This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
I don't understand E-grades fully. Don't feel like using the 8a.nu conversion chart because...Jens.
I spent the weekend getting completely beat down on a very well protected 7c+ crack. It eats gear. You're only limited by how many SLCDs you want to carry. Zero danger. A true cowards' trad line.
What would this weigh in at in E-Grades?
Many thanks for opinions and derision.
I spent the weekend getting completely beat down on a very well protected 7c+ crack. It eats gear. You're only limited by how many SLCDs you want to carry. Zero danger. A true cowards' trad line.
What would this weigh in at in E-Grades?
Many thanks for opinions and derision.
1
4
In reply to shouldbebetter:
I have no experience of routes anywhere near that grade but I'll start the bidding at E6 6c and then other people can jump in to tell me how ridiculously wrong I am and get you an actual answer.
I have no experience of routes anywhere near that grade but I'll start the bidding at E6 6c and then other people can jump in to tell me how ridiculously wrong I am and get you an actual answer.
3
In reply to shouldbebetter:
No personal experience of trad at that kind of grade, but Cave Route LH at Gordale is a F7c+ that back when it was protected by pre-placed threads etc used to get E6 6c I think.
No personal experience of trad at that kind of grade, but Cave Route LH at Gordale is a F7c+ that back when it was protected by pre-placed threads etc used to get E6 6c I think.
In reply to shouldbebetter:
So, my understanding...
The Adjectival and the Technical grade aren't completely independent. A 'typical' E1 is 5b, and a 'typical' E2 is 5c. A bit of leeway is allowed in either direction for safe/cruxy or bold routes. The problem is that at the technical grades you're talking about, the UK equivalent starts to break down ( this is visible in the Rockfax grade conversion table as the technical scope of the grades gets wider as the adjectival grade increases ), which is why the hardest trad climbs are often specified with a French technical grade rather than a UK one.
So it doesn't matter how well protected it is, a route with F7c+ climbing should be at least E6, possibly E7.
> I don't understand E-grades fully. Don't feel like using the 8a.nu conversion chart because...Jens.
So, my understanding...
The Adjectival and the Technical grade aren't completely independent. A 'typical' E1 is 5b, and a 'typical' E2 is 5c. A bit of leeway is allowed in either direction for safe/cruxy or bold routes. The problem is that at the technical grades you're talking about, the UK equivalent starts to break down ( this is visible in the Rockfax grade conversion table as the technical scope of the grades gets wider as the adjectival grade increases ), which is why the hardest trad climbs are often specified with a French technical grade rather than a UK one.
So it doesn't matter how well protected it is, a route with F7c+ climbing should be at least E6, possibly E7.
Post edited at 21:23
7
1
In reply to planetmarshall:
It didn't really break down did it?! Bashers Variation on Strawberries perhaps E7 6c/7c+
It didn't really break down did it?! Bashers Variation on Strawberries perhaps E7 6c/7c+
1
2
In reply to andy farnell:
Pretty sustained, not super cruxy. The difficulty is pretty consistent. And the gear is so easy. Pull a SLCD, slam it in, move along. Brainless and bomber.
Pretty sustained, not super cruxy. The difficulty is pretty consistent. And the gear is so easy. Pull a SLCD, slam it in, move along. Brainless and bomber.
In reply to shouldbebetter:
Try asking Tom Randall or Pete Whittaker, they would know all about crack grading.
To my mind though, a sustained 7c+ is going to be harder than a sustained E6 (which is more like 7b - 7b+, may be 7c) but probably won't have any 6c moves, so E7 6b?
Try asking Tom Randall or Pete Whittaker, they would know all about crack grading.
To my mind though, a sustained 7c+ is going to be harder than a sustained E6 (which is more like 7b - 7b+, may be 7c) but probably won't have any 6c moves, so E7 6b?
Post edited at 23:40
2
In reply to Misha:
I really wondered about crack grading after watching the video of that 5.14 horror-show Century Crack. That comes in at what E9/10 I assume...
Obviously incredibly technical and difficult off-width climbing... But essentially with a protection level akin to that of a HS, i.e. you are not going to fall far and every single move can essentially be protected. Assuming you have a massive rack. Compare that to some lower grade E6's with monster run outs, where death or very serious injury is very likely and it makes the whole grading system, in that regard, seem somewhat defunct (to someone like me who has absolutely no idea about high end grades).
