I see testpiece used to describe climbs sometimes. What does it mean? Why would you use that word?
Cos everyone else says it and I just want to be accepted as the person I wish I was.
It used to be a more popular term than it is now. Usually refers to a popular and accessible route that's still quite close to cutting edge in difficulty, so having done it is an indication of being among a fairly elite group of climbers.
Good examples over the years would include Right Wall, Strawberries, Big Issue, Hubble, etc.
Often used with reference to a specific technique, e.g. "jamming testpiece". In this context, it means, if you can jam you'll be alright, but if not you'll get spanked.
> having done it is an indication of being among a fairly elite group of climbers.
I don't think that's quite right because I've often seen it used to refer to a route that's definitely of the given grade and not soft. So if you do such a route you can definitely say you've climbed that grade.
I use it to mean a climb of benchmark difficulty for a particular grade or style of climb, one against which others can be compared and which often seems to be iconic or well-known. It is a bit cliché and overused, though!
> I use it to mean a climb of benchmark difficulty for a particular grade or style of climb, one against which others can be compared and which often seems to be iconic or well-known. It is a bit cliché and overused, though!
Yes, I expect its use has been morphing over the years, from 'a good test for a top-end climber' towards 'a good test for the grade' or 'a good test of a technique'.
Agreed. Also used a lot for routes that are hard for the grade or have been under graded for a long time.
I remember Kppier Crack at Symonds Yat was a guidebook "testpeice"; that is, nobody could ever get up it. It's upgraded now so anybody can do it: a testpeice no more...
Yes I think the word Testpiece also needs to be used in a historical context.
For example - Right Wall was probably the most famous Testpiece in the late 70s early 80s. Not any more.
Having said that, some routes have stood the test of time - London Wall?
E
> For example - Right Wall was probably the most famous Testpiece in the late 70s early 80s. Not any more.
It is still a testpiece at "entry level E5". In fact I think it was considered so in the early eighties when I did it!
A test-piece should also be 'finger-searing' and modern.
It is like a codpiece, but unlike a codpiece in that it is not really used for covering up but to assist with willy waiving
'Testpiece' means more or less: 'Warning: hard for the grade. A lot of contenders fail on this.'
I've always taken it to mean similar, i.e. "benchmark", not necessarily top-end but will require a certain "je ne sais quoi", whether technique or exposure or something else intangible, and also the route is (perhaps inherently) deemed a "classic".
The File at Higgar Tor might be called a testpiece, but Suicide Wall at Cratcliffe less so.
Chequer's Crack at Froggatt might be called a testpiece, but Tody's Wall less so.
That's it, in a nutshell. For me, back in the late 1970s, it was stuff like Right Eliminate and Flaky Wall; you could climb the grade but were intimidated by the route. And with good reason, because like Gordon says, you'd heard of people failing on them; in many cases, climbers better than you.
> I've always taken it to mean similar, i.e. "benchmark", not necessarily top-end but will require a certain "je ne sais quoi", whether technique or exposure or something else intangible, and also the route is (perhaps inherently) deemed a "classic".
> The File at Higgar Tor might be called a testpiece, but Suicide Wall at Cratcliffe less so.
> Chequer's Crack at Froggatt might be called a testpiece, but Tody's Wall less so.
Peapod Curbar
It means the opposite of what Kees is looking for
https://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/rock_talk/easy_7as_in_leonidio-711141
I've always seen it as a route that not many would argue if it were upgraded. "If you can climb this, you should be able to do just about anything else at the grade" kind of deal. Often routes with a technical grade you would expect on a higher grade route.
> A test-piece should also be 'finger-searing' and modern.
'... a route for the married hardman... ' Extra points if you know where that's from!
> 'Testpiece' means more or less: 'Warning: hard for the grade. A lot of contenders fail on this.'
Yes, that's my understanding of the term. Finale at Shepherd's being a good example for HVS.
Yes. I think the term also implies that there's something unusual/tricky about it (not just hard) at the grade.
I've read it but, no, can't remember where!
> Yes. I think the term also implies that there's something unusual/tricky about it (not just hard) at the grade.
Would you say that The File and Chequer's Crack (my examples) don't qualify, then?
I think they both qualify perfectly. I'd say that The File is unusually sustained for the grade, plus slightly awkward because of the way it leans to the left. While Chequer's Crack is unusually badly polished, and the gear placements (just where you want jams) make it unusually hard for the grade. Better climbers than me assure me that it's easier if you solo that first crack ...
It sounds like something Paul Williams would have said.
> It is like a codpiece, but unlike a codpiece in that it is not really used for covering up but to assist with willy waiving
I have no interest in waiving my willy. I quite like it
I think it just needs to provide a reasonably well-defined test of ability. This could either be overall difficulty, such as the near cutting edge routes the term used to be applied to, or could be a test of a specific technique. Hence 'jamming testpiece', 'smearing testpiece', etc. that don't necessarily imply unusual difficulty but do imply that relative mastery of that technique is needed for success at the grade.
The 'finger searing' was Paul, I'm sure. The 'married hardman' reference was Ron James in his selected guide Rock Climbing in North Wales (I'm almost certain but no longer have mine as it fell apart, so can't check). Can't remember which route though, maybe The Mostest...?
It was The Mostest, yes. p.140, for those who've got the book.
> It is like a codpiece, but unlike a codpiece in that it is not really used for covering up but to assist with willy waiving
Yeah but what has Geoffrey Cox ever done on the grit?
Central Sadness, Paul Williams?
Maybe not, actually - similar. And ironically now regarded as not that hard for its grade.
jcm
No. Try this:
'This brilliant, finger-searing modern test piece threads its technically intricate and devious way on tiny holds ('tinies') up the face to the right of Stromboli.'
For what it's worth, and from what I remember, Central Sadness was so called because of the bolt belay at half height... or at least, that's what I've always understood. Interestingly, in his 1987 Llanberis guide, Paul describes the top pitch as 'a pitch for the married man with a large rack of wires'.
Ah, that's where I remembered the 'married man' phrase from.
Yes, I knew it wasn’t quite right.
I can’t quite place the other one - is it Psyche ‘n’ Burn?
Edit - dammit, cheated now. I thought it was Hitler’s Buttock, but Stromboli confused me - I did one of those the same day as Olympic Slab, but they must have been different buttresses, or possibly all the same buttress but bigger than I think.
jcm
The second BMC Members Open Forum webinar took place on 20 March. Recently-appointed BMC CEO Paul Ratcliffe, President Andy Syme and Chair Roger Murray shared updates on staff changes, new and ongoing initiatives, insurance policy changes and the current...