UKC

When I started climbing in the 1970's the club I was in would visit the Peak and often after a session leading in conventional fashion we would set up a top rope on a harder climb to end the day.
There were fewer people around then and if someone wanted a lead we would refrain and let them through.
We justified it in the the value of learning new techniques in a safe situation and sometimes it concluded in an attempted lead which is not much different than todays red-pointing approach to sports climbs.
However I also felt it was an enjoyable experience in its own right - to enjoy the movement without the risk was a valid exercise. It is a different 'game' in the climbing genre. Interestingly it is not one in the Games Climbers Play set so perhaps it should be added.
Of course top-roping is a stock in trade of Outdoor centres/courses where risk must be minimised for acceptability in education (Not something I entirely subscribe to) and it is a common practise at climbing walls.
I for one gain great pleasure from that 'Pure joy of movement' that this allows and combine it with the leading game played out on walls & on real rock. I see no problem with it but accept that it is not the same game.
So lets be generous and assimilate top-roping into the climbing games set as a new addition to the spectrum and style of modern climbing.
I look foward to any comments.
RattyinStirling
PS I also think Ron Hills are great climbing pants but also insist that the area around Derbyshire is the Peak.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:
Found oneself nodding in agreement and then you went and spoilt it with the Ron Hills comment....

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

I'd have to say - from a sort of similar generation - that I found top roping quite sterile. Less focus / more worry / rope hitting your nose. If I wanted purity of experience I'd go soloing rather than top-roping.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

I've been arguing similarly for some time. The obsession people have with lead climbing has seen ridiculous 5m boulders and easily top-ropeable vertical walls bolted in order to satisfy this absurd requirement to notionally be protected from below. I'd be very happy to see top-roping embraced more widely if it meant it became a viable and just-as-convenient alternative to bolting good trad crags.

Ron Hills, on the other hand ...

In reply to andyathome:
I agree entirely about soloing - thats why I did the hundred routes to celebrate my 40th but they were all at a lower standard (Though several were on sight) But I would never have tasted the delights of The Dangler without the top-rope.
Can you explain - less focus - more worry please. I don't understand this.
Cheers Ratty

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:
Most trad climbers who live near outcrops do a bit of top-roping every now and then as a way of trying harder moves/routes, sometimes with a vague intention to lead them later, sometimes not.

The reason it's not very popular is just that it's boring.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

I quite agree Keith.
There was something nice about finishing off the day by slinging a top rope down something to hard to lead, and seeing if you could wobble your way up it.
However, I think you need to swap the Ron Hills for Helly Hanson Polar Pants accompanied by a battered pair of EB's, to complete the nostalgia trip.

In reply to Jon Stewart:
This is interesting - is it 'boring' because it lacks the excitement of risk?

In reply to NigeR:
Polar pants are for winter - but still in the wardrobe! Touch of nostalgia here - I used to climb with a guy called Nigel Raynor - I thought I had gained contact with a long lost friend! Damn - you are not him - but thanks for the comments.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

That is my name keith? though it's with an e, not an o!

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:


Yes, I suppose so. It completely lacks commitment, judgement, decision-making indeed anything that's engaging to the 'soul'. It's like bouldering except more hassle and you don't get the satisfaction of having completed anything. It's a recipe for an incredibly forgettable day at the crag.

When I was bothered about getting better at climbing I intended to do more toproping but never got round to it really. When I did, it just felt like a crap version of bouldering.

This is the bit I think needs to change. I know every route is different but why should a lead ascent of an over-bolted line give any more satisfaction than a top-rope ascent of the same route with a slack rope? Logically they're pretty much identical and the difference in satisfaction in that case must be entirely societal rather than intrinsic.

I still have fond memories of many years ago scrattling my way up Scritto's Republic onsight on a top-rope and feeling very chuffed with myself. Certainly it wasn't boring.

Attitudes do change over time - a hard solo ascent is nowadays likely to be met with as much condemnation as approval - so crediting slack top-rope ascents with a degree of validity shouldn't be out of the question.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Ok - I can see that it lacks commitment but I think it still requires the other elements you list - judgement & decision-making - but engagement with the soul maybe not in the same way. On a different angle but similar, one of my most satisfying days on Stanage was topped by seconding Right Unconquerable - the leader put in good protection (Pre cams) and I took it out and followed it - no risk except the embarassment of falling off but I did it and it felt good.

