UKC

Do you think that the better/more experienced a climber you are the more humble you become about your efforts and achievements and stop being such a 'grade bore'?

If so, when do you think the change occurs?

Was sat in a pub on Saturday night with a friend of mine and we'd been chatting to a guy who we ascertained was a pretty good climber - he'd intimated he'd been doing it for many years but was quite humble/modest about it. Then a friend joined him who just sat bawling away about 'E1 this' and 'E3 that' and my friend and I ended up just rolling our eyes and walking away. It's was painful to listen to as they really were the most stinking bore about it and clearly not as experienced/good as their friend as they so desperately tried to gain admiration and respect from 'grade dropping' and 'jargon dropping'.

Is it quite normal for mid-talent climbers to be such bores about climbing and will they grow out of it or are my friend and I wrong and it's just a matter of coincidence that the more experienced climbers we've met are more humble?

In reply to Hjonesy:

I'm very humble but sadly I am an average grade climber.

I'd imagine that there are both tossers and humbblybumblies at all grades.

Saying that I've met quite a few of the Big Boys and they don't go around boasting. They much prefere to talk quietly and in an unboastful manner

In reply to The Lemming:
the Big Boys and they don't go around boasting. They much prefere to talk quietly and in an unboastful manner

That's what my experience has been too.

For the record, I'm just too rubbish to be boastful myself!

In reply to Hjonesy: I dont know if you can generalise, but I too find people like that soooo boring. "yeah mate, if you're into trad you should get out to Ilkley-guilotine it wicked mate. Onsighted it laat year. On a top rope like, couldn't be bothered to lead it, but it's wicked, moves like this yeah-left, then out then up yeah. It took me two goes, but its well good. What grade do you climb?" Someone actually said that to me-pretty much word for word. I also had a similar description of various other climbs during what was almost certainly the most boring climbing converstion ever. On the other hand I was chatting to a guy yesterday after his first multipitch-he was totally stoked, and it was great.
Sam

In reply to Hjonesy: I think its in some peoples nature not to be humble. There are people like the late Bruce Lee, he was brilliant but he knew it and made sure everyone else did as well (still one of my hero's though!). Then there are people like John Gill, a real innovator and humble with it.

I reckon its down to personality type rather then pursuit of any particular activity.

In reply to Removed User:


Yeah, you're probably right, would be interesting to know however if anyone's met any of the big name or highly experienced climbers who are ludicrously boastful and boring.

In reply to Hjonesy: i think most people will go through that at some point, usually towards the beginning of their career, its probably to do with insecurity. most are likely to grow out of it after a year or two

i certainly did, although i tend to keep a bit more quiet about my repeats of things like if 6 was 9

In reply to Hjonesy:

A mate of mine who climbed around the same time as Sir Bonnington did not rate him

However he did rate Joe Brown

In reply to Hjonesy:

I think it's a bit like what they say about skill at snooker being the sign of a mis-spent youth - you get a bit older, and realise it really isn't much to brag about

In reply to Hjonesy:
Rule of thumb - if the name of the route and where it is is more important than the grade; they're probably OK to talk to

In reply to Hjonesy:

Talking amongst friends you may say what you have done that day, arms doing more semaphore than the flagman on one of the Spanish Armadas sinking ships, like climbingpixie.

Most you meet at somewhere like Kendal Film festival give talks but when talking amongst themselves know someone there will have trumped them in some sphere of climbing so may discuss the price of howdahs for crossing the alps instead.

In reply to Andy Say:

Pretty good rule of thumb I reckon - makes for more interesting conversation in my book

In reply to Hjonesy:

I'd agree.

In reply to sutty:

My friends and I can all get quiet excitable when we've been out and had a good day climbing although it was just cringe-worthy how the more experienced climber kept trying to change the conversation off climbing by talking about mutual friends etc and the other one would just immediately launch into "oh wow yeah, you know he did an E1 the other week, yeah well, I saw it and I thought it was probably graded wrong and then I had a go blah blah blah" The poor guy couldn't get a non-climbing related conversation out of the person for over 20 mins before my friend and I sloped off! If I were him I think I'd have just legged it myself!

In reply to Hjonesy: I don't know, I guess it comes down to the personality of the individual. I have met some very good climbers who are complete arses and I have met some equally good climbers who are not. The same can be said for some decidedly poor climber and some average climbers.

About ten years ago I was having a chat with a bloke I did not know at Wilton 1, he asked me what I had just climbed, we talked about it and a couple of other routes of a similar grade, the guy then went on his way. At which time my mate came over and asked me what Gaz Parry wanted.

