UKC

The topo shown in the latest Pembroke Rockfax guide for the 3 star E5 Adam Adamant at Stackpole is of a completely different route!
Adam Adamant is on the south facing wall, some 20 metres away. It is currently missing its crucial thread. It would not be possible to locate the line without the CC guide. The west-facing line taken by the Rockfax topo is Water Off a Duck's Back. It is given E3 4a,6a in the current CC Guide with a warning that it's been affected by rockfall. Frank Thompson and I replaced the insitu threads and reclimbed it. The first move on the second pitch is now very bold and we thought worth E4.
How did the guidebook writers mess up so badly? Even a cursory glance at the arete shown in the topo would have told them something was wrong, as the top pitch of Water Off a Duck's Back is coated with insitu threads, while the top pitch of Adam Adamant has none.
I hope the incompetence and laziness shown here isn't replicated elsewhere in the guide. We wasted a lot of time working things out and would have never have succeeded if we hadn't taken a copy of the CC guide to the bottom of the crag.

In reply to John Alcock:

I think the Pembroke Rockfax is great but there are a couple of other examples that I know of (crystal slabs and Hercules at stennis) with lines on the topos being in the wrong place.

A shame, but I guess that will happen with most guides.

In reply to John Alcock:

you seem to think that Rockfax is some great big company with a huge staff. The guys who write the guides put an enormous amount of work into them and considering the number of routes and details they have to get right they're bound to miss the odd bit. How about maybe you contact them about it if your unhappy rather than slag them off as incompetent and lazy?

In reply to John Alcock:

John, I don't think there is a single guidebook that is completely error free. Nor will there ever be. I'm willing to bet that the new CC volumes will have some, but I'd be the last person to criticise the guidebook team.

In reply to John Alcock:

Hi John,

I am currently out of the country but I'll have a look at this when get back.

Please don't judge a guidebook by one mistake. I would have thought that someone like yourself would be well aware that all guidebooks contain mistakes. The CC Pembroke guide itself contains very many mistakes which I am sure you are aware of.

Alan

In reply to Scarab9: I always email guidebook authors if I find a mistake, so that the next edition can be even better. But in the same email I do try and remember to thank them for all their excellent work and the amazing achievement of 99.99% accuracy!

I think guidebook authors must have very thick skin. I couldn't do it, that's for sure.

In reply to John Alcock:


That's a bit bloody harsh.

Mick

In reply to John Alcock:

Well done for getting on these routes. A major part of the problem is that so few people try them and so the inevitable errors will go uncorrected. Despite good tides, great weather and no bird ban Stackpole has been deserted the last two days we've been there. Where are you people? This is a fabulous crag, one of the best at Pembroke!

We got completely spanked by one of our routes (The Whaler) and had an epic as a consequence. Better guidebook information (big cams would be reassuring on the top pitch) might have helped avoid this but that's life on a big sea cliff isn't it?

In reply to Alan James - UKC:
Hi Alan

I have already added the information to the Rockfax data base.

I fully appreciate the hard work that goes into guidebooks, but I don't understand how a mistake like this can happen.

In this case the only way to find the route is via the topo. The written description does not tell the climber where the route is. Without an accurate topo it is therefore impossible to find the climb. In this case the topo is of an entirely different climb on a different section of cliff.

With a comprehensive guide I can understand how some routes descriptions remain unchecked (and yes the old CC guide is littered with errors), but with a selective commercially produced guide (in which many routes remain the same as the previous edition) it seems to me that the buyer has a reasonable expection that all routes will either have been climbed by or at least checked by the authors. I understand that the odd typo will slip through, but am bemused as to how a mistake like this can happen.

At first sight the new Pembroke Rockfax seems beautifully produced and a huge improvement on the previous edition. I am obviously hoping that the boob over Adam Adamant is an isolated one.

John

In reply to John Alcock:

"I hope the incompetence and laziness shown here isn't replicated elsewhere in the guide."

Concur with others. That's harsh. WAY too harsh.

Look at it this way. My copy of "Western Grit" contains over 2000 routes. That's ONE of the many rockfax publications. Given as far as I know these are mainly the work of two people, I think it is reasonable to expect the odd error.

Hence I think calling someone Incompetent and Lazy based on one or two routes out of thousands is out of order.

For what its worth, I own both CC guides and Rockfax guides to most of the crags I frequent, and have never found an issue with either.