In reply to john arran:


That's fair to say with an overbolted route, which is not what most of us in the UK will be top-roping. And clipping the rope does involve taking a hand off the holds and being stable so it does add some satisfaction of physically protecting yourself rather than being completely passive.


The routes I've TR'd haven't been onsight but if they were I'd just think they were too easy and not worth the bother of setting the rope up. Different on something as hard and classy as Scritto's Republic perhaps.


From whom? That's not my impression.


If someone says to me, as they sometimes do, "oh yes, I've done x route on top-rope" then I might think "that's quite good" if the route is hard. Just as if someone's done a hard boulder problem - I don't really have a view on "validity". But I'll be much more impressed or interested if they do a hard trad route because it requires so much more from the person.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

I went on a trip recently with someone who climbs a grade or two harder than me so I got to second some really classy routes that were out of my league. It was good, but the routes I seconded didn't compare to the experience of leading at my limit.

In reply to Jon Stewart:
I got to second some really classy routes that were out of my league. It was good,

Ok, perhaps Num Num might be accused of removing some of the context, but the remainder, which is perhaps the nub, neatly agrees with the sentiment of the OP…. that actually, there is some joy in climbing with a rope above you.
Which there is.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Funny how opinions on risk vary. I enjoy top-roping/seconding because it allows me to concentrate on the moves and the physical achievement without needing to be scared. Maybe I should just be a boulderer

Neil

In reply to Neil Williams:


Indeed. I'm at one extreme of the scale, I find bouldering and sport climbing at top-roping boring and don't bother (except as 'training' although I use the term loosely). I enjoy seconding a good route as it's a break from leading. But I couldn't spend all day seconding, I'd feel that I hadn't really done anything.

I go climbing very much to chase a buzz, rather than to achieve a score. Hence redpointing makes me feel depressed.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

Living near Southern Sandstone means that most of my climbing is top roping. I do it for fun, not just as training. I would never top rope if leading was an option though, even if the choice was between a filthy Diff chimney and a 6a 3* classic.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Like many other such debates it comes down to what we each see as the main challenge/s in climbing, which varies a lot between climbers. I completely get the pleasures and satisfaction to be had from leading bold or even well-protected trad routes near your limit, but I also appreciate the technical and physical challenge of sport climbing (which in its purest form isn't greatly different from top-roping). People seem to want both experiences and if these can both be achieved on the same route by 'legitimising' top-roping I think that would be a very good thing in general. Perhaps then there would be fewer calls to bolt trad crags for climbers wanting a sport-type experience.

I know this is possible right now but the widespread condemnation and ridiculing of top-roping that I read about on here is very unhelpful.

In reply to Jon Stewart:

Each to their own - at my advanced age and increasing decrepitude, I go climbing to have a good day out in the fresh air and get a bit of exercise. I'm more than happy to chuck a rope down and have a stress and risk-free day. My days of scaring myself shitless are well gone, and I don't miss them one bit. What other people do, and why, is entirely up to them.

JW

In reply to john arran:

I'd agree with all of that with one proviso: top roping can be very damaging if the climber is thrashing around especially in bad conditions with say dirty feet. Such behaviour is unacceptable on any large scale on classics if we want to preserve some of our best climbs as best we can and its not just an issue of novices ....I've seen quite a few 'good' climbers encourage mates (who can climb well enough when not out of their depth) into scrabbling on the likes of Downhill Racer. The conservation issue isn't limited to tr either: boulderers climb easy stuff in dirty trainers; 'good' climbers overbrush and over chalk; lead climbers grind out cam placements in their (dogged to death) heroic leading. So I support any form of the climbing game that also respects the rock..

In reply to john arran:

I wouldn't assume anything you read on here is widespread. Have you seen much ridicule of top-roping at the crag?

