This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
http://www.thebmc.co.uk/guidebooks/stanage.htm
I thought Froggatt was next on the list?
(I've not been paying much attention to these forums recently, so if this has been done to death just point me at the thread and I'll shut up. Sorry in advance. I did have a quick search.)
I thought Froggatt was next on the list?
(I've not been paying much attention to these forums recently, so if this has been done to death just point me at the thread and I'll shut up. Sorry in advance. I did have a quick search.)
In reply to garethmorgan:
Froggatt is going to be after Stanage - the team is working hard on it as we speak.
The area south of Froggatt seems to be the hardest nut to crack when coming down from the Froggatt - Gardoms - Chatsworth estate to the Amber Valley - its not an area that lends itself to easy checking and writing - and of course there is so much of it!!
we are getting there tho!!
cheers
Si
Froggatt is going to be after Stanage - the team is working hard on it as we speak.
The area south of Froggatt seems to be the hardest nut to crack when coming down from the Froggatt - Gardoms - Chatsworth estate to the Amber Valley - its not an area that lends itself to easy checking and writing - and of course there is so much of it!!
we are getting there tho!!
cheers
Si
In reply to Jamie B.:
Wait until you see the new guide - its a fantastic peice of work...
As for Foggatt - is that some new crag that we need to do a new guide on?!?
;0)
Si
Wait until you see the new guide - its a fantastic peice of work...
As for Foggatt - is that some new crag that we need to do a new guide on?!?
;0)
Si
In reply to garethmorgan:
This doesn't seem a sensible use of resources - wasn't there a recent 'new' Stanage guide?
This doesn't seem a sensible use of resources - wasn't there a recent 'new' Stanage guide?
In reply to Kipper:
There was. It's got some lovely photos in it, great route descriptions, but is extremely awkward to use at the crag because the decision to describe the crag from right to left, and number routes from right-to-left, was not a good one.
||-)
> This doesn't seem a sensible use of resources - wasn't there a recent 'new' Stanage guide?
There was. It's got some lovely photos in it, great route descriptions, but is extremely awkward to use at the crag because the decision to describe the crag from right to left, and number routes from right-to-left, was not a good one.
||-)
In reply to Kipper:
I have recently lost mine, but it was crap anyway cos the routes were all arse about tit.
New one looks very good. I'm gonna place my order now.
> (In reply to garethmorgan)
>
> This doesn't seem a sensible use of resources - wasn't there a recent 'new' Stanage guide?
>
> This doesn't seem a sensible use of resources - wasn't there a recent 'new' Stanage guide?
I have recently lost mine, but it was crap anyway cos the routes were all arse about tit.
New one looks very good. I'm gonna place my order now.
In reply to Simon:
Cool, thanks. Not sure that the recent Stanage book is sufficiently bad that it needs replacing though. Could Eastern Grit have had any influence, perhaps, or has the print run sold out and the plates been lost?
You've also reminded me that I have a long-standing appointment with Vibrio to arrange before the midges wake up...
Cool, thanks. Not sure that the recent Stanage book is sufficiently bad that it needs replacing though. Could Eastern Grit have had any influence, perhaps, or has the print run sold out and the plates been lost?
You've also reminded me that I have a long-standing appointment with Vibrio to arrange before the midges wake up...
In reply to garethmorgan:
Pedantic point of order
The idea of "losing plates" doesn't really exist anymore since nobody hangs onto plates these days. If you reprinted a book then you would go from electronic copy every time; that is what you hang onto, not the plates which would cost a fortune to store.
I think the idea of having plates which you could lose came from a time when sustainable electronic copies weren't available so, if you didn't have the plates, then you had no retrievable backup copy. Even then I doubt if many "plates' were actually held onto.
This is about as popular a misnomer as the idea of "typesetting" - another procedure which no-one has done for years.
Alan
PS. Not picking on you, just trying to correct some popular misconceptions.
> ... or has the print run sold out and the plates been lost?
Pedantic point of order
The idea of "losing plates" doesn't really exist anymore since nobody hangs onto plates these days. If you reprinted a book then you would go from electronic copy every time; that is what you hang onto, not the plates which would cost a fortune to store.
