UKC

On a recent trip to Symonds Yat, Wye Valley. After completing Golden fleece and then The Druid, me my partner abseiled back down The Druid to move onto Exchange. While setting up the abseil, ar group of 4 (We'll call them group A) arrived at the top with the intention of setting up a top rope for Golden Fleece before abseiling down.

While sorting our ropes, a group of 4 (Group B) arrived at the bottom of Golden Fleece intending to lead it and The Druid simultaneously between the 4 of them. I pointed out that there was a group about to abseil and then top rope the Fleece and the response I got was "I don't think so, we're here first"
I presume he meant at the bottom, ready to climb first, as I'd already said the other group were already at the top.

5 mins on and the first guy from group A dropped in and one of the guys from B immediately jumped on him with "Are you planning on climbing Golden Fleece?"
When his response was yes, he was met with "I don't think so, we (B) were here first, so you'll have to wait"
The dude (A) very graciously responded saying it was fine, they'd just do The Druid instead.
"No, we're doing that too"
*Sigh*

In the end, group A moved their rope out of the way, tying it to a tree so the Fleece was clear and waited so group B could lead it.

I just cracked on with my own climbing thinking it was none of my business, but noting the difference between one very gracious group, willing to move their already set up ropes out of the way for the other quite rude group unwilling to compromise or even consider moving on and coming back later.

Excuse me droning on, I'd just be interested in people's opinion on the situation.
Does it come down to first come first serve? Whether that be at the top or bottom of the climb.
Leading over top roping? Even when the top rope is already set up?
Were they rude, or right?

In reply to t_smallbone:


Lately on UKC there have been a fair number of rants initially gaining support from the UKC community, until someone comes along to give the other side of the story. I'm not going to pass judgement on anyone's behaviour I haven't witnessed first hand without an opposing viewpoint.

In reply to t_smallbone:

If you weren't there group B would have been racking up only to find group A dropping a top-rope down the crag.
I really don't think people should be top-roping 3 star routes on busy summer weekends, but if they do they should expect to move out the way when a team comes along to lead it (which is pretty much exactly what happened).

I was climbing in Dovedale yesterday and there was two other teams on the same buttress as us (Not sure what it's called but it has Ten Craters/ Simeon on it). All the lines are very close to each other and even share the same first pitch but we all managed to climb and ab right next to each other with no trouble.

In reply to t_smallbone:


You met some people in mild conflict. Some are better at resolving conflict than others.


First come first served is a reasonable starting point but sometimes a conversation needs to be had to fully resolve the situation.
jk

In reply to deacondeacon:

I'm of the same opinion. I think i just comes down to having a bit of grace and being somewhat polite about it.
If I was about to top rop and somebody politely spoke to me and said they wanted to lead that route, most of us would gladly move out the way, have a sandwich and wait.
But the second somebody rudely told me to move I'd immediately be uninterested in what that person wanted.

Everyone should try to be nice to one another...

The main problem with TR vs leads is groups hogging lines and areas for long times and antisocially preventing people from "proper climbing". What really gets my goat is huge groups on climbing experience days all wearing muddy trainers scuffing up and abseiling down decent lines - these I find are, perhaps, the least accommodating of all.

In this case it sounds like it was possible for both groups to share and given that group A got there first and there was two lines then it seems reasonable that (with the limited info) they should share so it sounds as if group B were ungracious and possibly quite rude.

Personally if I'm working with a group I always try to accommodate other climbers (and I think the onus is on the group to make it clear they are willing to share).

This usually works just fine but occasionally you regret it (few weeks ago giving a line to some miserable, grumpy, bastard who proceeded to fall, swing and dog a very easy route for hours - not that I'm bitter - but if you do want to queue jump please make sure you have a slight chance of actually climbing the line first please?).

In reply to t_smallbone: From my own experience, leading always takes precedence over top roping, so party A did the right thing. By the sounds of it, party B could have been al little more gracious, but we aren't in possession of all the facts, just your view of the incident.

Andy F

In reply to t_smallbone:


You were in the best position to judge whether or not they were rude and we could spend all day debating whether or not they were right.

My only observation would be that they were unimaginitive and inflexible if they couldn't find another route for one of their teams to climb whilst they waited for the other team to climb either of the 2 routes that they were so fixated upon.

In reply to t_smallbone:

When climbing at Elgol Skye my friends abbed into climb the severe route, abseil line going down the Severe, another team walked in or abseiled down a VS line, not sure which way, and despite the ab line being in place before the other team was at the bottom of the climb they insisted they were there first and should get precedence. This led to the most British argument ever, neither fully happy nor fully angry with a lot of under the breath muttering. All the while I awkwardly stood in the middle of group who I didn't know belaying my friend while they muttered about how stupid my friends were. To clarify both teams planned to lead the climb, but I do like the debate of when have you reached the climb when your at the top or bottom. Obviously majority of the time their is extenuating circumstances.

In reply to t_smallbone:


Read the recent thread on music at the crag

In reply to andy farnell:


There certainly seem to be plenty on UKC that quote this line, but I don't think I've ever observed anyone in real life that has been belligerent enough to try and enforce it.

In reply to t_smallbone:

This thread reads too much like a school exam question with Group A and Group B, I was expecting the question to be "How high was the route" or something like that?........

In reply to timjones:


I've seen it happen many times at many crags. It's one of the unwritten rules of climbing.

Andy F

In reply to andy farnell:

I agree.
When I've turned up at crags with multiple top ropes and politely asked the group leader if I can lead they always give way without a murmur. It does seem an unwritten rule.

In reply to Babika:



That is rather different from a scenario where a small team of friends is top-roping.

When I'm leading Scout groups at the crag I always offer to pull our ropes if a lead team turns up, I don't think I've ever had anyone accept. All the lead climbers that I have encountered in this situation have been quite happy to climb something else whilst we finish our session.

In reply to andy farnell:


It may apply at the top end where people may be spending hoursworking hard routes on top rope.

I would challenge the theory that your "rule" extends as far down the grades as HS where just about anyone should be able to complete the route and move on in very short order.