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

I have: its just usually gutless and whispered. Plus some folk still rightly challenge damaging practice.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

Some very good points have been made endorsing top roping if carried out in a sensitive manner. Polishing up three star classics is probably not the way to make yourself really popular. Top roping allows dirty, poorly protected and neglected climbs to be done in safety. With increased knowledge of the climb you might find you have a legitimate leading project. The nice thing about such climbs is that you are actually doing other climbers a service by cleaning it and perhaps reporting back at UKC.
I myself am not averse to a little "extreme toproping" in the winter months.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

I use a lot of top rope practice for sport projects and take a bit of stick for recording TR ticks on projects which I see as an great milestone on the way to the slightly harder lead tick. The hostility to top roping is macho bull. The way I see it, it's a complete waste of effort to take 10 falls trying to work a difficult crux ground up when you could dangle on the rope for a minute and fondle the holds 10 diffrent ways then do a couple of laps to wire the sequence without risking catching an ankle.

Whether it's a tool for training and red pointing, or to simply enjoy moving over difficult rock in a, fun, risk free way, there's now't wrong with top roping.

In reply to Offwidth:

I've said a few things to my mates before, but I'm not serious, unless of course they're on a route I want to lead.

In reply to stonemaster:

I love Ron Hills

In reply to lone:

Love is a strange emotion for pants. Mine are exceedingly well used with homemade knee and arse patches and are my go-to pants for dirty climbing or damp days. They used to be really cheap, cheerful and accepted; these days they are unfashionable, uncommon and rarely a bargain.

In reply to Kafoozalem:

Yet if I top-rope a classic I'm not putting any more polish on it than if I lead it.

I think a lot of people here lump "two people shoving up a quick top-rope and climbing a route instead of leading it as it's a bit scary/unprotected/whatever" with "large organised group top-roping a route for most of the day".

I certainly agree that if you lead a route you have achieved far more than if you top-rope it - but some are happy with the technical/physical achievement and don't want the fear/risk of injury. I think as climbing walls (where top roping is the norm, even though leading is an option) increase further in popularity there will be more such people. The alternative is of course bolting, but that is worse because it spoils the climb for those who wish to climb it as trad, whereas top-roping (as a substitute for leading) doesn't.

Neil

In reply to John Ww:

This is exactly my feeling about climbing - especially now I am older (Though not quite decrepit yet!)
I go climbing because it makes me feel good and reminds me that I am Alive & Kicking! I get more of that good feeling from leading routes that I feel are within my limit and seconding (or sometimes top-roping) some that are even closer to that limit. My buzz is in working out the problems that the rock poses and solving them - albeit in a vertical arena where it matters. The times I have really scared myself have never led to that good feeling so I now avoid them.
I use my skills to minimise the risk of hurting myself (And occasionally my pride) and work within a safe envelope. I occasionally push my comfort zone but never to the point of fear. I know that this is not everyone's climbing game but I think it applies to quite a few climbers.
The points made about damage are very relevant and I do accept that overuse of routes is nowadays an issue and that top roping particularly by large groups adds to this effect.
Thanks to all the contributors on this topic.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

There would probably be more support for toproping if it was mainly on dirty/mossy routes and the climber gave them a nice clean on the ab before climbing back up them?

In reply to Michael Gordon:

Too many people want the famous name tick with their eyes wide sbut on why its famous. Most of my top-rope adventures are to help assess/explore/clean uncertain terrain. It is rare that such lines are not worthwhile and the pristine rock can be a joy.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe: New Mills Torrs was bone dry during yesterday's heavy rain,thanks to the steepness and the trees at the top.These trees provide easy belays for top roping.Grades from VS to E5,and a great 200 foot boulder traverse,too.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:


I think most climbers have the same relaxed attitude. It's on here I've come across strict evangelists, not in the flesh.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

Nothing wrong with top roping as long as it is done with consideration for others.

In reply to GridNorth:


In theory that is quite correct. However, looking to the future, will a finite natural resource be able to withstand the "wear and tear" from an increasing number of climbers migrating from indoor walls to top roping outdoors?

In reply to timjones:

I don't know. But rock is rock, and I don't see why we don't all have equal claim to use it.

