UKC

A while ago some of my friends with no climbing experience were asking me how difficult it felt to climb different grades. I managed to fob them off with some rubbish I made up on the spot. I was musing over it in the shower this morning and I figured no one has anything better to do at the moment so why not post here. So, could anyone tell me how to convert between say, Font grades and music grades? French sport and karate belts? Does anyone know of a grading system that includes 'boldness' apart from UK trad? Any other comparisons?

In reply to Ned:

You mean like skiing?

In reply to Ned:

You could equate it to the average amount of time it might take someone to progress to a certain level, but the fact that climbing has some inherent risks makes it difficult to compare with other establishment systems i would say.  In Music, to use your example, their is no inherent risk in progressing beyond grades, it's mainly down to practice - in climbing, fear plays a part and in trad, risk is a very significant factor, in winter climbing there are many additional factors at play too.  I wouldn't pursue it any further, probably a meaningless exercise that is entirely subjective.

In reply to Ned:

How about something that everyone can do like cycling. 

Mod - pushing a bike 

Vdiff - Riding a bike

HVS- riding no handed

E2- wheelie as far as you like

E5- tailwhips or back flips

E6 and up - that crazy flatland spinning stuff that takes years of dedication and skill 

In reply to Route Adjuster:

Fear also plays a part in any combative sport, be it karate, boxing or even rugby. It also is clearly a part of skiing or kayaking.

In reply to Ned:

I seem to recall a long thread on this a while back from someone who wanted to rank the relative level of climbing to that of other activities. A similar thing might be saying that Roger Federer is equivalent in tennis, to Michael Schumacher (as was) in motor racing and perhaps we could say Adam Ondra is that level.

To compare to cycling:

E9/10 = Tour team leader

E7/8 = Tour team rider

I'm making those up but you get the idea. 

In reply to Ned:

Freediving isn't graded but the different disciplines can be analagous to different disciplines in climbing, and the numbers alone almost count as grades. 

So 30 metres "constant weight with fins/monofin" is a bit like being solid at VS onsight. 

Freediving is safer than climbing but there is a still a risk and boldness to it in terms of blackouts. For example in the "constant weight without fins" discipline, I am happy and confident down to around 27m but when it's more than 30m, I would be nervous as that is a few more arm strokes, putting me at the edge of my ability/endurance and closer to the possibility of a blackout. Whilst 30m constant weight with fins/monofin is like "solid at VS", take the fins away and it's more like highball bouldering Font 6

Actually now I've written them down, these analogies look like total hokum!

In reply to Ned:

9a -> four minute mile

In reply to Ned:

I got as far as grade 5 cello and grade V winter, so music grades and winter grades are basically equivalent.

In reply to Ned:

Mod - stroking a cat

V Diff- stroking an unfriendly cat

HVS - stroking a wild cat

E6  stroking a wild lion...

E9 ...whilst holding a raw steak in the other hand

In reply to Ned:

The Japanese use the belt grading system from martial arts for bouldering. 1st Dan (Shodan) Black belt is font 7A+/7B

In reply to Ned:

Quality thread you started hear. Very grateful for an injection of afternoon merriment. I'd agree with Route Adjuster that it is meaningless and entirely subjective but lots of fun things are!

I wrote a whole post based on my history of mountain biking and skiing but then decided I'm better qualified to comment on eating just now:

Mod - eating a "main course" in any restaurant where it arrives looking more like the world's smallest modern art exhibit than a meal.

vdif - burger and chips at a fast food restaurant - child's portion.

VS - burger and chips at a fast food restaurant - adult's portion.

E1 - "Standard" sized portion of anything at an American restaurant.

E3 - 3 full plates at an all-you-can-eat Chinese buffet.

E5 - An entire Gu trillionaires cheesecake (3000 calories with optional diabetes)

E6 - Puffer fish (dead).

E7 - Puffer fish (living).

E9 - Mahogany dining chair (with arms).

