In reply to Harrison Trewhitt - Rockfax:
> Flying Arete seems to be a poor benchmark because the crux for me is the span out to the good hold and its horrible (f6B+/C), whereas if you have longer arms / lank its trivial to reach the good hold and the top out is the crux (f6A/+).
> If a long armed person and a short armed person take that as a benchmark you would end up with two very different grading systems.
> Its a very good problem though.
> Pebble Wall makes more sense to me as a benchmark (if you're tall the rockover is awkward, but the end is easier, if you're short vice versa) although I think its kinda soft at f6C - uk 6b so f6B+(?) (easier than flying arete for me).
I think both those problems are poor benchmarks. I guess your view of a benchmark somewhat depends on your definition of "tall" (and how strong the "tall" people you know are). I'm 6'3" and always found Flying Arete horrendous, with the top-out bunched and harrowing. Pebble Wall similar - supposed 7as in the area were part of my warm-up circuit (e.g. Crucifix Arete SS without the break, DBS, Crucifix Low Traverse). Pebble Wall is definitely not part of the circuit - a foot-fracturing horror with long legs - I would more easily repeat a few 7bs.
Post edited at 22:05