Neil

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

Good for you. This point is what I feel strongest about. I can recall years ago wanting to have a go at leading Red Rose Speedway at Symonds Yat. A bunch of folk were top roping the route and when I politely asked them if I could lead the route, they flatly refused to budge! To say I was pi55ed off with these folk is an extreme understatement!

While I do subscribe to the "each to their own" theory, I do think top-ropers should unhesitatingly make way for leaders.

FWIW, my actual opinion about top-roping is very similar to many of those expressed here - leading for me is a great rush, while top-roping feels to me like gambling without real money.

In reply to Neil Williams:

Because if we reign in our urge to top rope routes today we will retain some great routes to aspire to in the future?

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:
I have no problem with top-roping. I think the major advantage of sport climbing/leading over top-roping is that the harder (steeper) stuff can't be top-roped, only lead/seconded, which is why we have agreed on the 'rules' of the game as we have. Also lots of sports routes don't top out, and can't easily be top-roped except through the anchors (which you need to climb to). But this doesn't mean people can't enjoy whatever they enjoy; freedom is supposed to be part of climbing, after all...

I don't tend to top-rope outside, but only because my inner stamp-collector wants the full 'tick' for UKC, which I would never say is makes my ascent 'superior' in any way!

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

Every second top ropes.

Its all just climbing init? Each to their own but don't understand some of the snobbery on both these threads!

In reply to JamButty:



Every second cleans the gear for the leader. They will very often then switch roles for the next route.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

An interesting debate. When asked to choose my best climbing experience for my profile on here, I didn't choose big trad adventures on Cloggy or Gogarth, good as they were, or sport route red-points where you desperately grab the chain with the last of your energy, I chose cruising Staminade at Pex on a slack top rope. I was very fit, knew every move and it just clicked.
To paraphrase Jim Perrin -'climb for the delight not the tick'.

Which doesn't excuse groups with wildly thrashing beginners polishing routes too hard for them or top ropers who hog routes. If top roping you should always give way to people wanting to lead the route. They're putting life and limb on the line. You aren't.

In reply to Pekkie: How's the weather that side of M62? Pex worth a shot?

In reply to Mike Stretford:

I'm looking at the window now, trying to decide whether to go down or go for a run. Hmmm...

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:





Sorry I missed your question. For me top-roping was 'less serious' (that's the point I think?) so I was far less focused on what I was doing than when leading. When leading, especially on thinly protected routes, I tended to be far more 'in the zone' and therefore less worried (sometimes!!). So, perversely, I think I tended to find climbing on a top rope more stressful as I was acknowledging the possibility of falling off and half expecting it whereas when leading that thought was stuffed firmly into the back of my mind.

I did fall off on the lead every now and again, mind, but at least I wasn't expecting it.

In reply to andyathome:



Spot on!

Top-roping really screws with my head

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

There's nothing wrong with top-roping. On Southern Sandstone all routes are top roped to protect the soft rock that would be damaged were one to place gear. Many indoor walls have lines that are top only too including the now popular self-belay routes.

For pure joy of movement bouldering is the ultimate because no rope or even partner is required - though admittedly not all problems are of the totally safe kind.

The only thing I'd question is why you feel the need to get out the way of climbers leading the route - as if their style, or ability means their needs take precedence over yours. When instructors set up a top rope for beginners to climb on they certainly don't get out of the way for lead climbers and I think that's totally fair enough.

In reply to stp:


You are out of touch with current crag ethics on this. Someone wishing to lead a route always gets precedence over people top roping because the leader is putting life and limb on the line. Similarly, people wishing to lead a route should get precedence over top roping groups. I believe that this is emphasised in the training of group leaders.

In reply to timjones:



Interesting - me and a mate have been doing a lot of multipitch recently, and both came to the conclusion that we preferred leading to seconding, partly for not being in the zone, and partly an irrational dislike of taking all the gear out (despite the fact a belay anchor is constructed to take destruction)

In reply to Pekkie:


Why? There's no logical connection there.

Besides the vast majority of routes do not involve putting life and limb on the line. The same logic would imply that soloists get to go in front of all roped parties.