In reply to Ned:

Football:

6a-6b, Pub League

6c-7a, Conference

7b-7c, Championship

8a-8b, Premier League

8c-9a, Champions League

9b upwards, Champions League finalists

In reply to Ned:

For running, a 20.30 min Parkrun is about VS? You’re competent - and impressive to an outsider - but someone with application and a history of using their body could get there in a couple of months.

Most musical instruments have grades. There's so many variables though - which exam board, do you need music theory, which instrument, etc. but here goes...

VDiff – Grade 1 - you can have a go and it might seem impressive to someone else but you’re still very fresh. Can be achieved by a complete beginner in a week of training.

Severe - Grade 3 – you’ve learnt loads but you’re still a relative beginner.

VS - Grade 5 – you’re pretty competent and can hold your own in a variety of environments but being any good seems a long way off.

E1 - Grade 8 – you’re better than average but you’re only just learning how little you know. People know that you do the activity and your friends might know you by that activity.

E3 – Diploma - you’re pretty handy now but are way off being a professional. You probably had to put a bit of effort in to get here.

In reply to Mr Fuller:

From complete beginner to Grade 1 in a week is going some! Six months to a year is fairly common for children.

There are some other nice parallels between music and climbing: sight reading = onsight, practised music = redpoint; soloing, etc. You can even have an onsight solo

In reply to Ned:

I feel like there is a reasonable comparison to teaching here which involves both fear and a certain amount of objective danger. 

Vdiff: a good teacher at a private school, posh comp, sixth-form college

VS: a good teacher at a bog-standard comp 

E1: a good teacher at a good school in a deprived area or a failing school outside of one

E5: a good teacher at a failing school in a deprived area

E10: an inspirational teacher at a pupil referral unit 

Climbing grades go MUCH harder than music grades. With a grade 8 in music you are simply a competent instrument player (which is not necessarily a demonstration of being a competent musician IMO). Perhaps 8a equivalent? 

I suspect the same goes for karate as I know a black belt who couldn't fight his way out of a wet paper bag.

In reply to henwardian:

Oh wow I can climb E5 now!

One thing I find interesting about climbing is how narrow the range of interesting grades is for a given level of climber. I wonder if it is the same for musicians? You could mess around playing Chopsticks but it's pretty boring, and you can look wistfully at videos of people playing Liszt....

Perhaps there is a parallel with sport. I'd call myself a casual weekend rugby player, pub team level. Vs, maybe HVS on a good day. Going up against a worse team (S, VDiff) is fine, but doesn't bring the same competitive enjoyment. I can face up to a stronger team (E1) but I'm going to get hurt, scared, and probably lose.

In reply to Ned:

Mod - Parish Councillor

V Diff - Town Councillor

VS - County Councillor

HVS - MP

E1 - Cabinet Minister

E4  _ PM

E7/8 - PM's special adviser

In reply to jezb1:

Team sports are not that good for comparisons to climbing and, I think, is football worse than most. We know that the best team in the land can be beaten or held to a draw by a 'minnow'. There's no way a VS leader is going to get up London Wall by having a good day.

In reply to Ned:

The old Mello guide used to have a 3 point system with little men showing off hairy bellies. 

I think it was based on the bold classic route  Stomaco Peloso (hairy stomach) and the belief that bold climbers  had the aforementioned body features.

So apart from a technical grade some routes little hairy bellied cartoon men next to their name: one meant sections were a bit run out but three little hairy guys standing in a row meant the route was a dead necky proposition.

In reply to DubyaJamesDubya:

No maybe not, but I can’t say I gave it too much thought..! A lot of people can relate to football though.

In reply to henwardian:

How about Adam Richman on Man versus Food? E6 could also be the 72 oz (an eye-watering 4.5 pounds or 2 kg, equivalent to 20 quarter pounders!) steak against the clock.

see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tx2r3U9wFvA&t=50

In reply to henwardian:

How about nights out in the pub? Obviously, this doesn't apply for folk allergic to alcohol.

