This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
.... on El Cap, for anyone interested:
https://www.lacrux.com/en/klettern/dawn-wall-in-the-sights-of-berthe-and-va...
https://www.mountainproject.com/route/109951912/the-dawn-wall
https://www.mountainproject.com/forum/topic/121866575/dawn-wall-attempt#For...
Post edited at 13:23
2
In reply to Ian Parsons:
Does it strike anyone else as weird that the article seems to suggest that they might downgrade the route, which has a grade based on and literally named after the area, given by the best climber of that style in the world, who has put up and repeated more free routes on the same wall than anyone else? How much weight would that really hold?
6
1
In reply to PaulJepson:
To be fair Berthe isn't exactly a couch potato and this isn't his first Yosemite Sam Rodeo... plus that article does seem a little bit jacked up - just because they say he might try to downgrade it, doesn't mean that's what he's going to do...
Post edited at 13:58
3
In reply to PaulJepson:
> How much weight would that really hold?
Everyone who successfully climbs a route gets to give their opinion on the grade. Not sure Ondra commented? It’s not uncommon for grades to change from what the FA thought.
4
In reply to PaulJepson:
Certainly seems a bit premature; they've got to climb it first! I've no idea whether Lacrux are just trying to be a bit controversial, or whether downgrading might be a very normal topic when discussing these two particular climbers.
2
In reply to Ian Parsons:
https://www.instagram.com/p/CQgOHQAD37B/?utm_medium=copy_link
He's been fairly open about the view that a lot of the hard multipitch routes he has been on are overgraded (i.e. individual pitches get higher grades than they would on single pitch to account for the additional demands of it being multipitch).
In reply to beardy mike:
Oh yes, anyone who climbs anything has the right to an opinion on the grade but isn't telling Tommy Caldwell that his El Cap route is the wrong grade like telling the inventor of oranges that they're green?
The explanation AJM has makes a lot more sense than what the article suggests.
Is the YDS based on the difficulty of a single hardest move like UK trad or an overall technical difficulty grade like the French system? The instagram post AJM posted suggests it might also have an element of British grading in that long and committing routes get higher grades than single pitches!
1
9
In reply to PaulJepson:
He's not telling Tommy Caldwell he's wrong. The article says that's what MIGHT be imminent. I just think the article is some keyboard warrior generating some clickbait. Until Berthe expresses an opinion, it's all just speculation.
7
In reply to AJM:
> He's been fairly open about the view that a lot of the hard multipitch routes he has been on are overgraded (i.e. individual pitches get higher grades than they would on single pitch to account for the additional demands of it being multipitch).
This is where adjectival gradings come into their own as that effect isn't over-grading it's correct-grading lets say Dawn Wall is graded E12 "fkn nails!" there - job done, move along people nothing to see....
I'm not sure what country has the biggest number of great climbers per population, Scotland, Switzerland, no idea, but Belgium has to be on the leader board in that competition - for a country whose highest "mountain" is https://www.thebestviewpoints.com/2018/07/09/belgium-signal-de-botrange/ they produce a heap of great climbers. The 3 "Wolfgang Climbing Team" films are still amongst my favourite outdoor films. Must be something in the water.
In reply to CantClimbTom:
I think when offering grades people need to be clear whether they're grading the pitch ("straight off the ground, this could get 8b") or grading the pitch in its context ("because it starts 5 pitches up off an awkward hanging belay this pitch will feel as hard as an 8b at the crag"). Either could work, but if you go in expecting one and find the other (particularly expecting latter getting former) then fun could result!
1
In reply to AJM:
Even if Berthe is probably correct in his assessment of the technical difficulties of routes like Silbergeier (how would I know?), IMO he should stick to the convention that factors the length and exposure have always influenced the grading of multipitch alpine climbs.
He did not suddenly discover the fact that an 8b (or for that matter 6a, more my range...) in the middle of a long alpine route will typically be easier than an 8b or 6a at the local single pitch sports crag, while everybody else has so far missed it *.