I'd certainly feel like a real arsehole if I pushed a small team off Golden Fleece due to a misplaced sense of superiority as someone who could lead Severe

In reply to timjones:

I guess that's because you've been friendly to start with? I find it fairly often seems to happen that a friendly approach to something gets the same in return.

In reply to Babika:

If I turned up to do a route and found someone was putting a top rope on it I really hope I wouldn't be so presumptuous to assume I had rights because I was leading. Sure, I'd be bit miffed, but no more so than if it had been another team racking up at the bottom about to lead the route.

In reply to deacondeacon:

I don't get this whole leading beats top-roping attitude. What if they've had an accident and are getting back into climbing? What if they're terrified of leading but want to do that route? What if they just don't want to lead?

I can understand if there is a team on a route all day then they should make way for others. But if they set a top rope up to each have a go then, in my opinion, it's fair game. If set up efficiently, they might even be quicker than a lead climbing pair who need to sort their gear out, stop and place things etc etc.

Why is your experience more important than theirs? If it's a route that you MUST, for whatever reason, climb then either get there early before the masses descend, ask if you can have a lead between their attempts or wait for your bloody turn.

In reply to Trangia:


25m

In reply to t_smallbone:

As someone who has climbed a fair bit at the Yat it is disappointing to see a quality (ish) trade route like Golden Fleece being top roped, as if the polish isn't bad enough. Before anyone calls me out for being a hypocrite, I just got back from toprope soloing some low E routes, but is that really necessary on a Hard Severe? :

In reply to jsmcfarland:

You're making the assumption that the group in question were damaging the route more than a leader would. Whilst it's possible, it's not a definite. Depending on competency, they might wizz up it and cause less damage than a leader.

Also regarding the grade, people can still be scared and want to try it out in safety. I've climbed sport 7c but never above VS trad (not that I've trad climbed for years). If I went for an E1 lead, I'd want to give it a top rope first as I've experienced how hard you can hit the floor after falling and ripping gear (whilst climbing well within O/S levels).

Is that wrong? Should others be able to veto my attempt as they want to lead the route?

The above, to me, means that someone who climbs less may also want to top rope something also, even if others consider it easy. Especially if moving up a grade or onto a new rock type, perhaps?

In reply to t_smallbone:

I think it's something to do with the Yat. It does seem to be overrun with idiots. I've only been there once admittedly, but I saw more clueless behaviour there in one day than the rest of my climbing career put together.
I think it was around Golden Fleece that I asked a second what on earth her partner was doing up there, with a tangled mass of rope spread across several routes. I couldn't tell if he was abseiling, setting up a top rope, or having an epic on lead. She had no idea and couldn't get a response from him, so we went off and did something else.

In reply to t_smallbone:

From Rockfax Golden Fleece (HS 4b)

Climb the obvious, prominent corner.
PLEASE DO NOT ABSEIL OR TOP ROPE THIS ROUTE unless you can do it it cleanly or are redpointing it as you are trashing it for people who want to climb it properly.

So apart from the fact they probably didn't know this, surely it's obvious that they should give way to someone leading and ready to climb?

It all sounds very girlie when you start tone-policing, supposedly one group rude the other gracious, because it seems you're more concerned about the tone than what was said or it's reason for being said.

It's because you're looking to see some pretty social tea dance done, rather than understanding the situation.

In reply to winhill:

Nowhere in this thread (unless I have missed it) does it say they were not capable of climbing it clean, or that they weren't redpointing it.

So it is NOT obvious that they should give way to someone else. There is too much of a general assumption that people top-roping are inferior climbers and will trash a route.

Various comments on this thread make me want to get a classic ticklist for Stanage and have an enjoyable day top-roping on the next bank holiday

In reply to t_smallbone:

The way I see it (assuming you both got there at the same time) if someone's abbing after setting up a TR it's much harder for them to go back up to remove it and find another route. If you're all racked up and ready to go you could just move down a route and wait for them to finish.

Even if I did get there slightly earlier, if the person made an honest mistake and had already set up an anchor, flaked the rope, and was abbing down - I don't think I would be bloody minded enough to demand they let me climb first.

In reply to James Malloch:

>Andy Farnell is quite right. The accepted etiquette in climbing is that top ropers should give way to someone wanting to lead a route. Provided, of course, that everything is friendly and amiable ie 'Excuse me, mate, would you mind if I lead that route when you've finished?' But then the top ropers should give way first - if they see a group approaching they should ask if they want to lead it. This is what I would do. I know these social skills seem a bit complex at first but if you stick at it you should get it right.

In reply to winhill:

I guess the point is nobody owns the routes, so you can't really stop people top roping it even if you don't like it.

Now I'd agree if you are top roping and someone else wants to climb the route (be that lead or top rope) then you shouldn't hog the route, one climb per person in the party and then move on seems fair.

In reply to Pekkie:


They're not complex, I just disagree with them. It all boils down to the situation:

Group who are there for the day having repeated tries - let people lead it between your attempts.

People (note, not a large group) who have just set up a top-rope to try or practice a route - others can wait. The leaders have nothing invested in that route (other than desire) and can just go onto something else. Not so easily done with a top-rope - why should they have to lose time from their day to satisfy another person's desire?

In reply to t_smallbone:

Leading always over top roping. Nothing worse than top ropes left up for hours blocking routes

In reply to jsmcfarland:


Makes no difference. one persons HS is another persons E3. Don't really think the grade should dictate the ethics. These situations like anything else in life should be settled with a polite conversation.

In reply to winhill:




I think they lost all credibility when they suggested redpointing a severe

In reply to t_smallbone:
As someone who only top ropes (not climbing that long, less than a year, no leading partner), if that happened to me, I'd initially move out of the way IF the group were polite about it.

If they were as bold / rude as this other group were, I'd argue my point that in fact - I was there first, hence set up at the top and ready to climb. Where it would go from there though I've no idea.....although maybe I'm just saying that as I'm sat behind a keyboard and not faced with it. Perhaps I'd actually want to show my son and daughter that I'm a better person and will resolve conflict with peace?