> Try asking Tom Randall or Pete Whittaker, they would know all about crack grading.
I really wondered about crack grading after watching the video of that 5.14 horror-show Century Crack. That comes in at what E9/10 I assume...
Obviously incredibly technical and difficult off-width climbing... But essentially with a protection level akin to that of a HS, i.e. you are not going to fall far and every single move can essentially be protected. Assuming you have a massive rack. Compare that to some lower grade E6's with monster run outs, where death or very serious injury is very likely and it makes the whole grading system, in that regard, seem somewhat defunct (to someone like me who has absolutely no idea about high end grades).
2
12
In reply to GarethSL:
Nah. You just don't understand the grading system. A certain adjectival grade isn't just for the seriousness of a route.
Nah. You just don't understand the grading system. A certain adjectival grade isn't just for the seriousness of a route.
7
In reply to GarethSL:
Not defunct. A grading system for trad is trying to describe an infinitely variable combination of factors. It's just an indicator, and if in doubt, read the route description. In combination that works pretty well really.
Not defunct. A grading system for trad is trying to describe an infinitely variable combination of factors. It's just an indicator, and if in doubt, read the route description. In combination that works pretty well really.
4
In reply to GarethSL:
On the video I saw they were facing almost certain ground-fall for most of the route.
> essentially with a protection level akin to that of a HS
On the video I saw they were facing almost certain ground-fall for most of the route.
2
In reply to Simon Caldwell:
Their choice of protection is their style. They climbed the whole line on pre-placed gear for effectiveness, so technically they could have laced the entire line if they wanted. I assume however that for most of it staying in place requires both hands... thus making clipping very difficult.
I genuinely don't know how flared the crack is or what the, gear on the line is like, or how the sandstone quality is. I was more interested in how, what can be a very well protected cracks, are graded adjectivally when they are also technically very difficult.
Their choice of protection is their style. They climbed the whole line on pre-placed gear for effectiveness, so technically they could have laced the entire line if they wanted. I assume however that for most of it staying in place requires both hands... thus making clipping very difficult.
I genuinely don't know how flared the crack is or what the, gear on the line is like, or how the sandstone quality is. I was more interested in how, what can be a very well protected cracks, are graded adjectivally when they are also technically very difficult.
1
5
In reply to GarethSL:
my understanding was that they climbed it twice, the second time to place the gear on lead. I think they did this to remove any questions about whether they had 'done it in good style'.
my understanding was that they climbed it twice, the second time to place the gear on lead. I think they did this to remove any questions about whether they had 'done it in good style'.
8
2
In reply to GarethSL:
and then reclimbed it placing gear on lead. Due to the weight of it they had to cut down drastically on the number of placements which meant groundfall would indeed have been the end result of a fall.
and then reclimbed it placing gear on lead. Due to the weight of it they had to cut down drastically on the number of placements which meant groundfall would indeed have been the end result of a fall.
In reply to shouldbebetter: E for effort
The adjectival grade is the difficulty of the climb, a combination of difficulty, strenuosity, risk and technicality of the climb. Comapred to many alternatives the British grading system is a wonderful thing
The adjectival grade is the difficulty of the climb, a combination of difficulty, strenuosity, risk and technicality of the climb. Comapred to many alternatives the British grading system is a wonderful thing
5
In reply to shouldbebetter:
I say about E6 6c as per a few others.
Hell's Wall in borrowdale is 7c+ and is protected by loads of pegs (old aid route) so is practically a sport route with little danger. It also gets E6 6c.
My understanding of it all is that as the tech grade gets harder the E grade goes up along side it. If the route is safe or bold then the E grade will start diverge accordingly. It could just as easily be described with a french sport grade and a Bold / Safe note next to it.
I say about E6 6c as per a few others.
Hell's Wall in borrowdale is 7c+ and is protected by loads of pegs (old aid route) so is practically a sport route with little danger. It also gets E6 6c.
My understanding of it all is that as the tech grade gets harder the E grade goes up along side it. If the route is safe or bold then the E grade will start diverge accordingly. It could just as easily be described with a french sport grade and a Bold / Safe note next to it.
