This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Climbing grades are a relative and open-ended scale.
A grade is a number that signifies the approximate difficulty of a climb relative to other climbs.
Therefore there is no such thing as 'grade creep'.
Discuss.
A grade is a number that signifies the approximate difficulty of a climb relative to other climbs.
Therefore there is no such thing as 'grade creep'.
Discuss.
In reply to hexcentric:
True enough in a way - it depends on just how subjective grades really are as opposed to their 'actual' difficulty ie people find some thing harder now than previous generations and vice versa?
True enough in a way - it depends on just how subjective grades really are as opposed to their 'actual' difficulty ie people find some thing harder now than previous generations and vice versa?
In reply to Bulls Crack:
But unless we want comparability across time as well as space, that really doesn't matter. I mean, I don't care if it felt VS in 1960 if it feels E2 now.
But unless we want comparability across time as well as space, that really doesn't matter. I mean, I don't care if it felt VS in 1960 if it feels E2 now.
In reply to hexcentric:
Good try. Grade creep is about the drift of the reference norm, not specific comparative route grades. Grade creep can happen whilst comparative grades all still compare well...just add a grade to everything.
Good try. Grade creep is about the drift of the reference norm, not specific comparative route grades. Grade creep can happen whilst comparative grades all still compare well...just add a grade to everything.
In reply to hexcentric:
Advances in protection and footwear have changed the relative difficulty of some climbs in relation to others. That's the source of some grade creep: it's easier to upgrade the minority of routes which are still poorly protected than to downgrade everything else. Changing skill sets (wall bred climbers can't chimney, for example) have also had a role.
Advances in protection and footwear have changed the relative difficulty of some climbs in relation to others. That's the source of some grade creep: it's easier to upgrade the minority of routes which are still poorly protected than to downgrade everything else. Changing skill sets (wall bred climbers can't chimney, for example) have also had a role.
In reply to hexcentric:
I think the point is, they're not supposed to be relative, they're supposed to be absolute. However, that is not really achievable due to the vagaries and complexities of human nature. Grade creep is therefore a natural and unavoidable consequence of our desire and fascination with routes and their comparable difficulty.
1. Route A is given VS.
2. Route A is compared to route B (HVS) and thought to be harder by consensus.
3. Do we downgrade B or upgrade A?
4. Ego and other non-useful emotions result in upgrading A more often than downgrading B.
5. The net effect of this is a slow and steady 'grade creep'.
Obviously what Mark Bull said is a factor too. But I think grade creep would happen irrespective of advances in gear & shoes.
And some routes get upgraded because they are just wrong.
> Climbing grades are a relative and open-ended scale.
>
>
I think the point is, they're not supposed to be relative, they're supposed to be absolute. However, that is not really achievable due to the vagaries and complexities of human nature. Grade creep is therefore a natural and unavoidable consequence of our desire and fascination with routes and their comparable difficulty.
1. Route A is given VS.
2. Route A is compared to route B (HVS) and thought to be harder by consensus.
3. Do we downgrade B or upgrade A?
4. Ego and other non-useful emotions result in upgrading A more often than downgrading B.
5. The net effect of this is a slow and steady 'grade creep'.
Obviously what Mark Bull said is a factor too. But I think grade creep would happen irrespective of advances in gear & shoes.
And some routes get upgraded because they are just wrong.
In reply to jonny2vests:
Not true. The original graded list was intended as a way of showing how all the established routes compare to each other, and was based entirely on opinion. It was introduced due to an increase in fatal accidents thanks to more beginners taking up the pastime without experienced guidance. Some system was believed necessary to act as a buffer to protect beginners until they had gained enough experience to judge for themselves.
This was in 1895; you should read the original climbing guides by O.G. Jones and the Abrahams.
> I think the point is, they're not supposed to be relative, they're supposed to be absolute
Not true. The original graded list was intended as a way of showing how all the established routes compare to each other, and was based entirely on opinion. It was introduced due to an increase in fatal accidents thanks to more beginners taking up the pastime without experienced guidance. Some system was believed necessary to act as a buffer to protect beginners until they had gained enough experience to judge for themselves.
This was in 1895; you should read the original climbing guides by O.G. Jones and the Abrahams.
In reply to Mark Bull:
all true, but there's also ego rubbing and mass pressure.
I don't care one way or another what people think, I always apply the original grade as a personal tick. Winter is a bit different because they changed the system at some point.
Grasp the nettle in limekilns (Fife, Scotland is never an E3...and never will be in my books).
To further muddle waters, however, there were climbs that were grossly undergraded because the ascensionists were just light years ahead of the rest but could only label their climbs with what label was avalaible then!
Always makes me think of some story of a northern irish guy (?) who climbed pretty much in isolation and thought he could only climb E3, so graded everything E3- turns out some were E5/6.
It is a discussion, so we talk about it but for me what matters is what I deep down believe. My first E3, never felt E3. I was chuffed of the number but always knew it was not as hard as many E2s I had done/tried...years later, it got downgraded.
my message has now shifted to completely anecdotal and nearly irrelevant, so feel free to discard it as garbage (as if you needed my permission to have made a judgement). Not even worth 2 pence...
> (In reply to hexcentric)
>
> Advances in protection and footwear have changed the relative difficulty of some climbs in relation to others. That's the source of some grade creep: it's easier to upgrade the minority of routes which are still poorly protected than to downgrade everything else. Changing skill sets (wall bred climbers can't chimney, for example) have also had a role.