In reply to John Alcock:

I wouldn't describe it as laziness. The Rockfax company produces guidebooks for so many different areas it would be impossible for them to have the background knowledge (or as greater passion for an area) as with local guidebooks, which take so much longer to produce. The Rockfax team put in a fair amount of effort and usually have good results, but they also have strict deadlines to meet, so route checking is going to suffer a little.

In reply to John Alcock:

As I said, I will need to check up how this error got in there when I get back to Sheffield.

Mike R wrote up a much more comprehensive Stackpole section than what we eventually included sine we didn't have enough space and it would have been illogical to have included so many climbs there when we were more selective elsewhere at more accessible and popular cliffs. So I edited his routes down. It is possible that my editing introduced this error, or it could have been that Mike had got the line wrong himself. I know he had some tide problems when doing that side of Stackpole and was chased off.

I also know that the CC guide is extremely confusing and difficult to follow for much of Stackpole since the routes see so few ascents and most of the descriptions are just verbatim FA descriptions written by different people, and relating only to the routes that existed at the time of their first ascents.

Adam Adamant is possibly the most obscure route in the guide, and one which has very few, if any repeat ascents.

There is a document here which details a few other small errors and omissions - http://www.rockfax.com/publications/miniguides/item.php?id=166

Alan

In reply to Franco C:

Never miss a chance eh! We put in a 'fair amount of effort' - well thanks for that. And we don't have 'strict deadlines' - Mark spent four years on his West Country Climbs for example.

I assume your and you team are assisting Steve Crowe with the next North York Moors guide - or is all mouth and no trousers?

Chris

In reply to Alan James - UKC:

Hi Alan

I totally agree the CC guide is not easy to follow for that section of Stackpole. It took us quite a while wandering around at the base to sort out where everything went.

If anyone does go down to the Leaning Tower area, then be aware that not only is the(apparently) crucial thread missing from Adam Adamant, but the threads on the routes to the right look in a dreadful state.

Frank is going to let the CC know about our proposed new grade for Water Off a Duck's Back following the rock fall. The spike and peg mentioned in the CC guide are no more, so the move left onto the arete is harder and very badly protected.

I do appreciate the inclusion of more obscure routes such as Adam Adamant in the new Rockfax. Frank and I love getting on lines we haven't done. It's great to see classics like Wishful Thinking finally getting the publicity they deserve.

I am well aware how hard it is to describe how to find the location of many Pembroke routes (I thought the last CC guide was awful in this respect). So far with the exception of yesterday's debacle, I've found the new Rockfax excellent in this regard.

In reply to Chris Craggs:

A bit touchy there.

In reply to Chris Craggs:


Jesus, last time I defend you chaps...

Me and dave are founding our own guidebook company actually- Stonemail. You should come join us. Our first publication is a biography of the cuddly legend that is Chris Craggs, man, farmer and entrepreneur...

The moors guide is a book fuelled by the passion of all those inhabitants of the moors, with pages scented with heather, unreasonable right wing agendas and slight tendencies towards our woolly friends. It may take another decade to be produced, but at least HighcliffE will be spelt with an 'E' and Whitestone Cliffe will be in it.

love

In reply to Franco C:

Actually Franco, I thought your post was remarkably pro Rockfax.

In reply to jon:

I know, ever since my good mate Jas disappeared without a trace after criticising rockfax, I have been very careful only to be positive.

In reply to Franco C:

though possibly only as a historical footnote after it's fallen down

In reply to Chris Craggs:


Shouldn't that be "all mouth and trousers" without the "no", meaning all talk but no substance behind the cloth? I'm never sure of these Northern idioms.

In reply to Coel Hellier:

According to this

http://www.phrases.org.uk/bulletin_board/19/messages/511.html

both are acceptable uses.

I wasn't aware they were Northern, although happy to take my tiny share of the credit if that is the case.

I'd say 'all mouth and no trousers' for what it's worth!

In reply to Chris James:


Out of interest, what would you consider the "... no trousers" to mean? In "all mouth and trousers" the meaning is (I would think) cloth only, nothing behind the cloth, no substance.

In reply to Coel Hellier:

I liked the Texas version - "all hat and no cattle"!


Chris

In reply to Coel Hellier:

If you take the expression 'she wears the trousers in that household... ', then trousers has the opposite meaning to your interpretation. I think I'd go with Chris's version.

In reply to jon: I think the rockfax guidebooks are great (despite referring to all guidebooks as 'the book of lies'), theyve been my bedside reading for years now, but without being a smarty pants and pointing out previous errors, can anyone spot the three line errors in the Black Rocks section in the newest Eastern Grit?

-to be fair thet're all hard routes that havnt had many repeats, so info on them would have been limited i guess.