It is simply the (arbitrary) convention.
CB
* or deliberately ignored it to inflate their resume. This unspoken insinuation is probably what rubs people like Beat Kammerlander the wrong way.
3
In reply to cb294:
From conversations I've seen elsewhere, I'm not sure that is a universal convention. It certainly doesn't fit with my experience at easier grades.
And it's worth noting various people in the responses to that IG post either saying "yes this needed to be said" or disagreeing with his assessment of the difficulties, so it's not at all obvious that he's the only one not in on the idea that this lower difficulty is what "should" be happening.
It's also far from clear it makes any sense, in that the level of "padding" you need to put into the grade to account for its multipitch nature will vary from person to person.
Edit: reading the IG post again, of course he notes that 6th and 7th grade pitches have been traditionally graded equivalently to single pitch routes, and that primarily this is a problem in the 8th grade. It's even less clear why it's beneficial to grade easier pitches one way and hard pitches another way!
Post edited at 18:49
In reply to CantClimbTom:
> I'm not sure what country has the biggest number of great climbers per population,
Slovenia, at least counting by 9a & upwards sport climbers of which it has 14 out of 2.1 million population: Not sure if that even includes Janja, although clearly there isn't the slightest doubt that she could if she wanted to
> but Belgium has to be on the leader board in that competition
Probably. 15 grimpeurs, but 11.6 million Belgians.
Numbers of climbers from here: http://escalade9.wifeo.com/par-nationalite.php
5
Doesn't sound like they're expecting an easy ride; pretty humble, in fact.
Post edited at 19:35
In reply to PaulJepson:
> How much weight would that really hold?
The idea of grading being based on consensus is hardly controversial. I mean, anyone can vote in the Rockfax database...
In reply to cb294: if you're giving individual pitches separate grades then that grading should be comparable to other single pieces else the grade is meaningless.
How much weight does their opinion carry.. we they've climbed a lot of other stuff, around the world on different rock types so I'd say quite a bit.
In reply to wbo2:
I understand the reasoning, but this is simply not how it is done. There always was a multipitch grade rebate, everybody knows it, and interprets guidebook information accordingly.
If, as AJM claims, this is even more pronounced in the 8s, there may be an argument to downgrade a few specific pitches.
CB
1
In reply to cb294:
> I understand the reasoning, but this is simply not how it is done. There always was a multipitch grade rebate, everybody knows it, and interprets guidebook information accordingly.
That's not been my experience in the Dolomites or around Chamonix.
I think it does happen in the UK, but it's obfuscated by the fact that routes get an overall grade and individual pitches on multipitch don't get proper grades (I find this extremely annoying but that's off topic).
> If, as AJM claims, this is even more pronounced in the 8s, there may be an argument to downgrade a few specific pitches.
Berthe's point, from what I remember of reading it at the time, was that the grades were accurate (not soft) up to the 8's, at which point they got soft, sometimes very soft (a couple of grades out in his opinion), and he was a bit annoyed by people claiming big numbers for these routes. I thought it was quite funny that there were some people in the comments agreeing with him, when I'm sure I'd seen publicity about their ascents with no mention of suggested downgrades or softness!
More on topic for the thread, it would be good downgrading drama if they suggested a downgrade for the dawn wall, but I'm sceptical that they will.
Post edited at 23:07
In reply to PaulJepson:
> Is the YDS based on the difficulty of a single hardest move like UK trad or an overall technical difficulty grade like the French system?
Nobody knows; it is a great mystery. If you ask an American they just look at you blankly as if it is a daft question and maybe mutter something meaningless.
4
In reply to PaulJepson:
> Is the YDS based on the difficulty of a single hardest move like UK trad or an overall technical difficulty grade like the French system?