To succeed at each grade, the candidate must not puke, start a fight or fall over. Also, a full clear memory of the night's events must take place, including no "beer tardis" situations (when candidate fails to remember journey home) or "phantom purchase" situations (when candidate has no recollection of the half-eaten Mickey D's, half smoked pack of Rothman's and three jazz mags on the bedroom floor).

Moderate - 2 pints of Foster's 

V. Diff. - 4 Stellas

VS - 4 Stella, 2 Strongbow, a double brandy and 2 packets of peanuts

E1 - 5 bottles of Brown, 4 snakebites and 3 after-shocks and 3 bags of dry roasted

E4 - 4 Guinness, 4 Scrumpy, 3 double brandies, six bags of pig shavings and a half bottle of Shite and Mackay on the way home

E7-8 - pint of special brew but candidate must piss in the glass and drink the contents. Followed byhalf a dozen four pint pitchers of Bacardi and Tizer, and a double shot of all the cheap blended whiskies behind the bar

In reply to jezb1:

Well given the lighthearted nature of the thread, it doesn't really matter, I just thought I'd make conversation...

In reply to Ned:

I'd like to think I could skateboard around 8a in my younger days. Standards have skyrocketed in the last 15 years though, so realistically I'd probably struggle to get beyond 6c today.

On the boldness note, the US grading system takes their boldness grade from films. One can do an x rated climb with ones clothes on.

In reply to Ned:

Oh, how about a difficulty for life?

Mod - born white, male, upper class and Swiss.

E9 - born black, female and in a slum in Nigeria

In reply to jezb1:

Very good - that made me remember Monsieur Mange Tout, he eats cars, amongst other thhings.

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6ipxkp 

In reply to Ned:

Good topic.

I like Trangia's current affairs take.

Very complex but fun to think about. Elite level of achievement has so much more to it than combining commitment and natural talent. I remember our physiology lecturer back in the 1970s raving about the Masai and warning the athletics world to watch out if anyone was to give them the motivation and opportunity to take up running. On the other hand, not wishing to decry the participants in any way, consider going to the Olympics as a dressage competitor; how many competitors are fighting for their seat on the plane? 

It's very difficult to equate the very best. Can Usain Bolt have an equivalent in present day climbing when our sport is still progressing and its number of participants still appears to be on the up? Maybe one way of looking at the mass participation level is to compare time input . Some people can come out and run very fast and some people can come out and climb hard things. I relate using starting blocks to technical (life saving?) use of climbing equipment here very loosely. However a 'good club sprinter' might train twice a week and run just under 11 seconds on a weekend. A climber who goes to the wall twice a week in winter might climb E2/6b sport (?) on the weekend. Similarly, following a couple of weeks warm weather training in Portugal, club sprinter may get a pb 10.7, while a couple of weeks in Kalymnos might give our climber a 7a tick. Both are happy but mediocre.

Just my personal two pennorth. I do also like the football comparison because it relates so easily to so many people. 

Final comment, not wishing to ruin anyone's (X Factor ?} dream; just really really wanting to be good doesn't make you good and this throws up a whole can of worms. 

In reply to AlanLittle:

No that was achieved in 1954 and is about 8a+. Current WR is 3.43 and is 9a.

In reply to Mark Bannan:

To succeed at each grade, the candidate must not puke, start a fight or fall over.  ...

I forgot to add - candidate is not allowed to piss or shit themselves either.

In reply to Ned:

good starter, Ned... prompt me to join in too

Easy one first...  MTB/skiing

How about comparing the Rockfax colour bands - green, orange, red, black - with similar systems for MTB trails and ski runs? The number of categories is similar, and so's the general consensus that green = beginner/easy and black = hard/expert. I'd venture that the learning curve for moving up the grades/trails/piste does deviate quite a bit because of the nature of the activities and how you can approach the terrain.