I think the idea of having plates which you could lose came from a time when sustainable electronic copies weren't available so, if you didn't have the plates, then you had no retrievable backup copy. Even then I doubt if many "plates' were actually held onto.
This is about as popular a misnomer as the idea of "typesetting" - another procedure which no-one has done for years.
Alan
PS. Not picking on you, just trying to correct some popular misconceptions.
In reply to scott sadler: Agree that the recent one was hard to use but the info included should have made the production of a 'BMXfax' relatively simple. All it would need would be updates and the Grimer touch.
In reply to Dominion:
That's my point. 'Awkward to use', because it describes routes in a different order, doesn't sound like a sensible business reason for producing a new one when there are a number of others waiting in the wings.
The Committee must have decided otherwise.
>
> There was. It's got some lovely photos in it, great route descriptions, but is extremely awkward to use at the crag because the decision to describe the crag from right to left, and number routes from right-to-left, was not a good one.
>
> There was. It's got some lovely photos in it, great route descriptions, but is extremely awkward to use at the crag because the decision to describe the crag from right to left, and number routes from right-to-left, was not a good one.
>
That's my point. 'Awkward to use', because it describes routes in a different order, doesn't sound like a sensible business reason for producing a new one when there are a number of others waiting in the wings.
The Committee must have decided otherwise.
In reply to Kipper:
I was being polite.
Please interpret "awkward" as "aggravating, frustrating, irritating and annoying"
We have a long history of reading from left to right. The book goes against common practice, and your brain rebels against it. At least that's what I feel.
I was being polite.
Please interpret "awkward" as "aggravating, frustrating, irritating and annoying"
We have a long history of reading from left to right. The book goes against common practice, and your brain rebels against it. At least that's what I feel.
In reply to Dominion: You do get used to it, perhaps you need to climb there more often . I also think Froggatt should be a far higher priority for the BMC.
In reply to Stig:
I had PGE, and found I had to use PGE to identify where I was on the crag (easy, good photos, clearly marked routes), and then try to find where it was in the BMC guide.
I've just opened a page at random (194, 195 fact fans) and not a single route described is on either of the topos on those pages. Holly Bush Gully Right route description is on page 192, for example, topo p.195
I had PGE, and found I had to use PGE to identify where I was on the crag (easy, good photos, clearly marked routes), and then try to find where it was in the BMC guide.
I've just opened a page at random (194, 195 fact fans) and not a single route described is on either of the topos on those pages. Holly Bush Gully Right route description is on page 192, for example, topo p.195
In reply to Stig:
If you are going to priorities, then surely you put the area that gets the most traffic first, and its possibly the biggest job to complete.
It had never even crossed my mind that one guide is out before another. So what! There's no rush. It's not like they're ignoring a brand new crag that doesn't have a guide.
> (In reply to Dominion) You do get used to it, perhaps you need to climb there more often . I also think Froggatt should be a far higher priority for the BMC.
If you are going to priorities, then surely you put the area that gets the most traffic first, and its possibly the biggest job to complete.
It had never even crossed my mind that one guide is out before another. So what! There's no rush. It's not like they're ignoring a brand new crag that doesn't have a guide.
In reply to Kipper: Another vote for the Froggatt guide being sooner. I have never had a problem with the last Stanage guide. For me it made me look at lots of routes that I previously wouldn't have even thought about. The Froggatt guide is over 10 years older!
In reply to D Berry:
You seem to be ignoring what others have said. Simon and team are working very hard on the Froggatt guide at the moment: it is a more difficult project than the Stanage guide, which anyway is now finished and due out any day now I guess.
You seem to be ignoring what others have said. Simon and team are working very hard on the Froggatt guide at the moment: it is a more difficult project than the Stanage guide, which anyway is now finished and due out any day now I guess.
In reply to D Berry:
I was also suprised at new Stanage guide leaping ahead of the new Froggatt guide, and raised this at the BMC National Council, so here's the answer.
Both books should appear this year
Stanage is a much easier book to produce, and has largely been a one-man effort (by Niall), whereas Froggatt is more of a team effort by volunteers.