I'd say instructing a load of beginners is far harder than leading a route with your mate. But regardless, whoever is on a route usually stays on it until they're done.

In reply to kwoods:

I find I can get in the "zone" far more easily if I'm not having to worry about whether I'm going to smash my ankles to bits if I fall off.

Each to their own I think.

Neil

In reply to stp:


>It's really just common courtesy. If I am top roping and another party comes up I would always ask if they want to lead the route and pull our rope down. It's like saying 'please' and 'thank you' and not throwing litter down on the street.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:
I started out top roping and I think it is a great way to train. Sure it blows the onsight but so does seconding. I have no problem with anyone top roping only with huge groups hogging a section of crag with top ropes dangling all day

In reply to Duncan Bourne:


Ditto. Because we were SE-based, sandstone was our mecca, and we loved it. I went back there literally 100s of times over 30 years. I had a real fondness for it: the best routes were so technically good, and I just loved the whole beautiful ambience and the scene (London banter etc). But it was always never more than a kind of adjunct to real climbing, and while it was very worthwhile in its own right, great training etc, it was never, ever quite the 'real thing'. I had that sense right from the very beginning, even when I first started climbing there in 1966, and I had my hunch borne out in spades when I first started leading in Snowdonia in 1968.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

Top roping has its place. Its a useful technique to have and use but its really only a tiny part for me of the full climbing experience.

I'm like you, I'll sometimes try a line because it looks interesting and too hard for me to lead, at the end of the day, but I couldn't get motivated to spend a whole day doing it.

I can't understand why people ever restrict themselves by only ever top roping

In reply to GrahamD:

I do do the odd bit of leading, usually completely terrified. The answer, though, is that many people restrict themselves to top-roping because they don't like the risk, but do like the moves and the challenge. Bouldering is another option, but perhaps they like getting up high.

Neil

In reply to Neil Williams:

Don't like the risk or don't like the fear ? I don't think any of the lead climbing I do is particularly risky.

In reply to GrahamD:

Either or both! (I'm quite happy to admit I'm a giant[1] wuss)

[1] 6'4", 17.5st, so in more ways than one

Neil

In reply to GrahamD:

'I don't think any of the lead climbing I do is particularly risky.'

It all depends on what you are climbing doesn't it? If it's Stanage or North Wales crack climbs then you're probably right. But many classic climbs have dodgy bits where you have to concentrate and not fall off. The start of the Dervish for instance has seen a few broken ankles and there is even an unprotected bit on the start of the Gates. And, of course, there are many gritstone slabs of all grades that have no gear. I remember starting the direct start to Tennis Shoe with a full rack and reaching the belay with the rack untouched.

In reply to Pekkie:

Risk isn't all about the gear, though, is it ? its also about the likelihood of falling off and the consequence of the fall. Lets face it, if you try to top rope a longish pitch the bottom bit is pretty unprotected because of rope stretch anyway, unless you are climbing on a banjo string.

Nice to have a few climbing style options to get the most out of what any route has to offer you, really.

In reply to Pekkie:

SO if you've just set up the top rope and someone comes along, you'd dismantle it to allow someone to lead it?
Crazy - as long as you don't hog it for hours on end you were first so should climb it.

In reply to JamButty:


And thats the real nub of all these debates about top roping. Don't hog the route(s). Don't set up multiple ropes not have them all in use or sit around and have lunch.

In reply to keith-ratcliffe:

I agree, i do loads of top rope shunting and love it. No faffing with partners and anxiety etc.

In reply to john arran:



I couldn't agree more, as much as I can from my less exalted position. Very well put.

In reply to Pekkie:


What??? First come, first served. It doesn't matter to the rock or the time spent on the route whether I top-rope it or lead so I see no reason why someone's irrational belief in the superiority of their style should give them precedence.
Better climbers don't get to go first, and they could legitimately argue they're quicker and damage the rock less. People climbing without chalk (where chalk is allowed) could legitimately argue they leave less clues to the route, i.e. a more pristine rock and should therefore get precedence and yet they don't.

In reply to markus691:

I put it to you, sir, that you are a cad..........only joking