Perhaps there's some psychology of top roping being inferior to leading and there's a hierarchy at play here? Shame really. I have no choice but to TR, so I'll always be classed as a second class climber?

On Saturday I was at Cheesewring, we set up a TR on Juliets balcony, and some leaders wanted to climb it. A 10 second conversation led to us climbing it first (2 ascents), then us dismantling the set up so the others could do it. No animosity, very polite.....it's pretty basic decent human stuff that really.

In reply to t_smallbone:

Hi, I think I might have been part of "group B" (at the bottom of the crag).

The "incident" was some weeks (months?) ago, so I won't pretend to remember details of what was said, but I'll give my perspective anyway...

From our point of view, we thought we were there first, as we arrived at an empty climb and racked up. It wasn't possible to see the party creating a toprope/abseil. You may have pointed this out to us, so maybe they did have priority - although they did take a while to even drop their ropes down.

Once they had got down, we were somewhat on edge, having had one or two rocks knocked down around us by the abseilers, so maybe our tone was a bit less gracious than it might have been? Personally, I think it's a bit irresponsible to abseil over a busy crag if you can't do so without dropping rocks, when there's a good descent route nearby, but again maybe it was our fault for standing in the way.

In any case, if we're both thinking of the same "incident", then it was far from hostile - we chatted with both yourselves and the other group during the day, and no-one seemed to go off in a huff. I'm sorry to yourselves and Group A if we've caused offence with our crag etiquette, and I hope it hasn't given you too many sleepless nights

Love and hugs

PS: I don't believe in prioritising leading over top-roping, no snobbery involved!

In reply to jalien:

Pretty cool response in my opinion!

In reply to t_smallbone:

Never been to the crag but in my book a lead attempt trumps a top rope climb any day.

I've been known to do a fair bit on top rope, either because I'm working something hard or just fancy something Mid E grade without any hassle. If at any point someone else turned up wanted to lead it I'd happy volunteer to move or pull my rope while they get on with it, and have done on a few occasions in the past, the leading party shouldn't really even need to ask, but most out of politeness will at least let you finish your accent before lowing off and moving out of the way.

End of the day, if you're top roping you're just having a play on it really, if someone's ready for the lead then you need to step aside and let them do it.

In reply to t_smallbone:
i notice UKC logbook is shouting not to toprope the Fleece
rude or right?

In reply to t_smallbone:

Oh climbers and their 'unwritten rules'. Playing by an arbitrary set of standards and then getting arsey when others don't. Suggesting that one method of enjoyment supersedes another, its all rather futile, no?

"i came to play here, and you're doing it differently to me and I don't like it and you must stop immediately or i will get very angry"

In reply to Einriba:



Of course you have a choice. When I started, there were less than 30 active climbers in the entire country and I didn't know any of them. No guidebooks. No gear shops. No climbing mags. No internet. It didn't stop me - and, with respect, I never top-roped.

It's immeasurably easier now. Join a club. Climb with folk from here. Don't deprive yourself of the joy of leading.

Mick

In reply to jalien:

I don't think it was you. It was way more recent than you're describing and myself and my partner quickly moved off to climb elsewhere. No much friendly chatting was done.
Maybe it's a common problem as the Fleece is a popular route with an easy top rope setup and abseil (even though you're not meant to)

Good to see that most people seem to agree that a friendly chat usually solves any priority disputes.

In reply to Mick Ward:


jeez Mick I knew you were old, but really?

In reply to Einriba:

There is a hierarchy of style in making ascents - and this is all about what your peers find acceptable and what they rate and respect as a good effort - there are no written rules. At the top of the hierarchy (for trad) is a solo on sight. Next a solo after top rope/shunt practice. Next a lead on sight in good style without weighting any gear (obviously a protectionless lead can be the same as a solo). Next is a clean lead after practice. I would then put a top roped ascent with a foot of slack. And then a dogged lead hanging on gear. And bottom a top roped ascent where you are hauled up with feet bicycling away. If you don't believe me go to any BMC area meeting, stand up and argue to the contrary. And, regardless of rules, you will generally find that an on sight lead (whatever the grade - if you are starting out or your confidence is low start on the easy routes) is a lot more satisfying than a top roped ascent.

In reply to paul_in_cumbria:

He started off in Ireland. Never mind only 30 active climbers there were only about 30 active people in the country.

In reply to Big_T:

Judging by "likes/dislikes" as well as some of the comments, I'm absolutely astonished at the amount of support for top roping (let alone for it ever getting equal priority to leading) in this thread. What is the world coming to? In the unlikely event that I was ever top roping a route I would, without hesitation, always give way to anyone wanting to lead it and I would hope anyone else would do likewise.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I absolutely astonished that people would stop other people enjoying themselves because they believe that they have the moral high ground or more rights than another person.

It's a bit of rock. It'll be there tomorrow. Climb something else.

I can imagine the conversation:

Leaders: Hey, can I climb this please, I'm leading it.

Top ropers: We're both just going to nip up it, then it's all yours.

Leaders: I'm sorry, you may have misheard, We're *leading* it. Do you mind if I set off?

Top ropers: Sorry, I don't get your point. We've just set this up and we'll be done shortly, then it's all yours.

Leaders (getting upset): My point is we're leading it. It's the unwritten rule in climbing that we're more important than you, so you should move aside and let me lead it.

Top ropers: Unwritten rule?

Leaders (now angry): Yes! It's on UKC. You must make way for us.

Top ropers: Oh, f*** off.

In reply to Einriba:


The problem here is entirely with you, it's awful of you to try to pass it off to someone else, really crass.

You're a beginner and that status sits uneasy with you, so you claim that anyone who makes you feel like a beginner is dismissing you as second class.

If you did parachuting and some people jumped from 3,000 feet whilst you only ever jumped from 3 feet, would you resent people who dismissed you as a second class or wannabe parachutist?

At the moment, as a beginner, you simply lack the experience to offer a perspective on where you sit in the learning continuum.

In reply to Robert Durran:
Shock of all shocks! Mr Durran doesn't get why some people might be defending others right to enjoy something a different way to him?!
Also shock, Mr Durran seems to think there is a rigid unwritten system that everyone must adhere too otherwise he becomes aghast and his monocle falls off.