Production of the new Stanage guide has not had a major effect on the schedule for the Froggatt guide
Both books will be stunning !
> (In reply to Kipper) Another vote for the Froggatt guide being sooner. I have never had a problem with the last Stanage guide. For me it made me look at lots of routes that I previously wouldn't have even thought about. The Froggatt guide is over 10 years older!
I was also suprised at new Stanage guide leaping ahead of the new Froggatt guide, and raised this at the BMC National Council, so here's the answer.
Both books should appear this year
Stanage is a much easier book to produce, and has largely been a one-man effort (by Niall), whereas Froggatt is more of a team effort by volunteers.
Production of the new Stanage guide has not had a major effect on the schedule for the Froggatt guide
Both books will be stunning !
In reply to garethmorgan: Wow, I don't believe they have a topless girl on an E4 on the cover - that's really pushing boundaries!
In reply to Dominion:
I'm very much with you on this one, the current Stanage guide is pish, and not just because it's backward, having the topo labelling not referring to the main text is pish poor idea too.
I too lost mine some time ago, and haven't really missed it .
> (In reply to Kipper)
>
> [...]
>
> There was. It's got some lovely photos in it, great route descriptions, but is extremely awkward to use at the crag because the decision to describe the crag from right to left, and number routes from right-to-left, was not a good one.
>
> ||-)
>
> [...]
>
> There was. It's got some lovely photos in it, great route descriptions, but is extremely awkward to use at the crag because the decision to describe the crag from right to left, and number routes from right-to-left, was not a good one.
>
> ||-)
I'm very much with you on this one, the current Stanage guide is pish, and not just because it's backward, having the topo labelling not referring to the main text is pish poor idea too.
I too lost mine some time ago, and haven't really missed it .
In reply to garethmorgan:
Point of Order:
On page 5 of the preview pdf of the new Stanage Guide, in an article entitled "Goliath's Area - A History", there is a reference to a "Jimmy Puttrell".
I've never heard him called this name before, and I found doing so rather offensive to his name and character. He was and always will be J.W. Puttrell.
Point of Order:
On page 5 of the preview pdf of the new Stanage Guide, in an article entitled "Goliath's Area - A History", there is a reference to a "Jimmy Puttrell".
I've never heard him called this name before, and I found doing so rather offensive to his name and character. He was and always will be J.W. Puttrell.
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
To the extent that I used it once then put it on a bookshelf where it has remained.
To the extent that I used it once then put it on a bookshelf where it has remained.
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
And apparently mercifully short lived
> (In reply to karl walton)
>
> Agreed. One of the most confusing, un-user-friendly guides ever produced.
>
> Agreed. One of the most confusing, un-user-friendly guides ever produced.
And apparently mercifully short lived
In reply to Horse:
Yes, I'm pretty sure the last time I went to Stanage I took the previous edition plus PGE.
Yes, I'm pretty sure the last time I went to Stanage I took the previous edition plus PGE.
In reply to Fredt: i wonder how calling someone by their real name could possibly be construed as "offensive to his name and character"?
what a preposterous statement!
what a preposterous statement!
In reply to martin k:
Dear Marty.
His real name was not "Jimmy", it was James.
Fred
> (In reply to Fredt) i wonder how calling someone by their real name could possibly be construed as "offensive to his name and character"?
>
> what a preposterous statement!
>
> what a preposterous statement!
Dear Marty.
His real name was not "Jimmy", it was James.
Fred
In reply to Fredt:
Have you seen Hard Grit? If you had then you'd know why Grimer (Stanage author) is calling him Jimmy Puttrell.
Alan
> On page 5 of the preview pdf of the new Stanage Guide, in an article entitled "Goliath's Area - A History", there is a reference to a "Jimmy Puttrell".
Have you seen Hard Grit? If you had then you'd know why Grimer (Stanage author) is calling him Jimmy Puttrell.
Alan
In reply to Fredt:
You are kidding, obviously.
Do you contribute to the letters page of the Leek Post and Times, by any chance?
