UKC

James Pearson climbing one of the best looking and most technical routes on Grit. Climbed by James in 2008 and still awaiting its 2nd ascent.

Watch the video: http://www.ukclimbing.com/videos/play.php?i=3101

In reply to UKC Videos:


Despite the best efforts of the editor of the Team America film trying to convince us otherwise.

In reply to UKC Videos:

Excellent stuff (and no mats )

In reply to UKC Videos:

Never seen that before. Strange video really; makes it look like it's all about one move. Perhaps it is. Certainly makes it look like he finds it quite easy, though, which I don't suppose it is.

jcm

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:
Found this from a 2008 article on Team America, here on UKC, so I wasn't the only one fooled:

"Kevin's repeats and possible down-grades of The Promise (E10 or E8) and The Groove (E11 or E8), which grabbed headlines worldwide."

http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=45471

Interesting I get 2 dislikes for bringing this up, maybe Kevin and the filmmaker.

I dislike dishonest filmmaking, and it's hard to watch Team America and not assume The Groove was repeated. It would be interesting if the dislikers could explain themselves?

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

The top is tricky and bold. 'Team America' didn't climb the top bit. Others I know had subsequently worked the bottom section but not the top bit. As for the grade, who knows? Its odd with all the talent around some of the hard grit routes retain a air of mystery when others become almost trade routes.

In reply to UKC Videos:

Did they put a WC "sleeve" or logo thingy over a ball nut? Approx. 40 seconds in. I wouldn't have noticed and don't really care, but it looks wierd the way they focus on him placing a covered up piece of kit.

In reply to Oliver Houston:

Looks like it to me. Strange thing to do unless it would be the only gear in shot and you're desperate to please the sponsers!

Nice video, love how Graham Hoey marches off at the end, job done, on to the next state-of-the-art belaying job to do...

In reply to Offwidth:


That's what I read, a long time after I'd seen the film and assumed they'd repeated it.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:


Mostly because you automatically get dislikes for complaining about dislikes. It makes you sound a bit whiney.

In reply to planetmarshall:


I got the dislikes for my original post, which didn't mention dislikes. I'll shortly be releasing a film of my repeat of Echo Wall.

In reply to UKC Videos:

Is that the much vaunted 'correct finish' then - the right-hand side of the Boot Hill/Nutcracker arete? I always assumed it was further right,


Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs:

Hi Chris,
The bit that hasn't been repeated is the arete/groove feature running up from the twin cracks in the way that James climbed it. It's eliminate, in that you could place your foot out onto the ledge of Boot Hill (and that section has been repeated that way), but James chose not to do so. It's all about hip position apparently, but he still found it easier than the lower section which he thought was technically harder than The Promise or Equilibrium.

Given that PRJH thought Nutcracker to be the same grade as Suicide Wall I think we can put that argument to bed

cheers

Graham

In reply to UKC Videos:

Great video. He makes it look so easy.

In reply to pigeonjim:

Tried it on top rope.One inch off the ledge.Go to it,lankers!Easy peasy if 5 foot ten or more.

If the person who hid behind the button to dislike my above comment would like to discuss what their problem is with my post, feel free to either reply or contact me.

Graham

In reply to Graham Hoey:



We will have to agree to disagree on that one,


Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs:


If we're talking Nutcracker in Yosemite Valley and Suicide Wall at Cratcliffe, I'd say Nutcracker was HVS and I haven't done Suicide Wall but it gets HVS. Anyway, I'd say certainly not proof that his 'grade radar' was way off.

In reply to paul mitchell:

Oh yeah, basically a VS then

In reply to Chris Craggs:

Hi Chris,

Well, I think we can agree that Nutcracker and Suicide Wall are not the same grade! Suicide Wall with the peg runner as led in 1946 would have been around E1 5b, whereas, even today with modern protection and sticky boots, Nutcracker is E5 6b for someone of Vin Ridgeway's height (approx 5' 9").

Graham

In reply to ashtond6:

Paul can probably climb 6c on a good day, so hard but not cutting edge hard.

However if the Americans thought 5.14c, or 8c+ then I think it would have to be much harder than that if it's essentially a one mover.

Has anyone suggested a boulder grade for it?

In reply to Graham Hoey:




Well Suicide Wall with a single peg runner would have had been more than E1 in my world! With the chockstone threaded (as for Tiger Traverse) I can't see Nutcracker being more than E2 (where did the 6b come from?).
If you doubt the ascent (and presumably Escape too) then who was telling fibs back then - a can of worms I would rather not peer into!

Chris

In reply to stp:

Kevin said f7C+

In reply to Chris Craggs:

Hi Chris,
On Nutcracker, there's a 6a/b starting move unless you are 5 10 or more and a 6b move up the right arete of the Boothil front face unless you are approaching 6 foot. If the high chock in Owl Gully was clipped it would only make the start safe.

I don't think it was due to anyone telling fibs, just misremembering a line. I've always thought a higher line was taken, that of Dr Prune, which is the most obvious line for 1951 considering the unclimbed nature of the wall and the difficulty of the climbing. I think Geoff Suton's Escape, also took a higher line, into the upper section of Boothill.

