UKC

I saw a reference to top roping under a different thread concerning a possible accident at The Roaches. My question is why would anyone be top roping a perfectly good crag with sound rock suitable for placing leader protection?

I haven't been on grit for many years now. The only area where top roping historically appears to be acceptable is on SS due to the dubious nature of the rock and the risk that leader gear could damage it. So has this practice now spread to grit and other areas, and how prevalent is it?

Maybe I am a bit long in the tooth, but I always believed that top roping was a bit unethical. If someone in the party wasn't able to lead, then surely the group leader should be gaining experience as a second, and then start to gain leading experience on easy climbs. Surely with all the courses available and friendly climbers around who can lead, it shouldn't be too much of a problem for novices to start without resorting to top roping. As the other thread has suggested if a group of top roping novices are that inexperienced they could be at risk from poor rope work and belay techniques.

In reply to Anonymous:


Because they want to climb the route, and, for any number of reasons, don't want to lead it?


It is the accepted practice on Southern Sandstone since, as you know, the only other viable alternative is soloing. I don't think there's been any particular 'outbreak' of it here on grit - it has always been used both for beginners, and for practice. Of course, at the harder end it is regularly used - there, it is disguised by the phrase 'head-pointing'.

So I don't think there is a problem with the practice per se: the problem is groups or individuals who hog routes and/or areas of the crag in this way. That's to say: the problem is one of bad ettiquette.

In reply to Anonymous:

Because they don't want to lead, haven't got the gear, aren't feeling up to it or any one of a number of other reasons.

>The only area where top roping historically appears to be acceptable is on SS

Or places like Slate etc. where the rock is not always sound or protection unavailable.

You could argue that leading is more unethical with the rock damage associated with placing,removing and falling onto protection.

If people want to top rope things, let them. It's not anybodys place to tell them they are not worthy because they aren't leading.

In reply to Anonymous:
surely top roping is the least damaging to the rock? also the safest way for novice climbers to climb. also if they dont have the skills to set up a top rope or belay properly they deffinatly wont have the skills to lead trad routes?
I also think that when a novice first leads a route, placing protection, they should have a second belay on a top rope set up in to ensure safety.

In reply to General Zod:


I don't agree with that in the slightest. That defeats the whole point of leading. If a novice can place gear at ground level, they'll be fine on a suitably chosen climb.

In reply to General Zod:
>also if they dont have the skills to set up a top rope or belay properly they deffinatly wont have the skills to lead trad routes?

But, conversely, if they do have the skills to set up a top rope, then surely they have the skill to place runners, and therefore lead? I honestly don't think the placing gear argument is a particularly good one, unless you limit yourself to top roping climbs that have a couple of handy threads at the top.

Nick

In reply to Nick Lambert:
I see your point but if climbing in a group of mixed abilities some people may not have the skills necessary to lead and therefore be better of toproping to start with.

Basically i dont understand the ethical arguement against toproping? i think its an excelent way for beginers to get used to climbing, without damageing the rock. I also think its ok to top rope in order to be able to concentrate solely on climbing technique as you can climb routes that would be way beond your lead climbing ability.

i really think ethics should stop short of this sort of thing and only really be applied to anything that is damaging to the crag or surrounding areas. i think as long as the route is left the way it was found what does it matter how someone climbed it?

In reply to General Zod:

Hmmm. I suppose it doesn't impinge upon anyone else, and from that point of view you could say that it does't matter. And maybe top roping has a (very limited) place with beginners.

But it seems such a shame - I remember my first climb (it being not that long ago) and I seconded (and belayed under supervision) a leader in the traditional way. I remember thinking something along the lines of, "Wow, twenty minutes ago we were both at the bottom, and now we're both at the top. How cool is that?" Walking round to set up a top-rope takes that away, and kind of makes a hollow mockery of the whole exercise.

Anyway, this has all been rehashed a million times...

Nick

Anonymous + Top Roping....


I know that sound.....




Run....



Rockfax/UKClimbing Troll!!!!!!!!!

In reply to Anonymous:
Also could be some beginners can't afford all that lovely shiny lead gear, I know that when i first strated climbing we HAD to toprope as we didn't have any pro and knew no-body that did. Fair enough this was up around the Angus quarries though, not popular crags with loads of folk around. Also were limited to places with belay stakes etc to set up on.
As has already been said, top roping is as valid a form of climbing as any other, as assuming good manners from both top ropers and leaders I fail to see why folk have such a problem with the practice (note groups hogging sections of cragg may be different). Setting up a top rope may provide valuable experiece in setting up a belay as well, equalising the anchors etc, if there isn't a single anchor directly above the route.