>
> Advances in protection and footwear have changed the relative difficulty of some climbs in relation to others. That's the source of some grade creep: it's easier to upgrade the minority of routes which are still poorly protected than to downgrade everything else. Changing skill sets (wall bred climbers can't chimney, for example) have also had a role.
all true, but there's also ego rubbing and mass pressure.
I don't care one way or another what people think, I always apply the original grade as a personal tick. Winter is a bit different because they changed the system at some point.
Grasp the nettle in limekilns (Fife, Scotland is never an E3...and never will be in my books).
To further muddle waters, however, there were climbs that were grossly undergraded because the ascensionists were just light years ahead of the rest but could only label their climbs with what label was avalaible then!
Always makes me think of some story of a northern irish guy (?) who climbed pretty much in isolation and thought he could only climb E3, so graded everything E3- turns out some were E5/6.
It is a discussion, so we talk about it but for me what matters is what I deep down believe. My first E3, never felt E3. I was chuffed of the number but always knew it was not as hard as many E2s I had done/tried...years later, it got downgraded.
my message has now shifted to completely anecdotal and nearly irrelevant, so feel free to discard it as garbage (as if you needed my permission to have made a judgement). Not even worth 2 pence...
In reply to Offwidth:
Example?
> Grade creep can happen whilst comparative grades all still compare well...just add a grade to everything.
Example?
In reply to jonny2vests:
Which gives a good case for sandbags. I did The Toy yesterday and frigged it to death. In spite of climbing E2 cleanly almost every time I've been to the crag (with a rope) this year. So is it really easier than the E2s? Of course it isn't, it's completely sustained 5c so you have to place (small, fiddly) gear off rubbish holds and get desperately pumped. Most E1 5cs have a rest from which to place bomber gear and then you have to do one hard move before you're back on massive holds again. It's a full step up in difficulty from E1 5c, and way harder than a pumpy E2 6a(!) like Midshipman which has massive holds and sinker jams and gets "top of the grade"(!) E2.
But should it stay as E1? Yes it should! Keeping well protected sandbags in place keeps grade creep in check. Next time someone ways x E1 should be E2, I'll say, "is it harder than The Toy"?
Poorly protected sandbags are irresponsible, but well protected ones serve a useful purpose.
> (In reply to hexcentric)
> [...]
> [...]
>
> 1. Route A is given VS.
> 2. Route A is compared to route B (HVS) and thought to be harder by consensus.
> 3. Do we downgrade B or upgrade A?
> 4. Ego and other non-useful emotions result in upgrading A more often than downgrading B.
> 5. The net effect of this is a slow and steady 'grade creep'.
>
Very true. Online voting provides the process for point 4 to dominate the whole system. I reckon that when people fail or struggle on route, they vote for the grade above. But when they cruise a route, they say "easy grade x", only when it's laughable do they actually vote for the grade below because it diminishes their achievement. So by using the voting system, grade creep is inevitable.> 1. Route A is given VS.
> 2. Route A is compared to route B (HVS) and thought to be harder by consensus.
> 3. Do we downgrade B or upgrade A?
> 4. Ego and other non-useful emotions result in upgrading A more often than downgrading B.
> 5. The net effect of this is a slow and steady 'grade creep'.
>
Which gives a good case for sandbags. I did The Toy yesterday and frigged it to death. In spite of climbing E2 cleanly almost every time I've been to the crag (with a rope) this year. So is it really easier than the E2s? Of course it isn't, it's completely sustained 5c so you have to place (small, fiddly) gear off rubbish holds and get desperately pumped. Most E1 5cs have a rest from which to place bomber gear and then you have to do one hard move before you're back on massive holds again. It's a full step up in difficulty from E1 5c, and way harder than a pumpy E2 6a(!) like Midshipman which has massive holds and sinker jams and gets "top of the grade"(!) E2.
But should it stay as E1? Yes it should! Keeping well protected sandbags in place keeps grade creep in check. Next time someone ways x E1 should be E2, I'll say, "is it harder than The Toy"?
Poorly protected sandbags are irresponsible, but well protected ones serve a useful purpose.
In reply to Only a hill:
Yes, you can still have a theoretical absolute system that fulfils that role. We compare them with each other (obviously by opinion - what else?), but the fact that there is an implied benchmark, which is aspirational and not really definable, is a given.
> (In reply to jonny2vests)
> [...]
>
> Not true. The original graded list was intended as a way of showing how all the established routes compare to each other, and was based entirely on opinion.
> [...]
>
> Not true. The original graded list was intended as a way of showing how all the established routes compare to each other, and was based entirely on opinion.
Yes, you can still have a theoretical absolute system that fulfils that role. We compare them with each other (obviously by opinion - what else?), but the fact that there is an implied benchmark, which is aspirational and not really definable, is a given.
In reply to hexcentric:
"> Grade creep can happen whilst comparative grades all still compare well...just add a grade to everything.
Example?"
That was an example ????????!!!!!!!!
"> Grade creep can happen whilst comparative grades all still compare well...just add a grade to everything.
Example?"
That was an example ????????!!!!!!!!
In reply to hexcentric:
Grades for climbs change because of a change in what climbers' perceive:
1) the difficulty of the route to be (difficulty in real terms, not the grade).
2) what a particular grade should feel like difficulty-wise.
When folk object to 'grade creep' (as opposed to say 'grade correction') they are mainly objecting to the latter shift in perception. Sometimes with good reason - for example I'd say the recent upgrade of Cioch Nose to Severe is a bit of a joke. This is a benchmark V-diff ("The diff to end all diffs" - Patey).
Grades for climbs change because of a change in what climbers' perceive:
1) the difficulty of the route to be (difficulty in real terms, not the grade).