Best wishes

Graham

In reply to Graham Hoey:

Ape index can be an issue. I'm 5'10" but have the same reach as an average 6' climber. I agree your theory is more likely but we can't know for sure.

In reply to Offwidth:


So I can't see that being 5.14c/8c+. Perhaps it was meant to be 5.13c or 8a+ which sounds more likely.

In reply to stp:

Depends which usa region he is basing the grade on haha.
Some, hardest move
Others, cumulative difficulty!
13c seems harsh either way

In reply to ashtond6:

Well 13c = 8a+ and if a boulder problem is pretty much the substance of the route then it will be pretty hard.

Pump Up the Power is 8a+ for its hard start which as a boulder problem only is given f7c+. Bear in mind that's a lot harder than anything found on most 8a+s.

In reply to stp:

Why do we have all the speculation and no one climbing it. Those that have tried or succeeded on the bottom regard the bouldery crux as somthing around the top 7 mark and its not as dangerous as many a hard grit route. The unrepeated top bit is down on The Gritlist as E6 (and the route still as E11); we put it in as E9 7b in Froggatt (almost certainly overgraded on the technical side) with the top as E7 6c. The End of the Affair gets E8 and plenty of ascents.

In reply to Offwidth:

In a recent discussion with James Pearson, he said he felt that the lower groove was harder technically than either The Promise or Equilibrium and that if he climbed the route now, given the fact that it seems to be safer than he originally thought and he's done more hard climbing now, he would give it E9 7b. Anther top-end grit climber I've spoken to who's done E9's and E10's feels it deserves E10. It's pretty accademic though really!

Cheers

Graham

In reply to Graham Hoey:

I guess it depend where the UK 7b grade starts. However, given how wide the 6c grade is and most grade tables showing stuff even on the f7C+/ f8A border (it is confirmed by a few to be no harder) as being Uk 7a.

It shouldn't be academic ... should have been repeated by now.

In reply to Graham Hoey:


That's an interesting thought that had never occurred to me before - I'll have to have a look at the wall again, I don't have a copy of Eastern Grit here with me - not surprisingly!


Chris

In reply to UKC Videos:
Well, until the camera pans back i didn't realise we were at Cratcliffe Tor. As for this fashion for insidious creep of French grades into British rock, will this cease when we opt out of the EEC?
Oh, I enjoyed the video, lovely footwork, but JP obviously felt no requirement for runners higher up!

In reply to Offwidth:

What I mean is, if you're operating at that end the grade debate won't be much of an issue. Additionally, when you start to push the top end, grades get much more influenced by particular personal strengths, skills, suppleness and morphology etc so one person's 7a is another's 7b. As to why it's not been repeated - maybe there are too few climbers out there interested in repeating hard grit routes? It is a bit odd.

cheers

Graham

In reply to Chris Craggs:

Well Chris, I'm disappointed you don't carry that everywhere with you. I hope you've got a picture of a favourite grit route or crag on your phone. Don't you get home sick for the feel and smell reminding you of those halcyon days on the lovely grit?

cheers
Graham

In reply to Sean Kelly:

UK tech grades started out as Font grades.

In reply to stp:

But imo pretty much all those boulder traverses have ridiculous route grades. I was only told the f7A traverse at stoney was F6c

Another example- broomgrove wall traverse is supposedly 7b/+. I've onsighted 7b and I can't touch the thing!

The cruxy 8as at raven tor seem to be V7, so 7C+ seems desperate imo

In reply to Offwidth:


It's the attitude of stuffing it into the lower grade and refusing to award it the next one up that has destroyed the UK tech grade at the top end!

We need some rampant grade inflation to return the tech grade to being useful. How about giving it 7c or perhaps 8a (English tech, that is)?

In reply to Coel Hellier:

For anything like that you'd really need a cohort (as many as possible) of top end climbers giving a long list of routes in rough order of technical difficulty and each suggesting possible new tech grades (if necessary). You can't just pluck numbers out of the air.

In reply to Sean Kelly:


The first good argument I've seen for this!

In reply to Michael Gordon:

You can. Dump the misunderstood and mangled UK tech and go back to la source.

In reply to Offwidth:

I've always been in favour of the old Scottish system where anything above Severe was all VS! You can do them or you can't! Simples.

In reply to Offwidth:

And interestingly to some degree this is actually happening. Not in guidebooks (yet) but certainly when climbers discuss hard routes they commonly use Font (or Hueco) grades to describe crux sequences.

In reply to stp:
Some extent? Show me a current wad who subdivides the UK 6c and 7a grades to describe how hard the route is. I think its hilarious that we use font grades to fix a UK tech grade system that was based on yes those very same font grades. The infamous Scottish VS and the 'there are only three grades' bulls*it are part of the same disease. Grades are supposed to be a subjective measure of noticable differences in difficulty but that was always a bit too clinical for some brits.

In reply to Offwidth:

It's the same with sport routes, using a Font grade to describe the crux, and not just the crux, any short section, the start if Font???, etc.