It's one of those things where the meaning isn't totally clear. However, I think that modern use of the YDS is to use it like the French system, whereas old use is more like the British tech system. So, for weak punters like me who mostly climb old and therefore relatively easy routes which may or may not have been changed in grade to reflect changes in the understanding of the YDS it's a bit of a lottery. A 5.8 in Yosemite might have one '5.8 move' or many '5.8 moves' or maybe it's just many '5.7 moves'.
2
In reply to Fellover:
The main problem with YDS is it does not have a clear calibration point like the British adjectival grades where E10 or above has a death fall.
1
5
1
In reply to Michael Hood:
YDS disputes are for kindergarten, AID CLIMBING is where proper men go for grading wars!
youtube.com/watch?v=boQHYBhlOcs&
CB
5
In reply to cb294:
Classic... I particularly like the bit about "We have a confirmed A5 pitch - there's the corpse! Now who's going back up to finish the pitch?"...
In reply to Removed User:
> The main problem with YDS is it does not have a clear calibration point like the British adjectival grades where E10 or above has a death fall.
Its not even funny. I knew someone who died falling off a HS.
In reply to beardy mike:
> Classic... I particularly like the bit about "We have a confirmed A5 pitch - there's the corpse! Now who's going back up to finish the pitch?"...
And does the pitch get downgraded if they complete the pitch or only if they fall off but don't die?
1
In reply to PaulJepson:
https://www.instagram.com/p/CY5Ds4ftoSQ/
Looks like the owner of that blog was just spraying in the meadow...
"We got to say how it is; we got our asses kicked! 😀 But nonetheless, we believe in the power of time, stubbornness and practice. Yosemite’s climbing is very particular, we both need some time to get used to the style and footwork. We were puzzled about the difficulty of getting our ropes up! And even more blown away about the great imagination @tommycaldwell had to put this together. We can see how he bundled all his El Cap experience in one massive route.
Talking for myself, this is the biggest project I’ve ever tried. I’m getting out of my comfort zone like never before. But I’m incredibly thankful to be able to try this line. The traverse of pitch 15 goes well. Pitch 14 is still a puzzle! Besides practicing the climb, skin and energy management will be a challenge."
3
In reply to Robert Durran:
>Nobody knows; it is a great mystery. If you ask an American they just look at you blankly as if it is a daft question and maybe mutter something meaningless.
Why as someone with intelligence do you insist on constantly repeating this childish misrepresentation. The YDS number grade is clearly the physical difficulty of a pitch, ignoring risk, in the style you climb it; it's effectively a top-rope grade. Every experienced climber I've met over there can explain it clearly. Your concerns with the system are clearly down to what you see as inconsistent grading on what are narrower bands in your range than for UK (and there are plenty of inconsistencies in the UK or any other country's system). Compare the 3 point range of UK trad from cruxy tech 5b to super sustained tech 6a: there are 9 points on YDS and sport grades from 5.9 to to 5.11d and F5 to F7a
I like YDS as I can go on holiday to climb multi-pitch trad onsight and push myself with the prang potential being very clear. I climb consistently much harder there, than here, for that reason. All the UK ego games attached to the large differences that can arise between purist onsights, beta leads, headpoints or top-roping becomes irrelevant with YDS grades.
Post edited at 10:53
2
7
In reply to Fellover:
Give me some 5.8 examples as I've done a fair bit there in that range ... I've always found grades in Yosemite pretty good for the same style. The shock to the system there for me was the difference in how they grade cracks compared to slabs. I find Yosemite 5.8 crack typical for UK grit cruxy 5a or sustained 4c. Yosemite 5.8 slab is at least UK grit 5b. A good example in a 5.8 route South Crack on Stately Pleasure dome. The crack felt like VS and lowish 4c. The R rated 5.7 slab felt like E1 tough 4c (and worth P3 in YMC terms as a fall would involve a big slide and then a drop onto a sloping ledge)
1
In reply to beardy mike:
"We were puzzled about the difficulty of getting our ropes up!"