I'll just let Grimer know that we have to amend all the Peak guides to refer to Joseph Brown, Ronald Fawcett, Donald Whillans, Peter Livesey...
You are kidding, obviously.
Do you contribute to the letters page of the Leek Post and Times, by any chance?
I'll just let Grimer know that we have to amend all the Peak guides to refer to Joseph Brown, Ronald Fawcett, Donald Whillans, Peter Livesey...
In reply to Dave Garnett:
Don't be daft. Those names are what they were called. I've never heard anybody refer to Joseph Brown etc. Just like I've never heard of anybody refer to Jimmy Puttrell, or Gazza Rebuffat, or Moss Herzog, or Eddie Whymper, or Dot Pilley, or Wally Haskett-Smith.
> (In reply to Fredt)
>
> You are kidding, obviously.
>
> Do you contribute to the letters page of the Leek Post and Times, by any chance?
>
> I'll just let Grimer know that we have to amend all the Peak guides to refer to Joseph Brown, Ronald Fawcett, Donald Whillans, Peter Livesey...
>
> You are kidding, obviously.
>
> Do you contribute to the letters page of the Leek Post and Times, by any chance?
>
> I'll just let Grimer know that we have to amend all the Peak guides to refer to Joseph Brown, Ronald Fawcett, Donald Whillans, Peter Livesey...
Don't be daft. Those names are what they were called. I've never heard anybody refer to Joseph Brown etc. Just like I've never heard of anybody refer to Jimmy Puttrell, or Gazza Rebuffat, or Moss Herzog, or Eddie Whymper, or Dot Pilley, or Wally Haskett-Smith.
In reply to Fredt:
Maybe you're right and his mates called him James (or maybe even 'JW' although I doubt it) but you must be older than you look if you were around at the time to be so definite about it. Grimer was making a little jokette, but I'm interested that you are so sure that just because the formal histories tend to refer to him rather stiffly by his full initials, this is any closer to the reality of his daily life than his mates saying 'I say Jimster, I suspect that it might be your round.'
Maybe you're right and his mates called him James (or maybe even 'JW' although I doubt it) but you must be older than you look if you were around at the time to be so definite about it. Grimer was making a little jokette, but I'm interested that you are so sure that just because the formal histories tend to refer to him rather stiffly by his full initials, this is any closer to the reality of his daily life than his mates saying 'I say Jimster, I suspect that it might be your round.'
In reply to Dave Garnett:
Agree, they could have called him anything, so let's not guess. I have used BMC guides for 40 years, and regarded the History sections as an accurate and definitive sources of infomation. Jokey assumptions could easily come to be assumed to be fact. If you want to call him Jimmy in a UKC thread, or a magazine article, fine. But not in an article entitled 'History'
Agree, they could have called him anything, so let's not guess. I have used BMC guides for 40 years, and regarded the History sections as an accurate and definitive sources of infomation. Jokey assumptions could easily come to be assumed to be fact. If you want to call him Jimmy in a UKC thread, or a magazine article, fine. But not in an article entitled 'History'
In reply to Fredt: my favourite subject: unwieldy pedants!
as you yourself have just said "they could have called him anything"...that'll include "jimmy" then.
you fail to answer my question about why calling him jimmy would be offensive to his name and character. given one of your comments above, are you saying that the history section is now inaccurate?
cheerio!
as you yourself have just said "they could have called him anything"...that'll include "jimmy" then.
you fail to answer my question about why calling him jimmy would be offensive to his name and character. given one of your comments above, are you saying that the history section is now inaccurate?
cheerio!
In reply to martin k:
Why make a guess at history when there's no need?
History has always known him as JW. Why change his name?
What if he loathed being called Jimmy?
How do you know everyone didn't call him Bill?
Yes! Why not let him henceforth be known as Billy-Boy Puttrell?
> (In reply to Fredt) my favourite subject: unwieldy pedants!
>
> as you yourself have just said "they could have called him anything"...that'll include "jimmy" then.
>
> you fail to answer my question about why calling him jimmy would be offensive to his name and character. given one of your comments above, are you saying that the history section is now inaccurate?
>
>
> as you yourself have just said "they could have called him anything"...that'll include "jimmy" then.