Jon Stewart will be over soon to shout at everyone and tell them they are wrong over and over and over again for daring to do and think a different way to him.

People enjoy different things. Nothing gives you priority over someone else. Get over yourself. Please.

In reply to mark_wellin:


Incorrect. There has been a flexible unwritten rule. I am surprised (and, I admit, a bit disappointed) that it is actually being flexed.

And I would never ask top ropers to give way unless they were hogging a route rather than just doing it once and moving on.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Fair enough. I'm glad it is being flexed and that people are enjoying themselves.

In reply to Pekkie:


I'm not sure I'd agree, it's easier to climb a route without gear (less physical effort).

In reply to springfall2008:


Well of course, I never thought of it like that before. You wouldn't have to carry all those heavy nuts and friends and slings and that. And you wouldn't have those darn ropes to lug around and coil. And get tangled. What a drag that is.

What's that? You might fall off and hurt, even kill, yourself? Holy shit!

In reply to timjones:


It very much should apply at any level. Leading a route is climbing it. Top roping is practicing the route. Leading should take precedence as it is superior in every way. It is a valid ascent. A top rope isn't.


See my point above


I wouldn't. I'd think that my ascent was more valid, because it is more valid

Andy F

In reply to andy farnell:

And I'd think you were a pompous arse, because you're saying things that a pompous arse would say.

In your made up game, with made up rules, leading wins. Great.

In other people's made up game, with different made up rules, that in no way have they asked you to stick your beak into, top roping is fun and an activity unto itself.

Common courtesy plays a part, if you're going to be to propping for a while, just let the leader nip in. But to suggest you're privilege to climb somehow supersedes another's?! Utter ridiculousness.
I hope you are forever cursed to find a party of ten top roping the route you want to do *wiggles voodoo fingers*

In reply to Robert Durran:

It simply shows the way things have changed. I totally agree with you but that's the way the cookie crumbles nowadays, viz the number of dislikes. There are however some better places than Symons Yat so leave it to the ethics of those who like to climb there and find some places where the issue is unlikely to arise.

In reply to mark_wellin:

What you've got to ask yourself is: 'What would Ken Wilson have said?'

In reply to Pekkie:

Who's Ken Wilson?

In reply to paul_in_cumbria:


Err... really. As Pete (Pekkie) notes, t'was Ireland. Not much athletic activity but, by the Lord Harry, those boys could drink.

But hey, it ain't over till it's over. My climbing partner, the immeasurably talented Marcus O' Leary (a whole two days older than me) did his first F8a a couple of weeks ago, at 63, even though his knee is so knackered he could barely hobble to the crag.

Have spent most of this evening with another mate, young whippersnapper, not quite 60, dangling over a void, inspecting two new craglets. Gary would get 20 new routes out of them (only joking!); we'll content ourselves with 10.

It ain't over till it's over. And it ain't over...yet!

Mick

In reply to Big_T:

You seem to not be considering the dropping of ropes on folk. I am assuming the ropes were not down the crag? Top roping vs leading aside, dropping ropes on top of people is without question bad form. So at some point dialogue would have to have taken place between parties to resolve this. It's not simply Party A were there first, clearly they were not ready to go, ropes were up. You can't throw ropes onto people, so they gave way to the teams wanting to lead. Had the ropes been down, then Party B would have needed to find sport elsewhere.

In reply to mark_wellin:


Easy there. It's possible to argue your point without the need to get so personal.

In reply to duchessofmalfi

(few weeks ago giving a line to some miserable, grumpy, bastard who proceeded to fall, swing and dog a very easy route for hours - not that I'm bitter - but if you do want to queue jump please make sure you have a slight chance of actually climbing the line first please?).

Maybe you could of loudly pointed out all the things he was doing badly to the group, turned it into a kind of how not to climb lesson.

In reply to planetmarshall:

Using their names?

In reply to mark_wellin:


http://community.thebmc.co.uk/Event.aspx?id=3732

In reply to Pekkie:

Thanks.

In reply to winhill:

Wow, very friendly response. I've been on this forum a few weeks, made a few comments, offered my opinion.....and get called crass, say that I'm the problem.

Lovely mate, just lovely. You've made some massive sweeping assumptions in your post.

FYI (not that I think you'll care), I don't think that being a beginner sits uneasy with me at all. I know exactly where I am in this hierarchy. When I read the original statement it was around how unfriendly climbing seems to have become, and that some feel they have an elevated status because they lead, rather than TR. And that the OP was questioning whether it could have been resolved better?

I gave an opinion based on my experiences of climbing so far. Experiences of TR'ing and talking to leaders (who thankfully haven't been as rude as you). I think my opinion is as valid as yours. I actually stated that I'd move away...and in fact this weekend DID move away after talking with leaders.

I honestly don't know how to reply to you? You've really angered me with your pathetic comments. Well done.

In reply to Mick Ward:

Yep fair point, in that respect there is a choice.
The issue at the moment is we're climbing as a family (wife + 2 kids who are under 10). They all love it. The kids particularly love it.

I can imagine the conversation with the wife and kids if I start asking to go leading without them all! It'd be as an aggressive response (or more so) than some of the replies in this forum (not yours!).

I'll check what's in the area and see if I'll be accepted in a club seeing as how I'm of a lower class than everyone else it would appear (comment not aimed at you Mick).

In reply to Einriba:


Have a search of winhill's posts in general and you may understand that you're not necessarily the problem.

In reply to Pekkie:


That actually provoked an involuntary shudder!!

In reply to Einriba:


Many here don't have to imagine this type of conversation...

In reply to Einriba:

If you're climbing as a family - and everyone's loving it - you're doing something massively right. Maybe you're doing the most important thing massively right.

For me, by far the worst thing about climbing, is the selfishness/obsessiveness which runs like a virus among so many climbers. I can understand it when people are young but sadly it's not confined to the young. I find it a pain on the crag and, off the crag, it wrecks relationships. And, most of the time, with some juggling of time, responsibilities, logistics - and some tolerance - there's just no need for it.

So climbing together as a family - great!!!