I assume they did manage to get a rope across the loop/dyno pitch to work the pitch...
I wonder how they managed it? Presumably some sort of aid shenanigans, no doubt complicated by the virtual/theoretical belay stance at the end of the dyno which I'm not sure ever got bolts installed.
In reply to Offwidth:
I remember rolling up to do Dike route on Pywiak Dome straight off the airplane and getting totally spanked by the never-ending runout... it was 5.9. That said I think slab down at J-Tree is even harder - I remember doing some 5.7 which was mindnumbingly runout. And these are still better than Mello slabs...
In reply to GrahamD:
You know this is a climbing forum don't you?
In reply to beardy mike:
We have probably done as much in Joshua Tree and Red Rocks as any UK holiday climbers of our ability (maybe 12 combined trips from two to four weeks and a couple of shorter visits). So as much as we love JT we are very aware of the preponderance of sandbags there. I tried to onsight a 5.9 at Indian Cove and was very glad I backed off when subsequently I failed to work it on tr (we were regularly tr flashing minor mid 5.10s as confidence building and technical warm ups to slab onsights)... also just managed to avoid a fall on poor RPs on a 5.4 that felt at least 5.8R. In contrast lost Horse Wall at JT is an absolute delight for UK trad crack and slab climbers from VS (the 5.7) to low extreme.
https://www.mountainproject.com/area/105721172/lost-horse-wall
Post edited at 12:02
1
In reply to Offwidth:
As a frame of reference, here is Stomaco Peloso (5c) which is given English 4c but on which you have a 20m runout... stuff of nightmares for many climbers The Italians can be somewhat bold...
http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-vWjvdOt5V7w/TcmaYJBI2BI/AAAAAAAAAkM/l8Aev6g2cyc/s...
In reply to Offwidth: How do you get greater clarity on the prang potential from what you yourself describe as efectively a top rope grade?
1
1
In reply to wbo2:
Because the YDS grading on trad comes with explicit prang potential 'film' grades, U, PG, PG13, R and X, and often with extra information on the crux bold pitches (as opposed to just the whole route).
In response to beardy mike
If you have 20m runouts on anything other than a single 4c move the route is E1.... it's amazing how many people don't understand how to grade for that level of boldness and how that damages our UK grading system. It seems the UKC grade votes on that link are not helping either. All very ironic given the invented grade fuss in the original press link.
Post edited at 13:21
2
In reply to beardy mike:
Ah yes... I remember that one.... Did it have one bolt on it (around where the climber is now... or slightly above).
I made the sensible choice and climbed the forest to the left... but we were aiming to do one of the routes that start from the ledge where this slab you are referring to ends up.
In reply to Offwidth:
Well that pitch in Italian money is UIAA IV+, which to most would indicate VS... no prang indicator, other than in the very old, not published anymore guide book the had a bald little fat guy with varying degrees of a hairy stomach to indicate required ball size. In fact I'm pretty sure the idea for that particular grading system came from this very route!
In reply to beardy mike:
As I said bad grading, especially in the lower grades, is an international problem. UKC can still help out on a more sensible UK grade.
In reply to Offwidth:
> >Nobody knows; it is a great mystery. If you ask an American they just look at you blankly as if it is a daft question and maybe mutter something meaningless.
> Why as someone with intelligence do you insist on constantly repeating this childish misrepresentation. The YDS number grade is clearly the physical difficulty of a pitch, ignoring risk, in the style you climb it; it's effectively a top-rope grade. Every experienced climber I've met over there can explain it clearly.
Sorry but I simply cannot agree. I get the impression that it is used in different ways in different places and on different rock types, certainly not always as the equivalent of a top-rope or French grade as you suggest. This seeming tailoring of its use to may work well with local knowledge, but it can certainly be confusing for visitors travelling to different places. It is common for topos to show different YDS grades for different parts of the same pitch. Here is an example:
https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=i&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.alpinist.com%2Fd....