>
> you fail to answer my question about why calling him jimmy would be offensive to his name and character. given one of your comments above, are you saying that the history section is now inaccurate?
>
Why make a guess at history when there's no need?
History has always known him as JW. Why change his name?
What if he loathed being called Jimmy?
How do you know everyone didn't call him Bill?
Yes! Why not let him henceforth be known as Billy-Boy Puttrell?
In reply to Fredt:
I think you will find that James William Puttrell was known as Jimmy in some circles (mainly his close friends) so Grimer is not wrong in using this term. I presume he was using his informal name to make the hisory a little less stiff. Nothing wrong in that but obviously not to everyone's taste.
If you want to find out further info check out the Puttrell Collection at Sheffield Library.
I think you will find that James William Puttrell was known as Jimmy in some circles (mainly his close friends) so Grimer is not wrong in using this term. I presume he was using his informal name to make the hisory a little less stiff. Nothing wrong in that but obviously not to everyone's taste.
If you want to find out further info check out the Puttrell Collection at Sheffield Library.
In reply to martin k:
This is a mildly interesting case that illustrates the way in which historical accounts, however subjective and selective when written, gradually become 'the truth'. The fact is that if Grimer had written the first Stanage guide instead of the last (by which I mean the most recent, of course) then everyone would be referring to Jimmy Puttrell (and much worse besides!) as a true reflection of what happened, irrespective of whether he had ever met him or not.
This is a mildly interesting case that illustrates the way in which historical accounts, however subjective and selective when written, gradually become 'the truth'. The fact is that if Grimer had written the first Stanage guide instead of the last (by which I mean the most recent, of course) then everyone would be referring to Jimmy Puttrell (and much worse besides!) as a true reflection of what happened, irrespective of whether he had ever met him or not.
In reply to Dave Garnett: hi dave, i agree. history is often based upon a collection of personal interpretations and viewpoints. to insist that what has been written thus far (e.g. "J.W.Puttrell") is always a true and accurate record is wrong. such interpretations make far too many assumptions about something there may be no evidence for.
marvellous pedantry, whatever the case!
marvellous pedantry, whatever the case!
In reply to Fredt: you *still* haven't said why calling him jimmy is imsulting to his name and character.
(well done, i'm enjoying this)
(well done, i'm enjoying this)
In reply to Dave Garnett: It's not just that though is it? J.W. is reflective of a more formal era, in which it probably would have been inpolite to refer to someone matily, particularly in print. It's not that long ago that newspapers and even sports commentators unfailingly used correct titles. I think it's the perceived slight to Putrell's status in his historical context, to which fred is objecting.
Personally I think it matters not.
Personally I think it matters not.
In reply to Fredt:
Dorothy Pilley did appear in a picture in a newspaper under the heading "Dot on Top", according to Climbing Days! I don't know if she was happy about it.
> (In reply to Dave Garnett)
> [...]
>
Dot Pilley
> [...]
>
Dorothy Pilley did appear in a picture in a newspaper under the heading "Dot on Top", according to Climbing Days! I don't know if she was happy about it.
In reply to garethmorgan:
Looks good - can't wait to get my hands on a copy, there might even be the odd corner I have missed. Be interested to know how many routes there are in it (proper entries that is).
Oh and the Wall End Slab shot in the free download is well tilted!
Chris
Looks good - can't wait to get my hands on a copy, there might even be the odd corner I have missed. Be interested to know how many routes there are in it (proper entries that is).
Oh and the Wall End Slab shot in the free download is well tilted!
Chris
In reply to Stig:
I don't disagree with you at all, but I think that sepia-toned formality was precisely what Grimer was trying to get beyond (where is he when you need him?). He was a climber, like us (only better, at least in my case), and maybe we should try to see him as a real flesh and blood person sometimes, rather than a couple of old photographs and the perceived black tie formality of the 19th century.
I don't disagree with you at all, but I think that sepia-toned formality was precisely what Grimer was trying to get beyond (where is he when you need him?). He was a climber, like us (only better, at least in my case), and maybe we should try to see him as a real flesh and blood person sometimes, rather than a couple of old photographs and the perceived black tie formality of the 19th century.