The biggest variable I can think of being: reducing speed to reduce the difficulty, allowings a relative novice to go to exciting places, e.g. you can snowplough your way down a red ski piste, or roll the jumps at the local trail centre. This is a long way from confidently blasting down the same terrain. Maybe it is a skills bias on my part, but I'd say it's a lot easier to get on a red MTB trail down the local forest than it is lead an E2. On the other hand, let rip on that trail and you could certainly endanger yourself... or do like Mrs. JD and break both arms going too slowly on a black run!

Harder one... skateboarding

Someone once asked me: "If skateboarding had grades, how would yours relate to climbing grades?" I thought about it on and off for ages and really didn't have a clue.

Thinking about it again, the mixture of technical skills and risk in skateboarding would much better slot in the British trad grades, than French sport, which seems more like an exercise in relative performance.

The funny thing is, trying to look at all the variables of technique and risk would result in a list full of information that would make a lot of sense to other skaters but be nonsense to outsiders.

How long does it take to drop-in on a small ramp or ollie a small stair set? Easy stuff, but you've had to learn to roll first, especially if you want to carry those off smoothly. Probably similar to the first lead - cruised by the well prepared, potentially desperate and dangerous for those who rush in?

Going quickly up the difficulty/danger levels, skateboarding definitely has it's E3 5c kind of moments too - either the sustained difficulty version with only your ankles in danger or the balls-out/don't fall off variety.

Like the original question, relating 'my climbing and skateboarding grade', the nature of the question is to place you on a continuum, with your peers. It's a bit like...

"Are you any good at that?"  The usual answer (no matter how good you are) being: "yer, alright."

Directly related to how much you've mastered? All those knacked ankles/elbows/fingers have to count for something, right? Not really, it just means you're up for it, and that's all that really matters, I hope. 

In reply to Pedro50:

Utter nonsense. 9a is four grades below the current limit, so how can you possibly say it's comparable to the world record?

Hundreds of people have climbed 9a, hundreds of people have run 4 minute miles. Both are highly respectable, neither is anywhere near current cutting edge.

In reply to AlanLittle:

8a -> sub40 10k

In reply to AlanLittle:

Not really. Considering the four minute mile was first done in the 1950's, I'd say it was more like E2. 

9a is closer to the 2 hour marathon (perhaps 9c to be fair).

Martin

In reply to Martin Hore:

Nah. Forget the dates. Systematic scientific training was applied to running decades before it was to climbing, obviously you'd expect "equivalent" levels to be reached much earlier. A four minute mile is still a notable achievement, whereas E2 is a decent amateur level attainable by anybody who puts a couple of years of effort & dedication in.

I went with a middle distance record because that's more comparable with the average single pitch sport climb in duration. But let's stick with your marathons. 9c: one person. Two hours: zero or one person, depending on whether you count artificial paced events versus actual world records under race conditions.

9a: couple of hundred people. What marathon time have a couple of hundred people run? I have no idea. 2:15? 

I actually suspect that 2:00 is closer to the limit of human potential (barring more magic shoes) than 9c is, because of running being far more mature as an athletic discipline. But that's an entirely different discussion.

(I wasn't your downvote by the way. I wouldn't downvote somebody simply because I disagree with what they're saying)

In reply to AlanLittle:

Yes sorry I assumed 9a was top end, not kept up with rising standards. 

In

But what if we funded climbing tech like running tech? Considering running is a ”minimalist” Sport but you are looking at millions of £ development to shave time off. Put that to climbing, ultralight ropes and gear, that extra tiny bit of friction in developing rubber/chalk etc. 

In reply to Liamhutch89:

Not parallel cases at all. There are plenty of more advanced qualifications in playing an instrument one can take after grade eight, up to performance-based fellowships like the FRSM. Adults can take any of grades one to eight, but they are far more commonly taken by (and arguably more aimed at) schoolchildren. 

In reply to HosteDenis:

No way.    Sub 30:30, and that might be generous

In reply to Ned:

Purely in terms of objective danger...