1
In reply to shouldbebetter:
7c+ was always considered the absolute upper limit for E6, so back in the days when sport routes were still listed with E grades routes of 7c+ would routinely be given E6 and those of 8a would be given E7.
If placing the cams is genuinely as easy as clipping bolts and they are genuinely as reliable then the route should get E6, but if it's even slightly awkward at times or any of the cams are less than bomber when placed in a hurry then E7 will probably be more appropriate. The tech grade of a 7c+ is likely to be either 6b or 6c depending on how long and how cruxy it is.
7c+ was always considered the absolute upper limit for E6, so back in the days when sport routes were still listed with E grades routes of 7c+ would routinely be given E6 and those of 8a would be given E7.
If placing the cams is genuinely as easy as clipping bolts and they are genuinely as reliable then the route should get E6, but if it's even slightly awkward at times or any of the cams are less than bomber when placed in a hurry then E7 will probably be more appropriate. The tech grade of a 7c+ is likely to be either 6b or 6c depending on how long and how cruxy it is.
6
In reply to GarethSL:
I've done plenty HS routes with bugger all gear on them!
> But essentially with a protection level akin to that of a HS, i.e. you are not going to fall far and every single move can essentially be protected.
I've done plenty HS routes with bugger all gear on them!
5
In reply to Michael Gordon: add +1 to those who still (amazingly) just don't get the UK grading system
4
In reply to Michael Hood:
Aye - that said there is a tendency for easier routes to have more gear but clearly there are routes at most rock climbing grades that are very poorly protected. I had to add one of my climbing partners to that list also and he leads E2. He claimed VS/HVS always has good gear and E grade what makes the risk.
Aye - that said there is a tendency for easier routes to have more gear but clearly there are routes at most rock climbing grades that are very poorly protected. I had to add one of my climbing partners to that list also and he leads E2. He claimed VS/HVS always has good gear and E grade what makes the risk.
Post edited at 17:48
In reply to john arran:
I agree, sounds like it would be either an old school E6 waiting to be upgraded, or a more sensible E7.
I agree, sounds like it would be either an old school E6 waiting to be upgraded, or a more sensible E7.
1
In reply to GarethSL:
High E grade doesn't necessarily mean dangerous. Also, I seem to recall that Century Crack wasn't that safe on the starting section as it wasn't far off the deck and they had to space out the cams to make it practical. Yes, you can place lots of gear in a crack but that makes it more physical, the cams get in the way and there are only so many cams you can physically carry, especially large ones.
High E grade doesn't necessarily mean dangerous. Also, I seem to recall that Century Crack wasn't that safe on the starting section as it wasn't far off the deck and they had to space out the cams to make it practical. Yes, you can place lots of gear in a crack but that makes it more physical, the cams get in the way and there are only so many cams you can physically carry, especially large ones.
2
In reply to GarethSL:
In other words, there's a certain level of difficulty which will make a route an E1, E5 or E10 even if the gear is very good.
In other words, there's a certain level of difficulty which will make a route an E1, E5 or E10 even if the gear is very good.
1
In reply to Frank the Husky:
http://gripped.com/news/canadian-ben-haley-sends-off-width-roof-trench-warf...
Sent by my friend Ben.
http://gripped.com/news/canadian-ben-haley-sends-off-width-roof-trench-warf...
Sent by my friend Ben.
In reply to Michael Gordon:
No gear on a ladder either
> I've done plenty HS routes with bugger all gear on them!
No gear on a ladder either
Post edited at 08:15
1
In reply to ianstevens: E grade of a ladder is related to the angle it's leant against the wall. But the relationship isn't as obvious as you'd think. For arguments sake lets call the optimal leaning angle E0 (whatever that angle is). As the angle is made steeper the ladder becomes both technically harder and more precarious and hence the E grade goes up. Current limit for ladders is totally vertical and unsupported at about E7.
However as the angle is decreased from the optimum, the risk goes up as too large an angle can lead to a ladder slipping away from the wall, but once the angle becomes very large, you're always near the ground so the risk goes down again even though the ladder is almost certain to slip. Max easy angle grade is about E3.