I just think that, while top-roping is fun, with leading (especially on trad, doesn't matter if it's a Diff), the game changes. And it's a much more subtle, deeper, ultimately richer game. It's also - on trad - a much more dangerous game. By far the best way to learn is from someone who is very skilled and entirely willing to pass on that skill. And - despite my comments above about mindless selfishness - there are such people. Of course there are also self-styled 'experts' who are dangerous knobheads (and yep, some are qualified climbing instructors!) so you need to be super-careful in the beginning. The golden rule is that if you have a bad feeling about such a person, bail. If you have a bad feeling about something you're supposed to do, don't sodding well do it - unless it really is a dire emergency.

I appreciate the above isn't 'selling' leading/trad to you. But I'd rather give you the downside. With a good club and some decent mentors, a lot (not all!) of the risk can be removed. Most of the risk is in the early days.

Conversely, if you're happy doing what you're doing, then fine.

The last - and most important - point. You're not of a lower class than everyone else - or anyone else. Grades are a benchmark, no more. Experience? Takes time - and no matter how much experience, you can never be complacent. We get better. Then life gets in the way. We get worse. Maybe we get a bit better, learn something else. Then...

With respect, climbing isn't about class. More than anything, it's about learning. About ourselves. Such learning can prove... interesting.

Whatever you do, good luck. Apart from clubs, you can use this place to meet up with people. I've never had a bad experience with anybody from on here. And that must mean something.

Mick

In reply to Mick Ward:

Thanks Mick! That's a really nice positive post. Very much appreciated.

I will get to lead outdoors, and go for trad, but at the moment, we're all happy TR'ing with the occasional indoor lead. I don't want to die, or kill my family rushing to get off TR's.

If you're ever down this way, and fancy taking me up as your second, I'd love to do it!

In reply to Einriba:

Would be honoured to. In the meantime, just keep doing what you're doing - and loving it.

All best wishes,

Mick

In reply to Mick Ward:

watched 'The Real Thing' vid last night, and half an hour later had a ferry crossing and a gite in Fontainebleau booked for the beginning of Sept. Haven't been there for more than 30 years. Mind I'm a sprightly 56 year old.

In reply to Robert Durran:


I wouldn't and I wouldn't expect anyone else to give way to me were I leading, in fact if they offered I'd encourage them to finish up doing what they were doing at their own pace. Choose the style you climb in and don't judge others for their choices. There's no logical anti toprope argument that doesn't boil down to reducing others' access to the thing we love.
jk

In reply to Big_T:

Just as a bit of context, in the late 70s and early 80s I wasn't alone in dogging and yo-yoing the bejeezus out of hard routes as part of the natural course of getting better/stronger, long periods of time and reasonably large groups. It was like RedPoint but without the Red and probably the Point. I'm not sure if i could then hold the moral high ground and claim the moral high ground of lead over TR. I wonder how many of us really have the stainless history to allow us to pontificate about top ropers or about what anyone does unless they're vandalising the place?

In reply to Einriba:


Don't worry, after a while you'll come to appreciate winhill's nasty little outbursts for what they are, a regular reminder to skim over the majority his posts.
jk

In reply to Pekkie:


Yes I fully agree, the point is it's easier to solo a route than lead it, it takes more skill to lead a route safely and cleanly than to totally ignore the risk and solo it. Now before I get flamed I'm not saying solo'ing isn't attractive, there have been times were I'd love to dispense with all that faff and just climb the route - but then I remember there are other people who perhaps would be impacted by my actions and they would think I was being selfish.

In reply to andy farnell:


Sounds like made up bullshit to me.

After all we all know the only true climbing is to solo the route in steel toe capped boots but while carrying ropes and placing gear - that's a real man's climbing (insert sarcasm here).

In reply to springfall2008:


Finally, someone who knows what they are talking about...

Andy F

In reply to Einriba:

I think Winhill's very proud of not top roping a climb (:-P @Winhill!). If you find a truly family friendly club please post about it.

Years ago I emailed my local clubs, explaining I was a single mum novice - granted not a very exciting prospect eh? But just having an email back would have at least left me encouraged, nowt! I emailed a popular climbing holiday venue, emailed to explain we're a job lot, I did get a reply saying they'd have a chat about it, last I heard.

Years later bumped into a member of red rope and that did seems genuinely inclusive but not very active climbing wise locally.

A local bunch of climbing buddies have since invited us, and made clear my daughter is welcome too, (she's actually very popular in her own right).

After just starting my own journey outdoors it's going to take a lot of patience and probably TRing to sort my own head out. I really hope I get as far as leading but at the moment that in itself is just a lofty ambition. Stupid thing is whilst trying to be a dutiful second I can take twice as long with more mistakes than on a TR - ie, from polish to wait time I'd be more considerate not less to wagon my very internal battle TRing than feeling too shy to actually do it. I'd give way to anyone rather than have them glare at me climb anyway!

Issues about polish on classics are valid, but neither here nor there in terms of who goes first - they relate SOLELY to whether a given climber is is doing the right thing to attempt a route, whether it's a second incapable with a leader who figured they could winch them up, a group, or someone after a ticklist short cut.

Last of all, I know some very lovely, elderly climbers where TRing is the only reasonable option - they are NOT low in the hierarchy, and any hierarchy that tries to place them low just needs changing.

In reply to James Malloch:


Curious, why?

I find that a lot of people do the same. Personally myself and my partners climb very similar grades on ungeared and bolted routes.

In reply to paul_in_cumbria:


Is that the one where Ben and Jerry end up at the disco? 'The Real Thing' - yeah!



Stochastic, heuristic, decision-making processes... but, then again, never mind all that crap. You're booked - you're going. That's what matters.



But you're 15 inside! And anyway, look at Jacky Godoffe - he's nearly 60 (and also probably 15 inside).



Hmm... when you get back into it... after all that structured training... you may be pleasantly surprised.

Say hello to the forest for me. A special place.

Mick

In reply to springfall2008:


Certainly some people solo stuff and pretty much ignore risk. One way or the other, they don't last long at it. Conversely there are lots of people who have soloed thousands of routes, often over decades. You'll tend to find that they're extremely mature about understanding themselves and assessing risk. Otherwise, they simply wouldn't have survived.