D - S: Starting Out Forum
VS - E1: Rocktalk
..E2-E4: Getting into a debate with Alan James
E5 - E7: Writing a comment piece as a woman with vaguely feminist politics
>E8: Delving into the Off-belay forum

In reply to Herdwickmatt:

I'm old enough to remember the jump in rubber technology from EBs to Firés, which was an instant half a grade boost for everybody. We all just jumped on it with delight - no squeals of unethicality etc.

Which leaves me a bit puzzled by the recent running shoe tech controversies

In reply to AlanLittle: 9a is going to be around 2:07.  2:06 was set as a record, noone came near for a while, then it became repeated relatively frequently, now it's not exactly common but there's a group of people regularly doing it. 

As far as decent weekend punters in running, 31.30ish for 10k is kind of around E2.  The numbers thin out pretty rapidly under this and a lot of people run it now and again, but aren't consistently there.  Once it goes under 30 then the numbers really thin out

In reply to wbo2:

Well there goes my best shot at 8a

I don't think 40min for 10k needs 'athlete class' fitness, it is substantially easier than a 3.30 marathon.   Maybe 7a.

I'd rate 8a at about the same level as a 3 hr marathon.   

In reply to wbo2:

That is absolute nonsense.  I won’t offer alternatives but 31.30 is very very fast and absolutely beyond the reach of all but a talented few.  It’s not weekend punter territory!  
 

I prefer the cat stroking analogies.

In reply to gazhbo:

I don’t know good club runners hit that. 31:30 is 5minutes off the track record. Alistair Brownlee ran 29minutes off the bike at 2012. 

In reply to Herdwickmatt:

Alistair Brownlee is one of the, if not the, greatest triathletes in history, who specialises in the distance that includes a 10k run.  He’s not really a good example of a weekend punter!

Plenty of good club runners will never get anywhere near 31.30.  There are people in my club running close to 2.35 for marathons who will still are still way off that 10k pace.  Loads of  mass participation 10k events will be won in times well over 31.30.

E2 is way way below that.

In reply to gazhbo:

So what do you think 31:30 equates to? I’m not saying it’s not fast just it’s not as elite as you are saying.  running standards in the UK aren’t great at the minute, it’s very much a complete not compete mindset. We are well behind were we were 20/30years ago.

Edit (sort of) I reread my original post, Should probably read top end club runners in top end clubs hit that.

also running a 2:35 marathon is different to running a fast 10k. It’s like a Peak trad vs long pumpy multipitch

In reply to Herdwickmatt:

I’m not saying 31.30 is elite.  I know it’s not.  I’m just saying E2 isn’t.  

I wouldn’t want to give a trad grade comparison as it would get picked apart (just like I’ve done), but I’m sure that if you picked 5 people who have never climbed And 5 couch to 5kers (for example), you’d get get the climbers up e2 long before you got anyone to run 31.30.  You wouldn’t even need the climbers to get fit!

What we need is somebody with time on their hands to get on Power of the 10 and 8a.nu and do some graphing, then we can solve this realitivy nonsensical and pointless discussion!

Also couch to E2 could be my new app I develop...

In reply to Herdwickmatt:

Agreed - though they’re are both clearly distance events.    
 

I’m just saying 31.30 is much quicker than it’s being portrayed. I know that running standard were better in the 80s than now but that has always been fast.  

Conversely E2 is much much easier.

There are some good runners on this site.  I’m not sure many of them will have run that fast.  Thousands will have climbed E2.  (I know it’s a climbing site so that’s a bit unfair!)

In reply to Herdwickmatt:

Good plans.

In reply to Herdwickmatt: 31:30 is not especially elite at all.  Road races are a bit spread in quality sometimes but a good measure is a Surrey League Cross country race - most all of the top 20 in one of those will have run that time, and potentially quite often, so there is quite a large pool of those people.    Countrywide I'd guesstimate in the 31.30 is a little bit odd and I wish I had used 31.17 as that's five min miling and something a lot of people look to, and achieve.  The numbers thin down rapidly below that.