In reply to Hjonesy:
I think some people are just grade bores and it isn't really related to how good they are. It's probably more down to the person involved rather than them changing personality (eg suddenly becoming more humble) once they hit E4!

Nao (rubbish)

In reply to The Lemming:

Didn't rate Bonington as what? As a good climber? Or as being humble/ unassuming?

With first ascents such as Central Pillar of Freney, Central Tower of Paine, the Ogre etc, etc plus some quite tough routes for their time in the UK, it's hard (though very common) to "dis" his credentials as a good climber.

In reply to Rob Naylor:

Absolutely, when I've heard Bonnington talking about his own climbing, he never seems to rate himself very highly.

In reply to Hjonesy:

I've met a fair few big name/ highly experienced climbers, and I can't think of one of them who's been anything approaching boastful and boring.

Mostly they're quiet and unassuming. I'd been chatting to Kurt Diemberger for a good 10 minutes at the opening of the Evolution wall in Groombridge before it suddenly dawned on me who he was!

The boring/ boastful ones are the "low to middle E grade" climbers who, because they realise that they're talking to a "bumbly", really big it up and go on about it. Met a number of those.

I reckon anyone who's really good is secure in their ability and doesn't need to boast. It's those who haven't quite made it to the "premiership" who seem to feel the need to brag and drop grade numbers into the conversation.

In reply to The Lemming:

Well Brown is easier to spell.

In reply to Nick B not logged on:


However I did meet Sir Bonnington at Castle Rock and he didn't say much apart from hello. He just quietly went up and down a few routes with his partner.

In reply to The Lemming:

Who is this Sir Bonnington? I have never heard of him.

In reply to Hjonesy:
Such people are apparent at the wall too. last time i was at a wall some shirtless young guy was proclaiming to his mate that "its easy only 7something" clearly loud enough for all to hear, followed by much, the moves are lovely, crank on this that and theotherness
it gives me great pleasure when quiet (often elderly, usually wearing ripped ronhills) lazily cruise up things without any fuss.

In reply to Hjonesy:

This should be posted in the Rocktalk forum.

But yes, grade boredom cock-showing does seem to more prevalent with less experienced climbers, I guess it is something one grows out of.

In reply to Andy Say:

I like your rule of thumb, one could also add the quality of the climbing, the deservedness of star-ratings, the line, the moves, or many other factors.

In reply to Southampton Tom:

Like a bloke at Froggatt I saw wearing ripped jeans, PAs, sweatshirt, with a tescos carrier bag as a chalkbag, drifting effortlessly up one of the harder routes on Great Slab, much to the chagrin of the folk with the latest fleeces, dinky little chalkbags and tiny-toed slippers.

My gear is now getting old enough to justify me cruising hard routes in front of people with shiny gear. Trouble is I can't get off the ground.

In reply to hutchm:

Would a leg up help you, we could get a human pyramid of never was beens to surmount all the difficulties.

In reply to Mooncat:
Quite right too. It's not everyone who has to put protection pegs in the first pitch of Aurora at Stoney Middleton.

OK it was 38 years ago but I've never forgiven him.....

And the way he laughed at my Hendrix t-shirt and orange trousers.......

In reply to Hjonesy:

yes had one of those conversations in ailefroide a couple of months back. my mate and I were having a drink with two other pairs of climbers and we knew one of the pairs and they were very understated and never mentioned grades. Not that any of the four of us had any reason to! Anyway, we'd not met this new pair before and one of them was clearly very good and, like in your story, didn't mention grades but was happy to chat about which crags were good etc. His mate (obviously less good) kept on about these hard routes they'd been on, grade dropping etc whilst "good climber" kept trying to turn the conversation. We rolled eyes a bit but listened along. Anyway, "good climber" eventually appeared to get a bit tired of his mates elitism and dropped it into the conversation that they'd had to escape off one of their hard routes that afternoon as they couldn't do it. Made us all laugh with him. Nice, v humble, way to bring his mate back into line I thought.

In reply to Hjonesy:

I read an interview with Jerry Moffat and he was far from modest, but he was also a damn good climber....but then I read another thing about him and he'd claimed he wasn't a natural climber and had had to train like a dervish to get where he was in lieu of natural talent. Which perhaps explains his bragging.

Must admit, though, I'm at the grade-dropping stage, even though they're nothing to drop. Personally speaking, I want to get better and getting better does involve going up the grades so nowt wrong in aspiring. But the more I climb, the more I get the 'other' bits about it....the freedom, the synching of your body with nature, the stuff that exists for everyone who climbs, be they at either end of the scale. I'm sure that this, in time, overtakes the panting desire to boast.