Mick

In reply to nutme:


I started climbing once a week indoors whilst at college and then joined the climbing club upon starting at Sheffield Uni. As such, everyone was into trad so I got the kit and started trad climbing on the grit. I went a fair bit outdoors but was always terribly slow on routes and got scared super easily (40 minutes on a 8m Severe at Rivelin was one of my records!!).

I moved to Leeds mid-way through uni to work for a year and climbed with some people indoors who were a lot better and I started to push myself more. Then I started going to Malham with some of them and got hooked on Sport.

Final year of uni (back in sheffield) we got a board in the house which meant getting a lot stronger and this boosted my sport and bouldering grades.

After a trip to El Chorro when I was climbing well I decided to try an E2 (to have a reasonable trad route to my name). I wasn't scared at all whilst climbing as it was about 6b and I could climb harder than that. Then my foot slipped on a rest and I decked out ripping loads of gear. No serious injuries but it highlighted that if wanted to do some trad then I'd need to go back to the basics and learn things from scratch.

But now that I was climbing harder things, I had zero motivation to go back to the easy trad routes and learn to place gear well as they never really interested me anyway. My thoughts were along the lines of, why climb something easy and be scared, when you can climb something hard covered in bolts.

And I've not done trad since. I'd love to do some but given the choice of going to Malham, or Almscliff I'd choose Malham every time. My plan is to make an effort to do at least some this summer (Almscliff after work) as it's a regret of mine that I've not done much.

Plus as I'm off to Chamonix in a week, it's a shame to be put off by the big multipitch routes as I don't fancy placing gear (despite knowing I can physically climb them). Maybe it's something to work on now I have injured a pulley again!


In summary - I neglected it. Got way stronger / better than I ever was. Then didn't want to climb easy things to get back into it. Plus it's a lot more faff than sport climbing!

In reply to paul_in_cumbria:

Ultimately, anybody using a guide book isn't following (to the letter) the maxim of climbing something in as good a style as the leader or better, which to my mind means that nobody who uses one really has a leg to stand on when it comes to being critical of top roping.

If the style of ascent is very important, folk should stop buying and using guide books.

It's a good way of having an adventure, my most fun route was without a guidebook...

In reply to Mick Ward:



I've resigned myself to take a complete spanking by Font, but we will see.
Last time I was there in a team of three (no room in the car taken up by mats then), sleeping under a tarpaulin suspended from my 1964 VW Beetle. (The previous owner had painted it a Sahara camouflage pattern, with a nod to the Afrika Corps. Very Irwin Rommel. I later repainted it back to proper VW colour. It certainly provoked 'discussion' at bars and boulangeries!). We'd spent a few weeks parked at the roadside by Snell's Field in Cham and were wending our weary way home and checked out Font for a couple of days which turned into two weeks.
One of my team observed that there were areas of Font almost as good as Burbage South boulders. High praise indeed!

In reply to flopsicle:

I can empathise with your position - many years ago I was desperate to climb outdoors but no one I knew (including my climber boyfriend) would take on a novice. Eventually someone took pity on me and set me up with an old timer and he treated me as his apprentice. I can't tell you how much I learnt from him over the years. He was a good friend to me, even if most people who saw us thought he was my dad.

My best moment was leading the now ex-boyfriend up a climb that he couldn't follow.
I'm really grateful to my mentor for taking the time to teach me and being patient although I paid him back in sandwiches, pints and some younger company. Now he has health problems and I have children so we don't see each other much but this thread has triggered me to get in touch with him again.

In reply to jkarran:

But there is an accepted hierarchy to styles of ascent and leading is above top roping (that is why routes only appear in guidebooks once they have been led and the first person to lead them gets to name them) and you havn't "done" a route unless you have led it. People can get psyched, fit and ready, and travel long distances to lead particular routes and windows of opportunity can sometimes be small - that is why I think it is good manners (and yes, gracious) for anyone top roping to offer to give way to somebody who is leading. Now on the vast majority of occasions, there being no problem to wait an hour or so, the offer might be graciously declined but just sometimes it might allow someone to thankfully accept the offer and fulfill a dream.

And I'm not judging anyone for their choices.

In reply to Robert Durran:

It may be a widely accepted hierarchy, I may even have agreed with you about this as a younger man but I'm afraid don't anymore. Climbing is just climbing, how people choose to mitigate the risk is of little interest so long as they're enjoying it and doing minimal harm.
jk

In reply to jkarran:


Yes, I agree, but the fact is that people get psyched for big leads in a way that they don't for top roping - can you accept and respect that?

In reply to Robert Durran:

You've nailed it! I'm particularly liking your use of the terms 'good manners' and 'gracious'.

In reply to Robert Durran:
It's a shedload easier to empathise with someone just getting too nervous if they wait than a 'remove the rope, leader coming through' policy!

In reality the one on the top rope might be a tit like me but may also be an emphysemic climber who has worked their guts out to be top roping the same route.

A conversation about the need to climb quick and queue jump is surely just better than wanting others to just kow tow at the sound of cow bells? Earlier in the thread it was kind of coming across like that from the 'leaders higher ranking' responders.

In reply to flopsicle:


It's not about forcing anything on anyone. It's about good manners and being gracious. I'm not asking anyone to do anything I wouldn't happily do myself.

In reply to James Malloch:

Thanks for coming on here and exposing the ridiculous insular views held by the "I've been climbing longer, harder and better than you" brigade.

It's nice to see a reasonable argument in favour of decency.

I don't toprope because it takes (me) longer and I seem to have an unreasonable addiction to fear. I have complete respect for those who love climbing, or just want to give it a go and don't want to risk themselves while doing it.

In reply to Pekkie:

But by saying that you are implying that people that are top roping are rude and ungracious, that they have something to repent for by enjoying toproping and daring to be there before you. They aren't. They are just doing something different to you that they enjoy!
It comes down to you think that what you are doing is better than what they are doing. It's ok that you think that, just admit it.
You're wrong, your climbing is no better or no more important than anyone else's. And the only reason you might get upset that a top roper doesn't move is because of your expectation. Well, that's all your problem, not the other teams.