Alert - I've just looked at the rankings - 31.30 gets you !00'th in the UK - that is f*****g disgraceful - I've run 30:30 and barely been in the top 20 in the past!  But it's still miles form elite and the physical effort is not more than E2

In reply to wbo2:

I’d suggest the top 100 climbers in the country are operating slightly above e2!

In reply to Ned:

E9=9 dart finish=147 break

In reply to wbo2:

I’m really surprised 31:30 gets you 100th. In fact I struggle to believe that. Where’s that data from? 
 

Maybe it doesn’t convert to trad but maybe E6? Do able but you’ve got to be committed? and I know nothing about sports grades.

In reply to Herdwickmatt:

If it’s power of 10 then it might be slightly warped by the lack of races this year.

In reply to Herdwickmatt:

One person has climbed 9c.

According to this - most likely reasonably but not completely complete - list, around 500 people have climbed 9a: http://escalade9.wifeo.com/par-nationalite.php#1123

What does the curve in between look like? 

9b+ about 5 or 6: Ondra, Sharma, Megos, Ghisolfi, Schubert, Bouin?

9b about 25 counting roughly from this list: https://www.99boulders.com/hardest-sport-climbs

If we guess wildly / interpolate at around 100 or so for 9a+, then we come out at somewhere around quadrupling or quintupling the number of climbers as we go down the grades.

In reply to Herdwickmatt: haha - my bad - In 2019 31.30 gets you 320th which is still far from elite but a lot better for my heart/indignation ... and still a real prospect for a lot of guys who do there weekly club session (similar to a wall session), long run and take it a bit seriously.  So I'd still say E2ish? Or maybe 7aish - ? 

In reply to wbo2:

Take 1000 uk 18 year olds in good health who have never seriously climbed and offer them 100 grand if they can climb an e2 by the end of the year, i reckon 950 of them will do it. 

Take 1000 uk 18 year olds in good helth but who dont seriously run and offer them 100 grand if they run 31.30 10k by the end of the year, i reckon bugger all will make it?  they are a million miles away from being equally difficult.

how many do you reckon would make it?

In reply to HosteDenis:

That is just silly. I’m no sport climber, but 7a max.

In reply to wbo2:

31:30 10k is an elite woman. Elite woman climbers are climbing E7 or harder.

In reply to Ned:

Aid climbing.

"A1/C1 – If placed correctly, every piece of gear would hold a fall. These routes are 'safe'. A fall is unlikely to do any more than give you a scraped knee or a bruised ego.

A2/C2 – You might place one or two 'bodyweight only' pieces in between good gear. These pieces wouldn't hold a fall, but your good gear beneath it would. A fall should be fine, though quite exciting!

A3/C3 – Falls may be long, but unlikely to cause serious injury – there's good gear somewhere down there, and no ledges to hit!

A4/C4 – You'll wiggle terrible gear into bad rock for around 10-20 metres until reaching a good piece. A fall at certain points will cause broken bones or worse.

A5/C5 – If you place your skyhook or copperhead one grain of granite in the wrong direction at any point, you will fall and rip out every piece of gear, hitting ledges and pulling off huge blocks as you plummet endlessly into the abyss. You will probably die."

From VDiffclimbing.com

In reply to climbercool:

Mmm.... that’s interesting. It falls down because you need a little mental psych for E2, which is different to slogging out training runs. I can get up at 5:00 and do 20miles, but haven’t climbed E2 because I’m a wuss (on paper I technically am capable/strong enough but I just freak when the gear gets far away!)

In reply to Herdwickmatt:

There are loads of E2's where you can place gear above your head pretty much wherever you feel like it.

In reply to AlanLittle:

I think we all reach as grade where the less technical stuff is too bold and the less bold stuff is too technical. It was E3 for me.

In reply to The New NickB:

When that happens, start climbing in a new area. Say, NW Scotland.

In reply to Ned:

It's always interesting how much people's opinions differ on this, especially the running vs climbing. I'm amazed anyone could compare anything under a 40 min 10k to an E2, let alone 31.30, but I'm not a natural runner.