2) what a particular grade should feel like difficulty-wise.
When folk object to 'grade creep' (as opposed to say 'grade correction') they are mainly objecting to the latter shift in perception. Sometimes with good reason - for example I'd say the recent upgrade of Cioch Nose to Severe is a bit of a joke. This is a benchmark V-diff ("The diff to end all diffs" - Patey).
In reply to Jon Stewart:
I don't think purposefully retaining the wrong grade (and from what you've said that seems to be the case) for routes is any better than routes being upgraded when they shouldn't. Why not keep 'grade creep' in check by just giving things the correct grade?
> Which gives a good case for sandbags. I did The Toy yesterday and frigged it to death. In spite of climbing E2 cleanly almost every time I've been to the crag (with a rope) this year. So is it really easier than the E2s? Of course it isn't, it's completely sustained 5c so you have to place (small, fiddly) gear off rubbish holds and get desperately pumped. Most E1 5cs have a rest from which to place bomber gear and then you have to do one hard move before you're back on massive holds again. It's a full step up in difficulty from E1 5c, and way harder than a pumpy E2 6a(!) like Midshipman which has massive holds and sinker jams and gets "top of the grade"(!) E2.
>
> But should it stay as E1? Yes it should! Keeping well protected sandbags in place keeps grade creep in check. Next time someone ways x E1 should be E2, I'll say, "is it harder than The Toy"?
>
> Poorly protected sandbags are irresponsible, but well protected ones serve a useful purpose.
>
> But should it stay as E1? Yes it should! Keeping well protected sandbags in place keeps grade creep in check. Next time someone ways x E1 should be E2, I'll say, "is it harder than The Toy"?
>
> Poorly protected sandbags are irresponsible, but well protected ones serve a useful purpose.
I don't think purposefully retaining the wrong grade (and from what you've said that seems to be the case) for routes is any better than routes being upgraded when they shouldn't. Why not keep 'grade creep' in check by just giving things the correct grade?
In reply to Michael Gordon:
That is not grade creep. That is one route being overgraded.
If in theory that was then taken as benchmark Severe, and everything else was regraded in accordance with it, you would have so called 'grade creep'.
Except you wouldn't, because everything would still be the same. There's no intrinsic quality of 'Severeness'; all it means is that the route is about the same as other 'Severes'.
> I'd say the recent upgrade of Cioch Nose to Severe is a bit of a joke. This is a benchmark V-diff ("The diff to end all diffs" - Patey).
That is not grade creep. That is one route being overgraded.
If in theory that was then taken as benchmark Severe, and everything else was regraded in accordance with it, you would have so called 'grade creep'.
Except you wouldn't, because everything would still be the same. There's no intrinsic quality of 'Severeness'; all it means is that the route is about the same as other 'Severes'.
In reply to Michael Gordon:
If it were that simple Michael, do you not think that would be adopted?
> (In reply to Jon Stewart)
>
> [...]
>
> Why not keep 'grade creep' in check by just giving things the correct grade?
>
> [...]
>
> Why not keep 'grade creep' in check by just giving things the correct grade?
If it were that simple Michael, do you not think that would be adopted?
In reply to Michael Gordon:
Why not keep 'grade creep' in check by just giving things the correct grade?
Because it's subjective, so there's no such thing as the correct grade. What feels like the 'correct grade' at one crag is totally different from the 'correct grade' at another because of the culture that develops around particular crags. I'm all for keeping it random and silly since any quest for objectivtity will utterly fail as we all know.
> (In reply to Jon Stewart)
Why not keep 'grade creep' in check by just giving things the correct grade?
Because it's subjective, so there's no such thing as the correct grade. What feels like the 'correct grade' at one crag is totally different from the 'correct grade' at another because of the culture that develops around particular crags. I'm all for keeping it random and silly since any quest for objectivtity will utterly fail as we all know.
In reply to hexcentric:
If a route was done originally with no protection at HVS but is now well protected by lots of gear, should it be downgraded?
If not, then people who can't do it without protection are not HVS leaders.;-{
If a route was done originally with no protection at HVS but is now well protected by lots of gear, should it be downgraded?
If not, then people who can't do it without protection are not HVS leaders.;-{
In reply to hexcentric:
The clearest example in the peak grit area I know well and have all the old guides is the failure to downgrade crack and break-to-break climbs as they moved from serious to protectable. Any average grade creep since cams became common is only a fraction of a grade at most (although some individual routes have moved more).
The clearest example in the peak grit area I know well and have all the old guides is the failure to downgrade crack and break-to-break climbs as they moved from serious to protectable. Any average grade creep since cams became common is only a fraction of a grade at most (although some individual routes have moved more).
In reply to Jon Stewart:
We could appoint a grade czar. Basically all grades are decided by him alone. As it happens, I'm looking for a job at the mo...
> (In reply to Michael Gordon)
> [...]
> I'm all for keeping it random and silly since any quest for objectivtity will utterly fail as we all know.
> [...]
> I'm all for keeping it random and silly since any quest for objectivtity will utterly fail as we all know.
We could appoint a grade czar. Basically all grades are decided by him alone. As it happens, I'm looking for a job at the mo...
In reply to sutty:
More gear
Dynamic ropes
Harnesses
Sticky rubber
Chalk
Mobile Phones
Helicopters
Mountain Rescue
Matts
Weather forecasts
UKC
> (In reply to hexcentric)
>
> If a route was done originally with no protection at HVS but is now well protected by lots of gear, should it be downgraded?