Now obviously, these grades are for totally unsupported ladders on a flat concrete floor. As soon as any of several "cheats" are used the grade is affected:
- Grass, earth, natural floor
- Someone holding the ladder - you might as well step on their shoulders
- Bricks stopping the base of the ladder moving, etc.
- Angled floor - although it is possible to have an away angle that increases the grade
Of course this is all for a "standard" length ladder that will allow people to comfortably reach gutters on the upstairs. Recently, there is a trend for people who don't like traditional ladders to only use step-ladders. These are much shorter and safer although they still allow the technical movement up ladders. The grading system detailed above is totally inappropriate for this new-fangled spinoff although some claim that step-ladders can be used for training.
Of course there are also a few people who climb up multi-floor long ladders, and no doubt there are many variants of the ladder climbing game that I'm not yet aware of.
Happy ladder climbing.
However as the angle is decreased from the optimum, the risk goes up as too large an angle can lead to a ladder slipping away from the wall, but once the angle becomes very large, you're always near the ground so the risk goes down again even though the ladder is almost certain to slip. Max easy angle grade is about E3.
Now obviously, these grades are for totally unsupported ladders on a flat concrete floor. As soon as any of several "cheats" are used the grade is affected:
- Grass, earth, natural floor
- Someone holding the ladder - you might as well step on their shoulders
- Bricks stopping the base of the ladder moving, etc.
- Angled floor - although it is possible to have an away angle that increases the grade
Of course this is all for a "standard" length ladder that will allow people to comfortably reach gutters on the upstairs. Recently, there is a trend for people who don't like traditional ladders to only use step-ladders. These are much shorter and safer although they still allow the technical movement up ladders. The grading system detailed above is totally inappropriate for this new-fangled spinoff although some claim that step-ladders can be used for training.
Of course there are also a few people who climb up multi-floor long ladders, and no doubt there are many variants of the ladder climbing game that I'm not yet aware of.
Happy ladder climbing.
6
In reply to Michael Hood:
A pretty thorough précis of the current thinking on ladder route grading. It should be noted however that sling threads are pretty abundant on ladder routes, thus reducing all grades to a maximum of HS
A pretty thorough précis of the current thinking on ladder route grading. It should be noted however that sling threads are pretty abundant on ladder routes, thus reducing all grades to a maximum of HS
1
In reply to Michael Hood:
What about one of those multi-section ladders which is just a tad short and as such is set up with minimal overlap between the sections resulting in extra length but maximal flex? Could that, vertical and unsupported on a polished, tiled floor (the kind you can skid across in socks) merit E8?
> E grade of a ladder is related to the angle it's leant against the wall. But the relationship isn't as obvious as you'd think. For arguments sake lets call the optimal leaning angle E0 (whatever that angle is). As the angle is made steeper the ladder becomes both technically harder and more precarious and hence the E grade goes up. Current limit for ladders is totally vertical and unsupported at about E7.
> However as the angle is decreased from the optimum, the risk goes up as too large an angle can lead to a ladder slipping away from the wall, but once the angle becomes very large, you're always near the ground so the risk goes down again even though the ladder is almost certain to slip. Max easy angle grade is about E3.
> Now obviously, these grades are for totally unsupported ladders on a flat concrete floor. As soon as any of several "cheats" are used the grade is affected:
> - Grass, earth, natural floor
> - Someone holding the ladder - you might as well step on their shoulders
> - Bricks stopping the base of the ladder moving, etc.
> - Angled floor - although it is possible to have an away angle that increases the grade
> Of course this is all for a "standard" length ladder that will allow people to comfortably reach gutters on the upstairs. Recently, there is a trend for people who don't like traditional ladders to only use step-ladders. These are much shorter and safer although they still allow the technical movement up ladders. The grading system detailed above is totally inappropriate for this new-fangled spinoff although some claim that step-ladders can be used for training.
> Of course there are also a few people who climb up multi-floor long ladders, and no doubt there are many variants of the ladder climbing game that I'm not yet aware of.
> Happy ladder climbing.
What about one of those multi-section ladders which is just a tad short and as such is set up with minimal overlap between the sections resulting in extra length but maximal flex? Could that, vertical and unsupported on a polished, tiled floor (the kind you can skid across in socks) merit E8?
In reply to ianstevens: Minimal overlap is where the cutting edge is with ladder climbing so maybe E8 has been done now.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...