Sarah (fingers crossed and ditto to Nao)

In reply to Hjonesy: I am guessing your friend was a woman. Sounds a bit like they both had different approaches to chatting you up, one (younger) trying to impress you with his climbing prowess, the other wanting to get to know you. Or maybe one was interested and the other not, who knows. Sounds like more about personality/age.

Some people who climb harder talk about grades, others about route names, others about moves etcetc. Sometimes that's because that's what's most important about their climbing (eg grade), other times what they might assess what the listener will have a clue about (eg I don't know lots of famous routes). If someone did not think E grade climbing was hard or a big deal, they might not really be bothered by grade "bores". If someone does climb the same grades, and is drawing up a wish list, they might be interested in hearing about other climbs, and the grade may be important to them.

If you don't climb those grades, know many routes names or aspire to, it can be even more boring. What's boring to one person isn't to another, the grade droppers mates may think he's fascinating. The top climbers I have met have some been "humble" some not, most have seemed pretty human really.

In reply to sarah79:
Have to say that Jerry Moffatt is probably the only good climber I've met who was really full of himself, and also the only climber my old dog ever barked at if thats any measure of these things. I have a lot of respect for the opinions of dogs.

All the others have been modesty to a tee.

In reply to Keeg: Johnny Dawes, John Readhead...?
Modesty is quite an English thing isn't it, but maybe climbers modesty is something else.

In reply to Hjonesy:

I think part of the change happens after you've had detailed knowledge of virtually every route worth climbing for so long that you forget other people don't instinctively know the difference between say Great Gully and Great Wall or perhaps Tension and Manic Strain.

There is certianly a time and place for grades, and I do think that it's over simplifing it to imply that if you mention them you're a 'bore' and if you just discuss a few route names you're 'humble'. Just spouting route names is not always ideal.

"We did a few good routes in the evening sun, the top moves on Bungle's Arete are ace."

"We we did a Grooved Arete, sunshine as we summited, it was ace"

"Oh, we ticked a load of stuff at insert obsucre crag, insert unknown route and another unknown route were the best. You should get yourself over there."

"Oh, we got 9 extremes done, 5 E1s and 4 E2s, it was well wicked"

"Oh, we ticked a load of stuff at insert obsucre crag, it's just 2 miles down the valley from where you were. About 20 short routes and it's probably best at HVS to E2. However insert unknown route E1 5c and another unknown route E2 5c were the best."

Route names are great if you know Grooved Arete is HVD but Bungle's is f8b. Equally if you don't know, then the whole sentence is pretty meaningless and I'd suggest realing off obscure routes is as bad as just quoting E numbers.

A geniune discussion (as compared with meaningless small-talk) needs shared knowledge and if both parties don't know the route in question, knowledge of the grade (implicit or implied) is essential for there to be meaningful dialogue.

In reply to sutty:

Perhaps we should campaign for a new log-book category.

Sent - with pity-filled leg-up from passing walker.

In reply to rock waif:
I've met Johnny several times and he has always been quite modest (if a bit left-field). He is a character, and he probably acts up to his reputation, but doesn't come across as in any way boastful in my experience.
Never met John Redhead so can't comment.

In reply to hutchm:

I recall taking a mate to Birchen Edge, he had never climbed before.

I took all the gear, but when I saw all the gear freaks, 'working' a Vdiff, resting and changing leads on a Diff, lacing Trafalgar Crack with a runner every foot, and all queuing up for the privilege of doing so I thought 'f** it'. I tied him on with a bowline round his waist. I did the same. We did 11 routes inside the hour, without using any gear. He absolutely loved it, but kept asking me what everyone else was doing and why did they take so long to climb one route. Then we joined our families for a picnic.

I'm not a good climber, (I once managed an E1), but I have no problem soloing VDiffs. I'm old enough to have learned that it's not what you climb, it's who you are with. That day was just as memorable as as any days in Yosemite or the Alps, for the big grin on his face.

In reply to Keeg: that's why I put a question mark after that!
plus where does young, with boundless enthusiasm and honesty begin and immodesty start (such as, Stone Monkey and say the JD quote "people did not know how good I was" (or "am" can't recall)). isn't it partly in the eye of the beholder?

In reply to Hjonesy:

I think that as whole climbers are incredibly adept at line shooting. Just sit back and listen to most conversations amongst climbers in a climbers pub and see how often the word "I" comes up. Its usually "I led x, y and z". Comments like "My mate and I had a great day on *** crag, and got in a few good routes" are far less common.

So many climbers are totally obsessed with telling everyone else of their achievements. I get very bored listening to self centred dickheads, even if they are good climbers, and much prefer listening to people recounting amusing or interesting events they have come up against during the day, particularly epics when the person recounting it can tell it against themselves.

Modesty is unfortunately an attribute many climber prima donas lack.