>
Everything should be downgraded because we have:>
> If a route was done originally with no protection at HVS but is now well protected by lots of gear, should it be downgraded?
>
More gear
Dynamic ropes
Harnesses
Sticky rubber
Chalk
Mobile Phones
Helicopters
Mountain Rescue
Matts
Weather forecasts
UKC
In reply to Jon Stewart:
The indoor wall Alien Rock in Edinburgh lets people vote on the grades of new routes. I think the routes at Alien Rock tend to be tougher for the grade than, say, Ratho or Ibrox (where the grades aren't voted on).
Ego might plausibly be a cause of downgrading as well as upgrading - saying "I thought The Toy felt like HVS" if it is a sandbag at E1 could be a subtle way of saying how great you are. Lack of confidence could cause a downgrade "I usually can't do E1 and this felt OK, so it must only be HVS".
The indoor wall Alien Rock in Edinburgh lets people vote on the grades of new routes. I think the routes at Alien Rock tend to be tougher for the grade than, say, Ratho or Ibrox (where the grades aren't voted on).
Ego might plausibly be a cause of downgrading as well as upgrading - saying "I thought The Toy felt like HVS" if it is a sandbag at E1 could be a subtle way of saying how great you are. Lack of confidence could cause a downgrade "I usually can't do E1 and this felt OK, so it must only be HVS".
In reply to jonny2vests: Quite right. So let's get rid of these nonsense grading systems too. What we need is a return to Victorian values and a grading system of:
An easy day for a lady
A refreshing interlude
An energetic passage
A stiff course
A challenge not to be undertaken by married men with children
That should cover everything.
T.
An easy day for a lady
A refreshing interlude
An energetic passage
A stiff course
A challenge not to be undertaken by married men with children
That should cover everything.
T.
In reply to hexcentric:
Probably depends on how you define 'grade creep'. If you mean routes being upgraded when they shouldn't (i.e. 'creep' rather than 'correction') then Cioch Nose is a good example of this. If you mean the large-scale upgrading of routes across the country (for whatever reason/justification) then that is also in evidence. Out of all the routes that have seen a change of grade the majority have seen an upgrade rather than downgrade - that is a fact.
Of course every single route hasn't seen a change in grade; routes are percieved to be different on an individual level - some are harder than others within their respective grades (grades 'digitise' an analogue reality after all). But the upgrading trend is there.
Probably depends on how you define 'grade creep'. If you mean routes being upgraded when they shouldn't (i.e. 'creep' rather than 'correction') then Cioch Nose is a good example of this. If you mean the large-scale upgrading of routes across the country (for whatever reason/justification) then that is also in evidence. Out of all the routes that have seen a change of grade the majority have seen an upgrade rather than downgrade - that is a fact.
Of course every single route hasn't seen a change in grade; routes are percieved to be different on an individual level - some are harder than others within their respective grades (grades 'digitise' an analogue reality after all). But the upgrading trend is there.
In reply to jonny2vests:
I discussed this in depth with Offwidth a while back. There appears to be two options:
1) down-grade routes every time there is a new innovation (nylon ropes, harnesses, chalk, belay plates, nuts, cams, decent guidebook etc) so everything would be Diff nowadays.
2) keep grades much the same but accept that the routes are 'easier' undertakings than they used to be.
Chris
> (In reply to sutty)
> [...]
> Everything should be downgraded because we have:
>
> More gear
> Dynamic ropes
> Harnesses
> Sticky rubber
> Chalk
> Mobile Phones
> Helicopters
> Mountain Rescue
> Matts
> Weather forecasts
> UKC
>
> [...]
> Everything should be downgraded because we have:
>
> More gear
> Dynamic ropes
> Harnesses
> Sticky rubber
> Chalk
> Mobile Phones
> Helicopters
> Mountain Rescue
> Matts
> Weather forecasts
> UKC
>
I discussed this in depth with Offwidth a while back. There appears to be two options:
1) down-grade routes every time there is a new innovation (nylon ropes, harnesses, chalk, belay plates, nuts, cams, decent guidebook etc) so everything would be Diff nowadays.
2) keep grades much the same but accept that the routes are 'easier' undertakings than they used to be.
Chris
In reply to jonny2vests: Could the Czar not appoint a working group (which might be just one person) looking into the issue of gritstone E1s and E2s, to advise him on his decisions?
In reply to hexcentric:
I always figure that stout Grit HVS routes (eg Suicide Wall, Right Unconq, Peapod, Bachelor's L-hand have been HVS for 40 years - so grade creep can't be happening or at least some of these would have migrated to E1 by now. There is no evidence of anyone suggesting they are other than stout HVS - which is nice!
Chris
I always figure that stout Grit HVS routes (eg Suicide Wall, Right Unconq, Peapod, Bachelor's L-hand have been HVS for 40 years - so grade creep can't be happening or at least some of these would have migrated to E1 by now. There is no evidence of anyone suggesting they are other than stout HVS - which is nice!
Chris
In reply to Offwidth:
So the grading system was corrected in line with advances in technology. Either some things had to go up, or other things had to go down, to keep it consistent. Would it have made any more sense to downgrade than upgrade?
So the grading system was corrected in line with advances in technology. Either some things had to go up, or other things had to go down, to keep it consistent. Would it have made any more sense to downgrade than upgrade?
In reply to Chris Craggs:
Maybe online voting and forums are having a dampening effect on creep and its slowing down.
Maybe online voting and forums are having a dampening effect on creep and its slowing down.