In reply to Anonymous:


I agree. If any form of climbing is more unethical than another id say leading is more unethical when we consider what climbing is - a recreational activity to be enjoyed. We should see the concept of ethics as having to do with the impact upon the natural world our enjoyment has, and not something that has been created out of a made up rulebook written by those who assume authority over a passtime that hundreds of people enjoy.

In reply to Anonymous:

The worst thing about top roping is undoubtedly the tedious threads it throws up where anonymous people defend it.

Still, I'm glad you know what climbing is and have been good enough to share it with us.

In reply to Li'l Zé:

>>Still, I'm glad you know what climbing is

Sorry, I'm confused again, can you help me. I thought that climbing was about starting at the bottom of something and going to the top?

I realise I am a bit slow and behind the times but is it now all about walking round the side, coming back down and using a mechanical pulley system to effect 'progres'????

Puzzled of SE17

In reply to GFoz:

Some people climb from side to side too, and apparently, if we are to believe a recent thread, some get a kick out of climbing down....

Hasn't this subject, top roping that is, been discussed one or ten times before recently?

I think the Troll thesis is the worthy of consideration.

In reply to Anonymous:

A slow start, but shows promise. I offer 54-60 posts. Not including ones taking up my offer, of course.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously1:

Spread betting on troll replies. Why did we never think of it before?

In reply to Li'l Zé:


'Li'l Ze'. 'Anonymous'.

Hah ha ha ...

"Maybe I am a bit long in the tooth, but I always believed that top roping was a bit unethical"

Unethical: is climbing with a baby in your rucsac!

In reply to Ozzrik:

Could not agree more.

In reply to Andrew Turner:

Just like Colin Kirkus - oh no, wait a minute, he didn't toprope, did he? I wonder what he did.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously1:

So what are you going to do about it?

In reply to Anonymous:

Cut the belays? I nearly did that at Almscliff the other week. Not only were people TRing piss easy, well protected routes, they also used up all the decent belays to set up their anchors. If only I'd had a knife. Might have let them know what climbing's all about.

In reply to Andyhob:

I was bouldering at Almscliff not long ago. I wanted to try Demon Wall Roof, but some incompetent idiot spent an hour trying to lead the route, so I couldn't get anywhere near it. Perhaps if he'd top-roped it instead of trying to lead it, he would have got up it in ten minutes, instead of hogging the route and preventing me and lots of other people from climbing in this popular bouldering area.

If only I'd had a knife. Might let them know what bouldering's all about.

In reply to Anonymous: Top roping can be fun!

In reply to Anonymous:

Confine myself to pointing out how stupid and feeble the arguments advanced by whatever-his-name-was are.

In reply to Anonymous:

They:
1.dont have a rack or gear
2.dont have the confidence
3.dont want to
4.have limited kit/ropes so find it quicker to top rope five people than repeatedly lead it
5.dont worry about ethics, and just want to have a good time

I can undersand people finding ethics important. Like you have said, ethics are important to you. But i realy cant understand why people are unable to accept or sympathise with people who do not share the same views on ethics.

Mat

In reply to johncoxmysteriously1:

Yeh, that'll work. Well done.

In reply to Andrew Turner:

Load of bollocks that you HAD to toprope as you had no gear. You bought a rope, three slings and krabs and three hexes would cover you on most mods and diffs till you could afford more, or get better so they would do for vdiffs and some severes. At least that would be more than I used up to VS.

In reply to sutty:

I can answer that, I started learning to climb on a climbing wall, which means although I had bought my own rope and quickdraws I really had no idea how to lead trad routes, and to be honest, I didn't even know where to buy gear from let alone have any more spare cash to do so.

Any way, me and my mates still set up topropes now, on climbs where there is no protection that are way out of our ability but we want to have a go at anyway.

It's all very well saying that there are plenty of diffs and v.diffs that you can lead with a couple of pieces of gear, but who the hell wants to climb a v.diff when theres a really nice hvs/E1 which a toprope will make attemptable?

In reply to Jo:

I think you are trolling but just in case you are not if you cannot lead vdiffs you are incompetent to be on HVS and a selfish dickhead scrabbling about beyond your competence.

In reply to Jo:


I can see both sides of this gear argument. I started in a club and was soon leading up to HVS. After that I spent several years with one half rope, a couple of slings, a few nuts and five quick draws. The only climbing partners I had were non-climbing dopeheads whose arms I twisted, and who would flop down at the base of the crag and start skinning up. In this period I bouldered, led at VD to VS, soloed easy routes and occasionally top-roped harder routes.

In reply to Jo:

All of which rather confirms what many of us were convinced of regarding this deviant practice and climbing walls.

Without wishing to sound like an old fart, when I started to climb I knew nothing about it either and hadn't been to a wall. A smidgen of initiative was required to work it out but really it itsn't that difficult.

PS John, Given the late night flurry I am going for 72 to 79.