I'm not saying that this a bad thing; it just shows that you are wrong! I have had conversations with American climbers where they have described a short pitch in Joshua Tree as somethiung like "a 5.8 slab into a 10a crack".
> Your concerns with the system are clearly down to what you see as inconsistent grading on what are narrower bands in your range than for UK.
No they are not. It is the inconsistency in what it is actually telling you and its inadequacy when not paired with a PG/R/X grade in indicating what you are letting yourself in for.
> All the UK ego games attached to the large differences that can arise between purist onsights, beta leads, headpoints or top-roping becomes irrelevant with YDS grades.
Well yes, the UK adjectival grade is often used as a "measure of achievement" grade, but most people seem to like that and it works because that is pretty much equivalent to a "level of overall challenge" grade which most people find useful.
Post edited at 14:58
3
In reply to Robert Durran:
I’ve seen topos that use French grades in exactly the same way you suggest, 2 grades per pitch where the pitch is unbalanced, that sort of thing. And you can describe a pitch as “7c to the lip followed by a thin 7a slab”, or even “a 7b into a V6 boulder through the roof” without anyone implying that the French grade is somehow confused about whether it relates to overall difficulty or not.
2
In reply to AJM:
> I’ve seen topos that use French grades in exactly the same way you suggest, 2 grades per pitch where the pitch is unbalanced, that sort of thing. And you can describe a pitch as “7c to the lip followed by a thin 7a slab”.
Yes, I've most often seen it used like that on trad routes and it can certainly be useful (I take it to mean that each section in isolation as a pitch would get that grade. But presumably a 7b wall into 7c roof might well be worth an overall grade higher than both, say 7c+. Anyway, it doesn't change my point that the YDS is not necessarily an overall pitch grade, just because a French grade isn't always either. Anyway, I think inconsistent use of the YDS goes well beyond this; it seems it can be used pretty much as anything from the equivalent of a UK technical grade to a French pitch grade. The most enlightening explanation I have ever heard (from someone on here) is that it is like a mini "physical" or French grade for a section of climbing between rests.
Post edited at 15:29
2
In reply to Robert Durran:
That half dome link gives trad information for aid climbers on pitch sub-sections for those who might want to free certain pitch sub-sections. I see no contradiction or issue in that. The overall top-rope grades of subsections don't contradict the tr pitch grade, so it's actually a clear benefit of the grading system. A 5.8 crack into a 5.10a slab is still a 5.10a pitch but the subdivision will be useful for climbers who are good at slabs but shit at crack technique. Big route topos often label such subsections...again a benefit.
>No they are not. It is the inconsistency in what it is actually telling you and its inadequacy when not paired with a PG/R/X grade in indicating what you are letting yourself in for.
In my experience it's no more inconsistent than UK trad grades let alone given the finer US grade gradations. Travel around the UK and you will find trad grades vary quite a bit from area to area and sandbags are still too common. I've found film ratings work well in the US with only rare exceptions and am familiar with similar with the old YMC P grades.
At least your latest arguments are reasonable (rather than the childish words in your earlier post).
Edit: if a 5.12c wall went into a 5.12d roof without a rest (say a sport route extension) then the grade for running the two together probably should be 5.13a. You keep seeing contradictions in the system based on ignorance of some users or grading inconsistency. I think UK trad climbers have to know quite a bit about how UK grading works to keep risk levels reasonable... occasional US trad climbers don't need to be so familiar.
Post edited at 15:44
In reply to Offwidth:
> That half dome link gives trad information for aid climbers on pitch sub-sections for those who might want to free certain pitch sub-sections.
Maybe, but you see section grades for pitches on plenty of routes which nobody aids.
> I see no contradiction or issue in that. The overall top-rope grades of subsections don't contradict the tr pitch grade, so it's actually a clear benefit of the grading system. A 5.8 crack into a 5.10a slab is still a 5.10a pitch but the subdivision will be useful for climbers who are good at slabs but shit at crack technique.