In reply to Jon Stewart:
I think it should be reasonably easy to give things the correct grade within certain localities; comparing one route to the others in that area. I agree it would be more of a challenge nation-wide but generally I think most places are in line with each other. The main exception I've experienced has been the Peak - I'm sure there's routes there which would be 2 grades harder if they were in Scotland! That's not because Peak climbers are 'better' by the way, they just grade differently.
> (In reply to Michael Gordon)
> Because it's subjective, so there's no such thing as the correct grade. What feels like the 'correct grade' at one crag is totally different from the 'correct grade' at another because of the culture that develops around particular crags. I'm all for keeping it random and silly since any quest for objectivtity will utterly fail as we all know.
I think it should be reasonably easy to give things the correct grade within certain localities; comparing one route to the others in that area. I agree it would be more of a challenge nation-wide but generally I think most places are in line with each other. The main exception I've experienced has been the Peak - I'm sure there's routes there which would be 2 grades harder if they were in Scotland! That's not because Peak climbers are 'better' by the way, they just grade differently.
In reply to Chris Craggs: What about TPS and FBD
In reply to Michael Gordon:
Really! I found the peak the most undergraded area I've climbed in. Left unconquerable is a breeze compared to many of the VS's in Northumberland. Some of the stiffist routes I've found for the grade have been in Scotland
> (In reply to Jon Stewart)
> [...]
>
> [...]
>
> The main exception I've experienced has been the Peak - I'm sure there's routes there which would be 2 grades harder if they were in Scotland! That's not because Peak climbers are 'better' by the way, they just grade differently.
> [...]
>
> [...]
>
> The main exception I've experienced has been the Peak - I'm sure there's routes there which would be 2 grades harder if they were in Scotland! That's not because Peak climbers are 'better' by the way, they just grade differently.
Really! I found the peak the most undergraded area I've climbed in. Left unconquerable is a breeze compared to many of the VS's in Northumberland. Some of the stiffist routes I've found for the grade have been in Scotland
In reply to Jon Stewart:
Welcome aboard Jon. Its not like I can solo them all anyway so 2 is a good number. And it's better than the anarcho-syndicalist commune that we have now.
youtube.com/watch?v=5Xd_zkMEgkI&
> (In reply to jonny2vests) Could the Czar not appoint a working group (which might be just one person) looking into the issue of gritstone E1s and E2s, to advise him on his decisions?
Welcome aboard Jon. Its not like I can solo them all anyway so 2 is a good number. And it's better than the anarcho-syndicalist commune that we have now.
youtube.com/watch?v=5Xd_zkMEgkI&
In reply to smollett:
Well, yeah. But that is a fairly skewed comparison. Where else have you been? Pembroke?
> (In reply to Michael Gordon)
> [...]
>
>
>
> Left unconquerable is a breeze compared to many of the VS's in Northumberland.
> [...]
>
>
>
> Left unconquerable is a breeze compared to many of the VS's in Northumberland.
Well, yeah. But that is a fairly skewed comparison. Where else have you been? Pembroke?
In reply to smollett: You mean overgraded in that context
In reply to Jon Stewart:
The Toy has for years been the most undergraded route on gritstone.
> (In reply to jonny2vests)
Next time someone ways x E1 should be E2, I'll say, "is it harder than The Toy"?The Toy has for years been the most undergraded route on gritstone.
In reply to smollett:
I haven't had the pleasure of climbing in Northumberland yet unfortunately. But I think we'll have to agree to disagree regarding Scotland!
I haven't had the pleasure of climbing in Northumberland yet unfortunately. But I think we'll have to agree to disagree regarding Scotland!
In reply to Mark Bull: they have chimneys at climbing walls these days. anyway chimneying is easy, jamming is where they really fail.
In reply to hexcentric:
Why is it? Surely that is the point of grade creep?
> (In reply to sutty)
>
> The original grade is irrelevant.
>
> The original grade is irrelevant.
Why is it? Surely that is the point of grade creep?
In reply to Michael Gordon:
I think hard grading in the Peak is a total myth. Sure some things feel stiff for the grade (though not often as stiff as in Yorkshire), but equally some things feel very soft. It's like anywhere else, varied.
I think hard grading in the Peak is a total myth. Sure some things feel stiff for the grade (though not often as stiff as in Yorkshire), but equally some things feel very soft. It's like anywhere else, varied.
In reply to andy moles:
Yeah. But another myth is that those who live next to the grit (me) always find it easier than other rock. I climb harder on almost any other type of rock even though most of my time is spent on grit. Grit just has less options for a short arse, exponentially so as the grades increase past E2.
> (In reply to Michael Gordon)
>
> I think hard grading in the Peak is a total myth. Sure some things feel stiff for the grade (though not often as stiff as in Yorkshire), but equally some things feel very soft. It's like anywhere else, varied.
>
> I think hard grading in the Peak is a total myth. Sure some things feel stiff for the grade (though not often as stiff as in Yorkshire), but equally some things feel very soft. It's like anywhere else, varied.
Yeah. But another myth is that those who live next to the grit (me) always find it easier than other rock. I climb harder on almost any other type of rock even though most of my time is spent on grit. Grit just has less options for a short arse, exponentially so as the grades increase past E2.
In reply to Al Evans:
Because the playing field changed, and adapting grades was a necessity. It wasn't 'creep', it was just a case of choosing which routes would remain the paradigm for a given grade. The fact that they weren't the original grades doesn't matter, because it is a relative system.
'Creep', to my mind, would involve the sort of scenario I outlined above with the example of Cioch Nose. Which doesn't really happen.
Because the playing field changed, and adapting grades was a necessity. It wasn't 'creep', it was just a case of choosing which routes would remain the paradigm for a given grade. The fact that they weren't the original grades doesn't matter, because it is a relative system.
