtitt:

In big boots! Respect!

In reply to Offwidth:

I've got a feeling that Bob's comparison between early climbing and cave diving is spot on. I can't believe it's never occurred to me before - but it didn't. Both were ventures in the unknown; a dauntingly high degree of uncertainty combined with a high probability of death if you muffed things.

Do fatality rates on rock correlate with either difficulty or seriousness? I remember as a 17 year old kid being amazed when I was told that classic Welsh Severes had more fatalities than (then very serious) Extremes.

I remember a brief period (late 70s??) when something like a third of British cave dives ended in fatality. I'd just been introduced to caving (Grade V, first time down!) and quite fancied cave diving. I'm a mechanical numpty of stunning proportions; changing a clogged up demand valve, never mind in cold and darkness, well, forget it! My mates weren't having it and I'm eternally grateful to them. Otherwise I certainly wouldn't be here now.

'The Darkness Beckons'. My God, what a title. And what guts those guys had.

Mick

In reply to GridNorth:

Perversely at around the same time I found the Corner more straightforward than Brant Direct (the latter had just the one slippy move just above half height where I'm sure I actually lost contact with the rock). A gritstone training, perhaps?

In reply to GridNorth:


Hi Al. I'm pretty sure it had. It's the Cenotaph Corner of Millstone - bloody awkward.



Agree totally about the psychological barrier. For me, climbing Brown routes in Wales was a massive psychological challenge. I didn't know anyone else who'd done them. It seemed as though an aura hung over them. One thing I knew for sure - I wasn't as good as Brown!

I've always viewed the inception of the earliest wires/hexes (roughly 1974), as a watershed. (My ascents were 1974 and onwards.) But doing hard stuff before this, on steep rock, with no strength/stamina training and facing those huge run-outs... In my view, most hard routes done back then (e.g. The Thing) were effectively a grade or two harder than even a few years later.

Mick

In reply to Andy Say:

I fell off the Corner and fractured my skull the week I did Brant Direct. The only pro I had was a few engineering nuts on nylon sling. The only pro I had in was a situ sling at about 35 feet. I wasted my strength trying to replace it with my own but couldn't manage it. I climbed on for another 20 feet or so and felt my strength draining from my arms. I wasn't too worried, after all there was a good thread below me, next thing I knew I was being hoisted up in a helicopter.

In reply to Mick Ward:

'I've always viewed the inception of the earliest wires/hexes (roughly 1974).' Earlier than 74. One of my trade routes 70 - 72 was Tensor, with aid over the roof. Made possible by a wonderful brass clog 0 in the crack before you moved up to the roof... Don't suppose it would have held, but thankfully I never found out.

In reply to Mick Ward:

There were hard routes and then there were super hard routes. The only real distinction was reputation passed around mainly by word of mouth and the back of fag packets. Even when I thought I was good enough for the Corner, which I wasn't, I would not have contemplated The Thing.

In reply to Mick Ward:



Not so sure. With most climbing however hard or dangerous you get some kind of look at what's ahead even if it's only on the approach. But exploratory cave diving? Underwater underground in unknown territory in a pitch black cave illuminated only by your torch. Scary stuff, not for me.

In reply to GridNorth:

I know what you mean. When I finally did The Thing I felt it was quite amenable because it was never going to be as hard as I expected.

In reply to Andy Say:

I think the other Exceptionally Severe route apart from The Thing was the Cromlech Girdle.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

My two-pennorth - exceptionally severe was invented by OG Jones when the sequence of grades was easy, moderate, difficult, very difficult. Anything beyond that was exceptionally severe, which later became adjusted to severe. Not sure when very severe was invented though.

There might of course be a difference between "the first climb to be graded HVS" and the earliest climb which carries that grade today. My feeling is that at the time when the hardest climbs were Very Severe that some guidebook writers (most notably in F&RCC guides) took to using Very Severe (hard) for the hardest routes of the day. I'm sure most if not all of those have become HVS (or harder).

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

The sub-divisions have always been awkward. We always worked on the principle that a Hard Severe was a Severe that was a little harder rather than a full grade harder. Same with HVS which we considered to be a slightly more difficult VS but a VS none the less. Bear in mind however that many areas particularly in Scotland saw VS as the top grade so some routes that get Extreme today, even one or two that are probably E3, were considered VS. I think that the theory was that if you were competant at VS you should be able to deal with whatever the route threw at you in a safe manner even if that meant failure and that you should be able to judge how hard the route is likely to be. I have to admit to having some sympathy for that view especially with the routes of that era. I acknowledge that harder routes need a different approach and if you consider many modern routes that is exactly what happens with abseil inspections, preplaced gear, bolts and top rope practice.

In reply to GridNorth:

Apparently Shepherd's Crag used to have a maximum grade of HVS or Very Severe(Hard) as being a roadside crag it was felt that nothing there could warrant a higher grade. Similarly the left wing at Malham had a maximum grade of VS, some are now given E3 and they weren't aided before!

In reply to Bob:


Allan Austin's maxim - I was told - was that if you could jump off the crux and walk away they couldn't be more than Very Severe.

In reply to Andy Say:

Didn't he jump off from the crux of Wall of Horrors at Almscliff? That's a long way up if he did.

In reply to Bob:

I think the right wing of Malham only went up to HVS. Me and my mate did Wombat, it was graded HVS with a peg for aid but we dispensed with that anyway.

In reply to Bob:

He certainly took the unroped plunge off Western Front and walked (maybe hobbled) away. VS anyone?

Mick

In reply to GridNorth:

Hi Al, yep, they were all given HVS on the right wing - Carnage, The Macabre, Wombat, etc. Did Wombat with four runners (eek... what was I thinking?)

Carnage had a dreadful reputation (and The Macabre even worse.) The three people I knew who'd done Wombat had all failed on Carnage; and the three people I knew who'd done Carnage had all failed on Wombat! My best mate had backed off the first pitch of Carnage three times. When he found out in the pub we'd done it, he snapped. "Who led the first pitch?". Rog grinned and said, "Mick." (Even then, the world's greatest coward.) The look on his face was priceless!

Happy days.

Mick