In reply to Dave Garnett:
Am I too late to point out a typo? At least it's called Skidoo 2, isn't it? Perhaps it isn't and there's just two Skidoos. Silk start V7 eh? Wonder what that makes the rest of it...
jcm
Am I too late to point out a typo? At least it's called Skidoo 2, isn't it? Perhaps it isn't and there's just two Skidoos. Silk start V7 eh? Wonder what that makes the rest of it...
jcm
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
That would be Grimer logic - Its skidoo - go figure! (if you can! ;0)
si
That would be Grimer logic - Its skidoo - go figure! (if you can! ;0)
si
In reply to martin k:
Ha! I didn't say "imsulting (sic)to his name and character"
What I actually said was "I found doing so rather offensive to his name and character"
Emphasis on "I found it offensive" not that it was offensive (or imsulting)
Offensive in the way that calling anybody by a name they may not like may be offensive. (Perhaps offensive is a bit strong. Annoying maybe.)
You have surely been called 'Mart' or 'Marty' in your time. I have been called Freddy, and I soon put the perpetrator right.
Has that answered your question sufficiently enough to enable a return to the interesting part of the debate, ie, changing history?
> (In reply to Fredt) you *still* haven't said why calling him jimmy is imsulting to his name and character.
>
> (well done, i'm enjoying this)
>
> (well done, i'm enjoying this)
Ha! I didn't say "imsulting (sic)to his name and character"
What I actually said was "I found doing so rather offensive to his name and character"
Emphasis on "I found it offensive" not that it was offensive (or imsulting)
Offensive in the way that calling anybody by a name they may not like may be offensive. (Perhaps offensive is a bit strong. Annoying maybe.)
You have surely been called 'Mart' or 'Marty' in your time. I have been called Freddy, and I soon put the perpetrator right.
Has that answered your question sufficiently enough to enable a return to the interesting part of the debate, ie, changing history?
In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Yep there is two Skidoo's. I called it Skidoo 2 in the last guide to avoid confusion but Grimer did actually call his route Skidoo too (or should that be as well?). Has Simon say's Grimer logic.
Yep there is two Skidoo's. I called it Skidoo 2 in the last guide to avoid confusion but Grimer did actually call his route Skidoo too (or should that be as well?). Has Simon say's Grimer logic.
In reply to Fredt: not really, because i'm about to go to wales for four days. it'll be much more interesting than debating semantics, unknowable historical 'facts' and whether your use of the much abused 'sic' is correct, or merely an attempt by yourgoodself to show that you feel superior!
have a great weekend!
have a great weekend!
In reply to Graham:
Best just to use it for fire lighters mate!
Best just to use it for fire lighters mate!
In reply to Graham:
Bloody well ought to be full exchange.
I don't feel cheated because I was expected to pay for CD's to replace my old vinyl. Now I buy remastered CD's with extra tracks. That's just business.
But I do feel cheated by the BMC and Stanage, or at least I will when I chuck good money after bad and buy the new guide. It's a shambles that it has come out at the expense of other guides. Maybe THATS just business too. Except that the BMC is not a business.
> (In reply to Simon)
> Can we part exchange copies of the last definitive guide?
> Can we part exchange copies of the last definitive guide?
Bloody well ought to be full exchange.
I don't feel cheated because I was expected to pay for CD's to replace my old vinyl. Now I buy remastered CD's with extra tracks. That's just business.
But I do feel cheated by the BMC and Stanage, or at least I will when I chuck good money after bad and buy the new guide. It's a shambles that it has come out at the expense of other guides. Maybe THATS just business too. Except that the BMC is not a business.
In reply to jhenryb: Your criticism of the last Stanage guide is unwarrented IMHO. That guide may have its faults but it introduced a great many previously undocumented climbs on what is probably the most loved and most climbed on crag in the world. For me it made a welcome publication. Previous BMC guides have been produced in good faith by teams of volunteers working hard in their own time to document routes and the history of Peak District climbing - we should all be grateful.