'Creep', to my mind, would involve the sort of scenario I outlined above with the example of Cioch Nose. Which doesn't really happen.
In reply to jonny2vests:
Devon, North Wales, Lakes, Yorkshire & N york moors, Borders, Skye, Torridon, Assynt, Trossachs, Ardnamurchan, Galway, Glen etive & Nevis, N Wales, Gogarth, Lancashire. Not Pembroke yet unfortunately but I aim to go sometime soon. Have to say I found the peak grading easier than most of these venues.
> (In reply to smollett)
> [...]
>
> Well, yeah. But that is a fairly skewed comparison. Where else have you been? Pembroke?
> [...]
>
> Well, yeah. But that is a fairly skewed comparison. Where else have you been? Pembroke?
Devon, North Wales, Lakes, Yorkshire & N york moors, Borders, Skye, Torridon, Assynt, Trossachs, Ardnamurchan, Galway, Glen etive & Nevis, N Wales, Gogarth, Lancashire. Not Pembroke yet unfortunately but I aim to go sometime soon. Have to say I found the peak grading easier than most of these venues.
In reply to andy moles:
A few of the routes are not too bad, that's true. But while in Scotland I climb around E2 I have to be doing well to get up an E1 in the Peak. To me the climbs seem a grade harder on average.
A few of the routes are not too bad, that's true. But while in Scotland I climb around E2 I have to be doing well to get up an E1 in the Peak. To me the climbs seem a grade harder on average.
In reply to Chris Craggs:
What if there's a new innovation that makes some routes easier but not others? I'd have said that this should lead to downgrading of those routes which are now safer. So if something came along that made 3PS a reliably safe proposition, the HVS/E0/E1 debate would end and it would (please God) be confirmed at VS 5a.
This should probably have happened rather more with the advent of Friends that actually happened in practice. eg Cubic Corner at Brimham went from MVS 4b to VS 4b even though it became safer!
> 1) down-grade routes every time there is a new innovation (nylon ropes, harnesses, chalk, belay plates, nuts, cams, decent guidebook etc) so everything would be Diff nowadays.
What if there's a new innovation that makes some routes easier but not others? I'd have said that this should lead to downgrading of those routes which are now safer. So if something came along that made 3PS a reliably safe proposition, the HVS/E0/E1 debate would end and it would (please God) be confirmed at VS 5a.
This should probably have happened rather more with the advent of Friends that actually happened in practice. eg Cubic Corner at Brimham went from MVS 4b to VS 4b even though it became safer!
In reply to Toreador:
You have not been paying attention. See me after class.
Get with the programme dude, they're called BOLTS.
You have not been paying attention. See me after class.
> So if something came along that made 3PS a reliably safe proposition, the HVS/E0/E1 debate would end and it would (please God) be confirmed at VS 5a.
Get with the programme dude, they're called BOLTS.
In reply to Toreador:
As you suggest cams made some routes easier (as in safer) though most of these could already protected with cammed Hexes - harder to place and less secure mind. It would only work on routes that got their grade for being unprotected; if a bomber nut appeared on Great Slab it might go from E3 to E1, and with a couple in the right places it could even be HVS 5b.
Chris
As you suggest cams made some routes easier (as in safer) though most of these could already protected with cammed Hexes - harder to place and less secure mind. It would only work on routes that got their grade for being unprotected; if a bomber nut appeared on Great Slab it might go from E3 to E1, and with a couple in the right places it could even be HVS 5b.
Chris
In reply to Chris Craggs:
Agreed. Other innovations would presumably make all routes equally easier.
Apart from sticky rubber, which made everything easier apart from boot-width cracks which became a grade harder
> It would only work on routes that got their grade for being unprotected
Agreed. Other innovations would presumably make all routes equally easier.
Apart from sticky rubber, which made everything easier apart from boot-width cracks which became a grade harder
In reply to hexcentric:
I think you've got a different idea of 'creep' to other folk. 'Creep', as the word perhaps implies, would be the almost imperceptible change in the nature of V-diffs, Severes, VSs etc (i.e. that they are getting easier) across the country over time. Which has definitely been the case - the Peak being a possible exception as upgrading seems to be strongly resisted there.
While your idea of 'creep' seems to be that all the routes in an area are upgraded to fit in with a percieved benchmark climb. I think the process is a bit more subtle than that.
> (In reply to Al Evans)
>
> Because the playing field changed, and adapting grades was a necessity. It wasn't 'creep', it was just a case of choosing which routes would remain the paradigm for a given grade. The fact that they weren't the original grades doesn't matter, because it is a relative system.
>
> 'Creep', to my mind, would involve the sort of scenario I outlined above with the example of Cioch Nose. Which doesn't really happen.
>
> Because the playing field changed, and adapting grades was a necessity. It wasn't 'creep', it was just a case of choosing which routes would remain the paradigm for a given grade. The fact that they weren't the original grades doesn't matter, because it is a relative system.
>
> 'Creep', to my mind, would involve the sort of scenario I outlined above with the example of Cioch Nose. Which doesn't really happen.
I think you've got a different idea of 'creep' to other folk. 'Creep', as the word perhaps implies, would be the almost imperceptible change in the nature of V-diffs, Severes, VSs etc (i.e. that they are getting easier) across the country over time. Which has definitely been the case - the Peak being a possible exception as upgrading seems to be strongly resisted there.
While your idea of 'creep' seems to be that all the routes in an area are upgraded to fit in with a percieved benchmark climb. I think the process is a bit more subtle than that.