Thats another reason why I enjoy this forum as there are a lot of folk on it who obviously enjoy climbing and the hills but can actually talk about other things as well as climbing without blowing their own trumpet all the time.

In reply to rock waif:
Sorry I misinterpreted the Q mark.
As for your other point yes it is in the eye of the beholder, almost wholy I would say. After all it is difficult to be immodest without an audience. Which is part of the reason I can only comment on those I've met (and voice my old dogs opinion...)

In reply to Trangia:

I have to say that having bumped into a few "names" at crags, the one that stands out the most as just happy to have a chat about and or do any good line was John Dunne. Which surprised me somewhat but there you go.

In reply to Hjonesy:

I think it depends as much as anything on why you climb. Some climbing seems to be goal-oriented, and competition is paramount. Others seem to me to be more interested in self-exploration and are spiritual in their relationship to rock and movement, they have a more meditative approach to their climbing, and are not performing to an audience. The former tend to need validication from others, the latter, less so.

In reply to Mark Stevenson:


I think we all know that. The point is that you can tell when people are just bragging about grades, some really do big themselves up terribly. Hence my story - this chap was talking about this route they were on at the Ecrins in such a way that you were led to assume they'd done it. At which point his (better) partner metaphorically coughs and explains they'd had to back off it. Which made his partner appear even more ludicrous (perhaps a little unkindly in some respects but maybe it was also a lesson).

I, on the other hand, only ever mention grades when there is a genuine need Err, right..

In reply to Hjonesy:

There's a lot to be said for being rubbish. You can get your kicks from doing mid-grade stuff and not risking your life every time you climb. Would you want to be so good that you had to do routes with catastrophic consequences of failure just to get your buzz? I wouldn't!

In reply to Removed User:

Theres less to be said for not understanding the grading system of course.

You can risk your life as effectively on a VDiff as you can on an E4 (or above, for that matter), you just have to pick the right line.

Why does this idea that increased grade = increased danger come about?

AJM

In reply to AJM:

Agreed its not always the case that higher grades are more dangerous, but don't you find that generally there is likely to be better protection/less chance of falling on a VD than E4?

In reply to Removed User:

Is that a rhetorical question, or a genuine one? From the tone its hard to tell.

My knowledge of E4s, it has to be said, is limited. But generally, no, I wouldn't say so.

Less chance of falling - depends how close each route is to your respective lead limit. Obviosly if you can just about lead E4 then there'll be far more chance of you falling on an E4 than on a VDiff.

Better protection - again, wouldn't generalise that way. Depends so much on the route. I've done VDiffs on compact rock with little gear, and I imagine that you'd be pretty hard pushed to injure yourself on something like Wellington Crack at Ilkley (which I think is E4 although I could be wrong).

AJM

In reply to AJM:


The point being, if you can't hang on long enough to place the gear you shouldn't be on the route (if you expect it to be well protected). And that goes at any grade.

I suppose that harder routes do *tend* to have less/more marginal gear. But there are well protected hard routes so you pay your money and make your choices, no?

In reply to Hjonesy: im humble as im inexperienced and crap

In reply to AJM:

It was a genuine question. But my experience of E4s is zero, so I'm not really in a position to disagree!

In reply to JonC:


I'm never sure - perhaps if people spent as much effort fiddling in marginal gear on VDiffs as they do on E4s, the perception would be different. I think though that fewer people will bother because VDiff is very few people's physical limit so most people aren't concerned about fiddling in that microwire in quite the same way.......

AJM

In reply to Trangia:

Really? I don't find that at all among the *real* good climbers.


Again, I find it's only the "second string" or "never quite were's" who act like that. I've heard more stories of epics and near-disasters from "top" climbers than I've heard boasting about grades.


I don't agree. Every "big name" climber that I've met to talk to or climb with (Kurt Diemberger, Stephen Venables, Mick Fowler, Martin Boysen, Neil Gresham, Tim Emmett, George Band, James Pearson, Tyler Landman, Johnny Dawes, Mark Edwards, Rowland Edwards, Joe Brown, Joe Simpson, Simon Yates, Andy Cave, Libby Peter, Anne Arran, Leah Crane, to mention just those that come immediately to mind) has been modesty personified. And the above list encompasses a fair cross-section of generations!

In reply to Rob Naylor:

Agreed.


Agreed

>

By prima donas I meant the self appointed ones, the ones in your second category.

As for the top names , I haven't met that many but those that I have, I agree have been very pleasant and modest people.

My comments are aimed at those in that much larger middle section of climbers who although not "names", are experienced, but far from humble.

In reply to Trangia:

OK, fair dos. Sounds like we're singing from the same hymn sheet!