Similarly, your comment that the forthcoming Stanage guide will "come out at the expense of other guides" is just plain wrong. As another poster clearly states earlier in this thread, the work on the forthcoming Stanage guide has not put back the publication of other BMC guides.
Similarly, your comment that the forthcoming Stanage guide will "come out at the expense of other guides" is just plain wrong. As another poster clearly states earlier in this thread, the work on the forthcoming Stanage guide has not put back the publication of other BMC guides.
In reply to Offwidth:
Broke mi bloody wrist at the place - never going back there!!
(well untill the next time - good bouldering!! ;0)
Si
> (In reply to DerwentDiluted)
>
> There's a question...have you been?
>
> There's a question...have you been?
Broke mi bloody wrist at the place - never going back there!!
(well untill the next time - good bouldering!! ;0)
Si
In reply to Nige M:
True - the volunteers are doing the Froggat Guide and are still working on the scripts - Grimer has done Stanage - as a paid BMC memeber of staff - so no worries there dudes!
Si
> the work on the forthcoming Stanage guide has not put back the publication of other BMC guides.
True - the volunteers are doing the Froggat Guide and are still working on the scripts - Grimer has done Stanage - as a paid BMC memeber of staff - so no worries there dudes!
Si
In reply to Nige M:
That's true.
If only the BMC would be willing to provide the text of the guide as a RTF document, and the topos as tiffs (or similar) it would be worth spending a bit of time myself dtp'ing certain sections of it into a left-to-right format, and putting the topos in the appropriate place in the descriptions (ie somewhere near them, maybe even on the same page!)...
But I can't be arsed with scanning and OCR'ing it myself...
Having said that, the Burbage, Millstone and Beyond guide is fantastic, and well worth the money.
The 2002 Stanage Guide is Windows 286/386 (1987 release) compared to the current desktop and functionality of your fave OS (B,M &B) - but the Stanage Guide is written in Arabic, too...
> Your criticism of the last Stanage guide is unwarrented IMHO. That guide may have its faults but it introduced a great many previously undocumented climbs on what is probably the most loved and most climbed on crag in the world.
That's true.
If only the BMC would be willing to provide the text of the guide as a RTF document, and the topos as tiffs (or similar) it would be worth spending a bit of time myself dtp'ing certain sections of it into a left-to-right format, and putting the topos in the appropriate place in the descriptions (ie somewhere near them, maybe even on the same page!)...
But I can't be arsed with scanning and OCR'ing it myself...
Having said that, the Burbage, Millstone and Beyond guide is fantastic, and well worth the money.
The 2002 Stanage Guide is Windows 286/386 (1987 release) compared to the current desktop and functionality of your fave OS (B,M &B) - but the Stanage Guide is written in Arabic, too...
In reply to Dominion:
Er, Dominion ... (have you just got back from the pub??) ... There's a new Stanage guide coming out in about 2 weeks, correcting all those faults. Just why do you think the BMC 'would be willing to provide the text of the [previous] guide as an RTF document'?
Having implied that the BMC are both mean and idiotic you then go on to heap praise on Niall's last production. You've lost me.
Er, Dominion ... (have you just got back from the pub??) ... There's a new Stanage guide coming out in about 2 weeks, correcting all those faults. Just why do you think the BMC 'would be willing to provide the text of the [previous] guide as an RTF document'?
Having implied that the BMC are both mean and idiotic you then go on to heap praise on Niall's last production. You've lost me.
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
Nope.
I know. I have actually both read, and contributed to this thread several times.
So I could turn my £20 investment in the 2002 guide into a workable document? Part of this is a response to Graham's comment about being able to trade my barely used, pristine condition, 2002 guide in for the new one...
The content of the book is great. The organisation/layout of it is appalling.
Written all my previous posts in this thread right-to-left, have I?
> Er, Dominion ... (have you just got back from the pub??)
Nope.
> ... There's a new Stanage guide coming out in about 2 weeks, correcting all those faults.
I know. I have actually both read, and contributed to this thread several times.
> Just why do you think the BMC 'would be willing to provide the text of the [previous] guide as an RTF document'?