In reply to Michael Gordon:
Au contraire, I didn't mean to suggest it wouldn't be subtle. In general I think it is more correction than creep.
Au contraire, I didn't mean to suggest it wouldn't be subtle. In general I think it is more correction than creep.
In reply to smollett:
Or to put it another way, you found all those venues harder than the Peak.
N Wales harder than the Peak? If I were to guess at your style - good technically but not masses of stamina? Are you tall?
> (In reply to jonny2vests)
> [...]
>
> Devon, North Wales, Lakes, Yorkshire & N york moors, Borders, Skye, Torridon, Assynt, Trossachs, Ardnamurchan, Galway, Glen etive & Nevis, N Wales, Gogarth, Lancashire. Not Pembroke yet unfortunately but I aim to go sometime soon. Have to say I found the peak grading easier than most of these venues.
> [...]
>
> Devon, North Wales, Lakes, Yorkshire & N york moors, Borders, Skye, Torridon, Assynt, Trossachs, Ardnamurchan, Galway, Glen etive & Nevis, N Wales, Gogarth, Lancashire. Not Pembroke yet unfortunately but I aim to go sometime soon. Have to say I found the peak grading easier than most of these venues.
Or to put it another way, you found all those venues harder than the Peak.
N Wales harder than the Peak? If I were to guess at your style - good technically but not masses of stamina? Are you tall?
In reply to thomasadixon:
Climb a steep VS in the peak, on natural grit, maybe even VS5a, then just nip up to Almscliff, and pick a VS, any, don't care, although Central Climb would be good intro into Almscliff VS4c.
> (In reply to andy moles)
>
> Totally agree. Hardest grades I've climbed have been in the Peak, on grit.
>
> Totally agree. Hardest grades I've climbed have been in the Peak, on grit.
Climb a steep VS in the peak, on natural grit, maybe even VS5a, then just nip up to Almscliff, and pick a VS, any, don't care, although Central Climb would be good intro into Almscliff VS4c.
In reply to NorthernRock:
I think you're misunderstanding me... Not hardest routes for the grade, hardest graded routes.
I think you're misunderstanding me... Not hardest routes for the grade, hardest graded routes.
In reply to Jon Stewart:
Online grade voting may indicate grade creep but if those writing guidebooks use their own judgment when applying the votes to new versions of the guidebook or database then it is easy to counteract this effect.
For the Rockfax guides we use a series of rules that mean we need a significant majority in order to go with an upgrade, usually at least 2/3 of the votes being for the next grade up. There also have to be a decent number of votes recorded as well.
As for Toy: I remember thinking it was the living end when I first tried it. I then returned to it a month later and cruising it thinking, "about E1 5c". If you do it quickly and get the runners sorted easily without faffing, then it really isn't too bad. As soon as you pause, you will wilt quickly.
Great micro-route though.
Alan
> Very true. Online voting provides the process for point 4 to dominate the whole system. I reckon that when people fail or struggle on route, they vote for the grade above. But when they cruise a route, they say "easy grade x", only when it's laughable do they actually vote for the grade below because it diminishes their achievement. So by using the voting system, grade creep is inevitable.
Online grade voting may indicate grade creep but if those writing guidebooks use their own judgment when applying the votes to new versions of the guidebook or database then it is easy to counteract this effect.
For the Rockfax guides we use a series of rules that mean we need a significant majority in order to go with an upgrade, usually at least 2/3 of the votes being for the next grade up. There also have to be a decent number of votes recorded as well.
As for Toy: I remember thinking it was the living end when I first tried it. I then returned to it a month later and cruising it thinking, "about E1 5c". If you do it quickly and get the runners sorted easily without faffing, then it really isn't too bad. As soon as you pause, you will wilt quickly.
Great micro-route though.
Alan
In reply to hexcentric:
I agree with the person who said that ego in voting on grades can work both ways. People can feel very much that if they think something is hard for the grade then they seem like a bad climber.
There are two reasons for grading, firstly it gives an indication of the standard you are at and can help setting goals in what you want to achieve in climbing. Secondly it helps a person assess if they are likely to be able to complete a climb or not.
In my opinion the second reason is most important. If someone for whom leading Severe is at their limit, for example, tries to lead a Severe which should really be graded HS, then there can be all sorts of epics if that person gets seriously stuck on the climb and has to be rescued. A lot more worrying a scenario then someone feeling chuffed that they've done a HS, when it really should only be a Severe. That's why it's probably safer for routes to be overgraded then undergraded.
That said though, the person who does the HS that should have been a Severe may now feel they can lead HS and then get stuck on an epic HS that is right for it's grade or even worse undergraded and should be a VS.
I agree with the person who said that ego in voting on grades can work both ways. People can feel very much that if they think something is hard for the grade then they seem like a bad climber.
There are two reasons for grading, firstly it gives an indication of the standard you are at and can help setting goals in what you want to achieve in climbing. Secondly it helps a person assess if they are likely to be able to complete a climb or not.
In my opinion the second reason is most important. If someone for whom leading Severe is at their limit, for example, tries to lead a Severe which should really be graded HS, then there can be all sorts of epics if that person gets seriously stuck on the climb and has to be rescued. A lot more worrying a scenario then someone feeling chuffed that they've done a HS, when it really should only be a Severe. That's why it's probably safer for routes to be overgraded then undergraded.
That said though, the person who does the HS that should have been a Severe may now feel they can lead HS and then get stuck on an epic HS that is right for it's grade or even worse undergraded and should be a VS.
In reply to thomasadixon:
Sorry not got gramma pedant head on. Erm ugh, no sorry, don't get your meaning!