I agree that the subdivision can be useful but it certainly contradicts your assertion that it is necessarily a pitch physical tr grade. A 10b wall into a 10b roof could easily be overall harder than 10b say.
> > No they are not. It is the inconsistency in what it is actually telling you and its inadequacy when not paired with a PG/R/X grade in indicating what you are letting yourself in for.
> In my experience it's no more inconsistent than UK trad grades let alone given the finer US grade gradations. Travel around the UK and you will find trad grades vary quite a bit from area to area and sandbags are still too common.
I am not talking about inconsistencies in difficulty for the same grade in different places (it happens with every grading system everywhere). I am talking about inconsistencies in what it is actually trying to measure in the first place.
> At least your latest arguments are reasonable (rather than the childish words in your earlier post).
Not childish. Just an attempt to humourously sum up the YDS situation.
In reply to Robert Durran:
>Maybe, but you see section grades for pitches on plenty of routes which nobody aids.
Said a man who clearly never watched less experienced people in the US (not competent in a specific technique) resort to 'French freeing' style aid. It's usually there as it's useful ...a bold crux section or say a section known to cause struggles. I've seen way more bad practice in the US as people carry too much gear, (and even the second rope for abseil on their back) adding to risk. Even some hard climbers have been known to struggle on offwidth sections said to be an equivalent of low extreme.
>I agree that the subdivision can be useful but it certainly contradicts your assertion that it is necessarily a pitch physical tr grade.
I never made that assertion...a pitch grade is the tr grade just as a section grade is a tr grade. It's a benefit of the grading system!
>A 10b wall into a 10b roof could easily be overall harder than 10b say.
Yes and if so the pitch should be graded that way as 10c.
>I am talking about inconsistencies in what it is actually trying to measure in the first place.
In the last decades of UK guidebook work I've lost count of grades I've pushed hard to change as there is simply no logic given the typical route experience and how the UK trad system is supposed to work... that's just an example of doubly bad grading.
>Not childish. Just an attempt to humourously sum up the YDS situation.
It's the way ya tell um
Post edited at 16:03
In reply to Offwidth
> Said a man who clearly never watched less experienced people in the US (not competent in a specific technique) resort to 'French freeing' style aid. It's usually there as it's useful ...a bold crux section or say a section known to cause struggles. I've seen way more bad practice in the US as people carry too much gear, (and even the second rope for abseil on their back) adding to risk. Even some hard climbers have been known to struggle on offwidth sections said to be an equivalent of low extreme.
I think my observations of US climbers is that there is probably more nonsense and poor style going on but also more climbers just confidently climbing stuff with no faff, nonchalantly putting in a token runner every 5 metres or so!
> >I agree that the subdivision can be useful but it certainly contradicts your assertion that it is necessarily a pitch physical tr grade.
> I never made that assertion...a pitch grade is the tr grade just as a section grade is a tr grade. It's a benefit of the grading system!
To quote your post of 10.59: "The YDS number grade is clearly the physical difficulty of a pitch". Are you now in fact agreeing with me that it gets used as a physical difficulty grade for anything from pretty much a single move to a whole pitch (ie anything between a UK technical grade to a French grade)?
> In the last decades of UK guidebook work I've lost count of grades I've pushed hard to change as there is simply no logic given the typical route experience and how the UK trad system is supposed to work... that's just an example of doubly bad grading.
But I think we all at least agree on what the UK adjectival grade is supposed to tell us.
In reply to JLS:
> I assume they did manage to get a rope across the loop/dyno pitch to work the pitch...
> I wonder how they managed it? Presumably some sort of aid shenanigans, no doubt complicated by the virtual/theoretical belay stance at the end of the dyno which I'm not sure ever got bolts installed.