In my own case I would say I've never really done structured training for climbing. I've had short spells where I've used a fingerboard more regularly. I usually have a vague plan in mind at the wall or do some circuits, but I'm no good at motivating myself for the boring grunt work for climbing harder. I've never had a rigid 3 month training routine for a goal. Climbing lots has always been the best training I've done. With that I've redpointed 7c, 7b onsight and E5 on trad, but with a 50:50 success rate. With a solid, structured, winter of training I'd be confident of redpointing 8a within a few sessions having been on a few in the past, and I'd hope I'd be fairly solid at E5 onsight, maybe even try a few harder safe routes.

My 10k PB is 45mins. I don't run as much as I climb, and again I've never done much training beyond putting the miles in. It would be interesting to know what I could bring that down to with the same structured training. I'd like to think it would be sub 40 mins, but I'd be surprised if it was much lower.

Maybe that's what makes the comparison so hard. When I climbed 6c the step to 7a seemed desperate, to 7b and beyond looked impossible. Once I'd got there it felt like a pretty small step. It was eye opening and made me realise I'd held back for years! For running getting sub 40 looks the same, possible but something I'd never go beyond. I may well be wrong, but sub 35 looks impossible from where I'm sitting, whereas going beyond 8a feels like a case of motivation.

In reply to Wil Treasure:

In my 20s I climbed a fair amount, but never trained, I would start to find climbing hard to impossible around English 5c/6a. I was reasonably fit and ran a bit, but didn’t really train. I could run a 10k in 45 minutes.

In my mid 30s I ran a 50 minute 10k and thought it was the end of the world. I joined a club and started training properly, sub 40 took seven months, sub 39 took another two years. 

I suspect that if I had trained as hard at climbing as I did at running, I would have climbed a grade or two harder.

In reply to Wil Treasure:

Yeah I find it very interesting too. I'm a pretty crap rock climber and always will be: I'm not motivated by hard climbs, the climbs I enjoy most tend to be mountaineering routes, and I have a poor trad head. Weirdly, winter appeals to me way more, I don't get anywhere near as scared, and the movements come to me much more naturally. If I sorted my head out I think I could lead E2 within a few months but the motivation just isn't there.

I'm not a natural runner, having fairly broad shoulders and short legs for my height and was average to poor at all running throughout school. But, I broke 40min for 10k last year with no specific training and not in a race, just out on a run on my own. It was something I'd been keen to do for a while. So i think ultimately it comes down to what motivates you most. If I put some proper training in for running I'm sure I could break 38minutes for 10k without too much difficulty,  and possibly 37min with some real work, but I don't know if I could ever climb 7c, let alone 8a.

In reply to HosteDenis:

Without being especially talented at either, but being quite good at endurance generally, my best 10k is 33 min and my best redpoint 7c+. For both I was probably training equally hard at the time.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Blimey. This thread leads me to think I should probably give up running and climbing

In reply to Ned:

Ok, I stand corrected. You guys are right, comparing 8a to a sub 40min 10k was silly of me (was a bit quick to respond and didn't really think it through).

However, comparing 8a to a 31:30min 10k seems like the other extreme to me. Maybe 8a is closer to a sub 34min 10k? 

In reply to Liamhutch89:

As someone who has both of these things (Grade 8 clarinet and black sash Kung Fu) I am (almost) inclined to agree. Grade 8 clarinet took years of practice as a child, not sure what the equivalent would be to climbing. But you could pass grade 8 or get a merit or distinction so it may not be quite comparable...it's almost too broad a range.

Same goes for martial arts. Might be easier to say getting grade 8 or a black belt is like breaking into the E grades, after which there's still much room for improvement.

In reply to HosteDenis:

See my other post above. I've also gone sub 40 for 10k and I'd equate that to grade 8 music or black belt martial arts for me. Let's say that's 5 years of casual training few times a week. Not sure what level of climbing that would equate to as I'm too sh*t at climbing.