In reply to mark_wellin:

No he is not. Where has he (or myself) said anything which implies this?

In reply to Robert Durran:

"It's not about forcing anything on anyone. It's about good manners and being gracious. I'm not asking anyone to do anything I wouldn't happily do myself."

Does this not suggest that if you don't follow his standard you don't have good manners and aren't being gracious?

In reply to mark_wellin:

It is not rude to get there first. It is not rude or something to repent for by top roping. All we are arguing is that it is good manners to offer to give way to someone wanting to lead.

In reply to Robert Durran:
No it isn't. If somebody is climbing as a pair and they want to toprope the route then how is that going to make a difference to you? You're not superior simply because you're leading and to suggest so is rubbish. You're both there to climb.

I've seen loads of leaders piss about on the rock, take repeated fall, and take bloody ages to lead a route.

If people are hogging a route then fine. But you're not Billy Big Bollocks simply because you lead a climb.

In reply to Robert Durran:

ok fair enough. im saying its bad manners to assume that someone should do that.

In reply to Robert Durran:


No, it's good etiquette. Manners are common decency, whereas etiquette is constructed ritualism that you can choose to sign up to or not. Elbows off the table!

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:


OK, etiquette then.

In reply to Kid Spatula:


I explained in my post at 2027 yesterday.


Yes, whether leading or top roping.

In reply to Robert Durran:
No, you think you explained. That isn't a valid reason at all. The top roper may have also travelled miles to have a go at that route. It's no different.

In reply to Kid Spatula:


I did explain. The fact that you disagree does not mean I didn't.

In reply to Robert Durran:

but the fact that he does disagree with you makes him wrong though, yeah?

In reply to Robert Durran:



Who cares if the rope comes from above or below them, they're out in the world enjoying climbing.

In reply to mark_wellin:

Well I wouldn't be arguing a case that I thought was wrong would I? So yes, I think he is wrong: I believe that people can invest far more in leading a route than in top roping, so, as I have explained, it is good etiquette for top ropers to offer to give way to people leading. It's got nothing to do with who is having more fun. In fact it's quite possible that the top ropers are having more fun, but there's more to climbing than fun.

In reply to Robert Durran:

is there? surely any reason you climb is for fun, once you think about it. unless you are a professional, all you ever get out of it is fun.

you're wrong to assume that its good etiquette to give way to a leader. its good etiquette to allow whoever it is to work in, no matter what you're doing. its decidedly bad etiquette to assume you have a priority for some reason.

In reply to Robert Durran:

you can think differently to someone but not assume their opinion is wrong, just that it is different. that's the reason i was arguing on the music thread, even though i personally don't like it. being able to think like that allows for a much greater scope of understanding of the world and avoid being upset by what others do, quite so much. you should try it before someone eats a ham sandwich at the crag while youre there, when its always been historically cheese sandwiches that have been eaten, and you blow a gasket.

I'm loathed to get involved in this again....but.....

Are there 2 arguments here?

1> Style of ascent hierarchy - TR vs lead etc
I can see why there would be more kudos given to someone that has lead a climb over a TR climb. I think that there is some recognition that there are hierarchy's here.

2> Right of use of a climb based on style
This is where I think there's a big disagreement. I think that there are people here saying that if there is a TR team on a climb, and a lead team comes up, the TR team should stop what they're doing and pack up - before they get asked / told to move on by the superior team.
......this is utter bollox.....

It's like saying a ford mondeo should get out of the way of a ferrari on the road - driving a ferrari is 'real' driving, so you peasants in inferior cars need to move out of the way before you're pushed. It's just ridiculous.

I think there are caveats - if the TR team are hogging the climb, then I don't think it's unreasonable to ask politely if the lead team can have a go....however I think this is just common courtesy? If a lead team were hogging a climb and another lead team want to climb it, how do you work out who climbs and who is right? And, oh my, imagine the insult if a TR team asked a lead team if they could be next on the climb.....JEEZ!!!!

In reply to Einriba:

pretty spot on mate

In reply to Einriba:
Basically everyone should just go climbing and enjoy themselves without hogging routes or being idiots. All this getting wound up for no reason whatsoever over what is essentially a hobby is totally pointless.

In reply to Big_T:

Not really keen on going climbing outdoors tbh. After reading this i want to even less. With my grumpy nature, i will undoubtably break one of these unwritten rules and end up with some angry climber going nuclear about my

Lack of style
Lack of lead
Lack of trad
Lack of ettiquette

Really, for someone new to the sport/activity it really is off putting how you guys cant just be reasonable with each other.

I climbed for a few hours indoors yesterday with my 2 kids and a pal. In that time i did a few climbs, fell off a few climbs, laughed, joked, was knackered, even helped out a rather pretty girl with some technique advice which she was very happy when she completed the climb. Not once did i hear anyone debating who's turn it was, who was a better climber and who was doing it properly.

If you cant get on with people with same/similar interests to yourself then you really have got problems.

In reply to mark_wellin:


Of course someone can have a different opinion, but a debate such as this wouldn't be happening unless people thought that their opinion had more validity than another's. Nothing wrong with civilised debate and, if somebody can convince me that I'm wrong in believing it's possible to have more invested in a big lead than anyone could ever have in top roping, then I'll change my opinion.

I also disagree with you about fun. Of course climbing can be fun, but to me the word fun implies a rather trivial sort of instant gratification, and, while there is nothing wrong with that and climbing provides me with loads of it, I believe that climbing can be so much more and is thus, for me, elevated above many other activities. Suppose I said that one of my great climbing dreams was to lead Darkinbad the Brightdayler (which it is!). Now I'm not going to be nipping down to Cornwall tomorrow to do this for fun. Realistically it is a two year plan involving much training (maybe including top roping), loads of mileage on rock, driving 500 miles to Cornwall when I feel ready, feeling nervous and slightly sick, getting the conditions right, getting psyched yet calm, and then, just possibly, if I don't blow it, having an experience which will leave me with a satisfying warm glow which will last long into my dotage. There may be some fun along the way, but it will be rather incidental.