> (In reply to NorthernRock)
>
> I think you're misunderstanding me... Not hardest routes for the grade, hardest graded routes.
>
> I think you're misunderstanding me... Not hardest routes for the grade, hardest graded routes.
Sorry not got gramma pedant head on. Erm ugh, no sorry, don't get your meaning!
In reply to hexcentric:
To be honest I'd tend to agree. As the total number of grades has increased over the years one perhaps has a more precise idea of what V-diff etc should be like compared to the neighbouring grades? I'll always object to the upgrading of routes such as Cioch Nose, TD Gap, King's Chimney etc though which to me were/are classic problems at their grades.
> (In reply to Michael Gordon)
>
In general I think it is more correction than creep.>
To be honest I'd tend to agree. As the total number of grades has increased over the years one perhaps has a more precise idea of what V-diff etc should be like compared to the neighbouring grades? I'll always object to the upgrading of routes such as Cioch Nose, TD Gap, King's Chimney etc though which to me were/are classic problems at their grades.
In reply to SharonC1604:
That's why the best solution is to grade accurately, not softly.
> (In reply to hexcentric)
> In my opinion the second reason is most important. If someone for whom leading Severe is at their limit, for example, tries to lead a Severe which should really be graded HS, then there can be all sorts of epics if that person gets seriously stuck on the climb and has to be rescued. A lot more worrying a scenario then someone feeling chuffed that they've done a HS, when it really should only be a Severe. That's why it's probably safer for routes to be overgraded then undergraded.
>
> That said though, the person who does the HS that should have been a Severe may now feel they can lead HS and then get stuck on an epic HS that is right for it's grade or even worse undergraded and should be a VS.
>
> That said though, the person who does the HS that should have been a Severe may now feel they can lead HS and then get stuck on an epic HS that is right for it's grade or even worse undergraded and should be a VS.
That's why the best solution is to grade accurately, not softly.
In reply to Michael Gordon:
Of course grading accurately is the answer, but how can it be achieved, as grading is subjective. I do tend to look at the voting on UKC to get an idea.
Of course grading accurately is the answer, but how can it be achieved, as grading is subjective. I do tend to look at the voting on UKC to get an idea.
In reply to smollett:
That says rather more about Northumbrian VS's than it does about the Peak.
> (In reply to Michael Gordon)
> [...]
>
>
>
> Really! I found the peak the most undergraded area I've climbed in. Left unconquerable is a breeze compared to many of the VS's in Northumberland.
> [...]
>
>
>
> Really! I found the peak the most undergraded area I've climbed in. Left unconquerable is a breeze compared to many of the VS's in Northumberland.
That says rather more about Northumbrian VS's than it does about the Peak.
In reply to Al Evans:
Not really, the question is, has there been a systematic uplift of climbs from one grade to another?
Apart from a bit of a decompression at the HVS/E1 boundary (mainly on old HVS sandbags) following the shift from XS to E grades I don't think that has really happened. The routes that have gone up in grade were generally in the wrong grade to begin with. There was a greater tendency to correct soft touches than sandbags in the early guidebook appearances hence more sandbags to sort out than soft routes. The situation was always worse in backwaters like Northumbria than in popular areas.
> (In reply to hexcentric)
> [...]
>
> Why is it? Surely that is the point of grade creep?
> [...]
>
> Why is it? Surely that is the point of grade creep?
Not really, the question is, has there been a systematic uplift of climbs from one grade to another?
Apart from a bit of a decompression at the HVS/E1 boundary (mainly on old HVS sandbags) following the shift from XS to E grades I don't think that has really happened. The routes that have gone up in grade were generally in the wrong grade to begin with. There was a greater tendency to correct soft touches than sandbags in the early guidebook appearances hence more sandbags to sort out than soft routes. The situation was always worse in backwaters like Northumbria than in popular areas.
I think one of the main contributing factors to grade creep is 'currency trading' grade creep between sport routes and trad routes.
People selectively compare grades across the different systems and take the ones that suit their requirements. When currency trading you only do the conversion when it is favourable to you and you end up with a more dosh after a few trades back and forward. The same principle works with route grades and is even more pronounced with some indoor grades that can give people a very inflated sense of their actual ability.
Alan
People selectively compare grades across the different systems and take the ones that suit their requirements. When currency trading you only do the conversion when it is favourable to you and you end up with a more dosh after a few trades back and forward. The same principle works with route grades and is even more pronounced with some indoor grades that can give people a very inflated sense of their actual ability.
Alan
In reply to NorthernRock:
Some climbers do. Misguided ones.
> (In reply to Alan James - UKC)
>
> But who classes their indoor grade as their climbing grade?
>
> But who classes their indoor grade as their climbing grade?
Some climbers do. Misguided ones.
In reply to Alan James - UKC:
I'd agree with that currency trading point. I also think your approach on only following the votes on a 2/3rds majority is very sensible.
Despite the regular moans, Rockfax and BMC editors have taken a fairly tight and sensible line on grade creep in the recent peak grit guides. The Toy is a good example... its a top of the grade E1 requiring good stamina at the grade to lace, or a more confident approach if you lack this.
I'd agree with that currency trading point. I also think your approach on only following the votes on a 2/3rds majority is very sensible.
Despite the regular moans, Rockfax and BMC editors have taken a fairly tight and sensible line on grade creep in the recent peak grit guides. The Toy is a good example... its a top of the grade E1 requiring good stamina at the grade to lace, or a more confident approach if you lack this.
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Elsewhere on the site
Loading Notifications...