So I could turn my £20 investment in the 2002 guide into a workable document? Part of this is a response to Graham's comment about being able to trade my barely used, pristine condition, 2002 guide in for the new one...
> Having implied that the BMC are both mean and idiotic you then go on to heap praise on Niall's last production.
The content of the book is great. The organisation/layout of it is appalling.
> You've lost me.
Written all my previous posts in this thread right-to-left, have I?
In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
Which is a good guidebook. The Stanage 2002 guidebook isn't, and it is that specific publication that my criticism is levelled at.
And to re-iterate, it's not the content; it's the decision on the layout.
If they given the 200 Stanage guide to 5 complete Stanage virgins, but people who were used to climbing guides, and told them to go and find 15 specific climbs, climb them, and then rate the guidebook on usability, I suspect they would not have made that decision to go right-to-left.
PGE on Stanage is a Mod.
Stanage 2002 is well into the E grades.
Which is a good guidebook. The Stanage 2002 guidebook isn't, and it is that specific publication that my criticism is levelled at.
And to re-iterate, it's not the content; it's the decision on the layout.
If they given the 200 Stanage guide to 5 complete Stanage virgins, but people who were used to climbing guides, and told them to go and find 15 specific climbs, climb them, and then rate the guidebook on usability, I suspect they would not have made that decision to go right-to-left.
PGE on Stanage is a Mod.
Stanage 2002 is well into the E grades.
In reply to Offwidth:
Yes, soloed pretty much every line that I could, a nice crackline coming out of the cave at the left hand side sticks in the memory (V0/ HS5a ish). I'm just a completist who can't stand the thought of an undocumented crag inches from stanage.
> (In reply to DerwentDiluted)
>
> There's a question...have you been?
>
> There's a question...have you been?
Yes, soloed pretty much every line that I could, a nice crackline coming out of the cave at the left hand side sticks in the memory (V0/ HS5a ish). I'm just a completist who can't stand the thought of an undocumented crag inches from stanage.
In reply to DerwentDiluted:
Just realised who you are! I couldnt find the routes (did you?) but the hueco wall bouldering on the far left was great.
Just realised who you are! I couldnt find the routes (did you?) but the hueco wall bouldering on the far left was great.
In reply to Offwidth:
Hi Steve, yes I changed my ID to something a little less ahem.. unique. The routes I think I found are not very memorable, axle grease I think was one and something about frogs. Lots of lovely easy pillars and slabs but nothing too spectacular route wise. lots of nice short problems though.
I'm hoping the new guide will cover it as it deserves better than the sentance or two in the 89 guide. Keep up the good work and please feel free to mail me if you want any comments from me on obscure subHVS peak stuff, not done them all but am about a third of the way through. Slowing up now though due to other commitments.
Hi Steve, yes I changed my ID to something a little less ahem.. unique. The routes I think I found are not very memorable, axle grease I think was one and something about frogs. Lots of lovely easy pillars and slabs but nothing too spectacular route wise. lots of nice short problems though.
I'm hoping the new guide will cover it as it deserves better than the sentance or two in the 89 guide. Keep up the good work and please feel free to mail me if you want any comments from me on obscure subHVS peak stuff, not done them all but am about a third of the way through. Slowing up now though due to other commitments.
STANAGE GUIDE HITS SHOPS THIS WEEK!!
The new Stanage Guide should be hitting the shops this week for the Bank Holiday Weekend.
I say should - as you never know what pesky Gremlin's going to pop round the next corner - but its set to be the bumber book of all books to the Best Crag in the world...(apart from Font)
Go see whats left of the Plantation - 2 miles of it all, try the new circuits and swear like a Frenchman, see what the Cowperstone top outs are really like and go and fall off Quietus - all good!!
Taster here:
http://www.thebmc.co.uk/guidebooks/samples/BMC_stanage_plantation.pdf
...and of course learn some colourfull history whilst sat on the bog - you know it makes sense!!
Simon
In reply to Simon: Wasn't in Planet Fear shop in Sheff today. Can someone update this thread when it is 'actually' in the shops - i.e. not 'coming out soon'?
Nice one.
Nice one.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...