In reply to Thelittlesthobo:

The internet isn't the crag, thankfully. Give it a go, you'll be pleasantly surprised.
jk

In reply to Thelittlesthobo:



Don't worry. The atmosphere at crags is overwhelmingly friendly, accommodating and egalitarian (one of the nice things about climbing is that beginners and superstars almost always mix and treat each others as equals). Yes, there is some commonly understood etiquette which has evolved to help everyone get along, but it is mostly common sense. Obviously there may be things which are disagreed on but I'm sure that if those disagreeing in this thread met at a crag, we'd get along much better than you'd imagine.

In reply to jkarran:

Thats a fair point. I just cant imagine my response to me travelling an hour or so to a crag with my kids, setting up a top rope and someone comes along and presumes they have priority because they are going to lead. I have just spent a weekend recently trying to learn how to setup topropes safely because we are 'plastic' climbers trying to get into the climbing world. This just strikes me as pretty poor form tbh.

In reply to Thelittlesthobo:


You can almost certainly avoid the problem by avoiding setting up a top rope on a classic route at a popular crag at a busy time. The guidebook or the UKC logbooks should help you in your choice.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Nice reply Robert and you are of course correct. People are usually much nicer face to face.

In reply to Thelittlesthobo: Unless your kids are little athletic stars, it's unlikely that a route you set up for them to top rope will be a "lifelong ambition" route as per Robert Durran's description above; so it's unlikely that any leaders would be greatly put out having to wait or come back later.

Personally, I don't think there's any reason for leading to take priority, although I do agree with RD that leading often requires more investment and is usually a more fulfilling experience (although that doesn't mean that everyone has to aspire to leading).

If you're a newbie, you may not realise that the main reason for the antipathy towards top-roping, is when it hogs routes. This has usually happened from organised groups/courses having top-ropes strewn all over the place rather than small family/friend groups.

In reply to Michael Hood:
The jist of this thread isnt lifelong ambitions though is it. Its more popular climbs which may or may not be within my kids abilities (9yr old daughter top ropes up to 7a indoors and leads upto 6a/b at the moment). I can understand someone like Robert being rather shocked at Darkinbad the Brightdayler ( No idea what the climb is about) and finding someone has setup a top rope. However, is this really the basis of this thread?

Thankfully the odd occassion i have managed to get out on real rock with my daughter, there hasnt been a soul about to upset.

In reply to Big_T:

I was once climbing in the slate quarries and was just about to flake the rope out at the bottom of Donald or Gadaffi Duck (can't quite remember which). An older chap named Joe Brown ambled over and asked which route we were doing as he was going to do Donald/Gadaffi, at which point my mate jumped in a little too quickly and defensively to make it very clear that we were about to get on the route.

If the ground could have opened up and swallowed me...

In reply to Pekkie:

See, I understand good manners, teach my kid good manners and part of that is a willingness to wait. If people want a tradition to outlive them then it comes down to the ability to explain it to those that don't currently sign up to it. Barring references to 'Psyche' (boy talk for nerves or lack of them!) nothing in this thread has come close to me wanting to raise my daughter to expect others to give way to her if she's leading, or to be supportive of fellow leaders expecting the same.

In terms of giving way myself - yes, always, to anyone regardless as I need time pressure about as much as a hole in the head! I'd also teach my kid to give way to people who are more likely to get upset about waiting, it'll never be her job to bring them up and giving way will have them out her road faster!

As a bit of a side issue. I can guarantee, it takes more for me to do many routes second or top rope than it would for most decent climbers to lead the same route. I wonder if the leaders who feel sure they're investing more on climbs well within their scope, have just never known what it's like to fight to just get outside, and then battle their own demons knowing full well that they are demons not 'real' big boys risk? I find it very easy to tell myself I have no right to be there, very easy indeed.

In reply to Thelittlesthobo: I think Robert was just using Darkinbad as an illustration of investment into a lead of a dream route. He's rather unlikely to find anyone toproping it as it's a 2 (or 3?) pitch E4 on the north Cornwall coast. It possibly could be toproped with something like a 70m rope but I suspect that would be more scary than leading it - can you imagine 200ft of rope above you on a vertical wall with no gear between you and the top and the sea crashing below

Also sounds like your daughter may be in the "star" category if she's getting up 7a at 9 years old. If she's that good then she's unlikely to be hogging popular routes on a top-rope so leaders can just wait until you're done.

In reply to Michael Hood:


Yes


Indeed, though I'd be pretty gutted if I did and couldn't get on it (and it's E5, often claimed as a strong candidate for the UK's best route).

In reply to Robert Durran:

Hi guys,

I was kinda jesting when i mentioned Roberts route in relation to top roping. Hadnt googled it but imagined it was quite a route if it was one he was aspiring to. However, in relation to this thread, there may be 'middling routes' that my daughter (Or anyone else) fancies a go at in future years which i have no choice but to setup a top rope. In ability terms she may be able to climb it better than others at the bottom planning to lead it. Is she any more less deserving of climbing the route.

TBH i would be you guys worst nightmare. I would spend 3 x as long as normal setting up the top rope, followed by the safety net and air bag at the bottom of the climb

I use her as reference but i can see how someone who has done some time on the plastic, got himself to a decent ability would then move to wanting to climb on rock and without the help of experienced climbers (Friends or paying an instructor) this is a natural progression.

In reply to Thelittlesthobo:
Most of us are pretty reasonable at the crag. I do a fair bit of soloing of easy grit routes. If someone's on a route I want to do then I wait or go onto another route. If they're still setting up then I'll ask if they mind me nipping infront or I'll go onto another route. If I ask then I'll check that me climbing it infront of them (hopefully easily and smoothly) won't spoil their experience on the route. Quite often people will ask if I want to go up first.

Unless a large group that has pre-setup several ropes is involved, I can't really imagine a situation on grit where who goes first would matter too much.

I suspect that any disputes are more likely on crags where the climbs are longer so generally take more time, and where there are fewer alternative routes that are easily accessed.