The loop/dyno pitch starts from a hands-off stance at the end of the previous Dike Traverse pitch. The actual belay is on bolts just to the left of this stance, in the gap between the stance and a right-facing crack/dihedral just left again; I'm guessing that this gap is about three horizontal metres. The original Harding/Caldwell 'Wall of Early Morning Light' comes up the crack/dihedral from below and continues up it for several pitches to the Wine Tower ledge; the bolted stance appears to have already been there as an optional belay on WoEML, so it would have made complete sense for [Tommy] Caldwell to use it rather than placing more bolts at the hands-off stance. The dyno pitch climbs up various features on the wall to the right of the WoEML dihedral to some sort of take-off point whence it launches leftwards across the gap to a target hold in the dihedral, probably around 10 - 15 metres above the bolted stance. Clearly this point can be gained - either free or with aid - by simply climbing up the dihedral from the stance; one would then continue up the pitch to fix ropes at the next bolted anchor. The loop pitch moves a short distance back right on the Dike Traverse before climbing a long way down, possibly to the point where WoEML arrives on its leftward traverse from the general vicinity of the Caldwell/Jorgeson 'Portaledge Camp'; it then crosses leftwards into the dihedral and follows WoEML up this to arrive back at the same belay that it started from - but, crucially, on the other side of 'the gap' - before continuing up to merge with the dyno pitch at its touch-down point. It was quite confusing at the time as to why either of these two options was necessary when it appeared that both started from a portaledge that was already in the dihedral that they were trying to get into; the point was, of course, that the gap between hands-off stance and dihedral is, although narrow, presumably somewhat blank and lacking in any convenient feature to jump for - meaning that the only way to make the crossing at this level would either involve clipping across on the belay bolts or crawling into the portaledge at one end and out again at the other. Neither of these, of course, would count as free climbing!
Post edited at 17:00
1
In reply to Robert Durran:
> To quote your post of 10.59: "The YDS number grade is clearly the physical difficulty of a pitch". Are you now in fact agreeing with me that it gets used as a physical difficulty grade for anything from pretty much a single move to a whole pitch (ie anything between a UK technical grade to a French grade)?
Actually you already pointed out what YDS is.
It is the overall physical difficulty of that section. Note, Section =/ Pitch.
But as with everything, things have actually evolved a bit.
Kind of like the UK Tech grade. Originally it was just the hardest move, but at times it was the hardest sequence (or vise versa or something in between). I even recall reading that it was sometime the set of moves from easier to again easier climbing (but I guess that is how it has never been intented to be used).
Things and definitions change... old school 5.9 can be anything, as it was where the grade was capped at time. So unless the grade has been revised, at could very well be 5.11b. That is not per se the fault of the grading system, but history of bad decision (who on earth decided, that the grade-range is not open ended)... oddly enough, I recall similar discussion ongoing about the UK Tech grade again (which realistically had been capped at 7A for how long... finally someone is actually using 7B IIRC).
In reply to Robert Durran:
>I think my observations of US climbers is that there is probably more nonsense and poor style going on but also more climbers just confidently climbing stuff with no faff, nonchalantly putting in a token runner every 5 metres or so!
Agreed, albeit on the softer sandstones you don't want to be running things out too much. I'd add people are more friendly... I've been offered a beer back at the parking from someone I first met en route or on the walk-out on almost every trip to the US.. To be fair a certain Skye guide did his bit to try and level up from the Scottish side of the UK in one go once.
>To quote your post of 10.59
Which is why I clarified it. As I said the fact the same grading system works for a pitch and a section of it is an advantage in my view. It's only ever really a single move if that is an isolated crux move, in which case the same would apply to a French grade.
>But I think we all at least agree on what the UK adjectival grade is supposed to tell us.
Another joke I guess... it's been like pulling teeth with a few, sometimes dealing with actual logical contradiction (especially on micro-routes with bouldering grades way higher than logically possible with the supposedly correct trad tech grades).
Post edited at 16:36
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...