UKC

This looks like fun route to have a crack at. Inspired by the Elder crack topic, does anyone know what size cam would fit in this.

p.s. if you fancy giving any other beta then I would appreciate it

In reply to kareylarey: If you protect it with big cams you may as well top rope it!

In reply to Al Evans: ooow, maybe it deserves a downgrade then. Modern technology makes it safe. Do you think its graded for a solo ascent then?

In reply to kareylarey: a big one, cant remember the size, i didnt have one, there used to be an old bit of tat in the back of the crack that i really struggled to clip. "fun" :S route maybe.

In reply to Al Evans:If you protect it with big cams you may as well top rope it!


Does that go for all routes with good protection ?

In reply to Simon Lee: Maybe he means that goes for all routes that have recently gained good protection but haven't had a grade change.

In reply to kareylarey:

Yes, or at least it always used to be.

In reply to Al Evans: OK so it needs a grade change. I havn't done the route so I can't realy comment but E2 5c seems about right then.

In reply to kareylarey: Thank you, certainly many routes are now different propositions than they used to be, if guidewriters haven't moved with the times and downgraded them, then people are just kidding themselves, that always assumes they have the latest optimum protection of course, so poor guidewriters what do they grade for?
Some old solos have become safe routes, but not unless you have the right gear, I don't have an obvious answer. It used to be much more democratic, we all climbed the same grade, didn't matter how rich you were, the gear to get one up easily and safely just didn't exist. Having said which I was always willing to take on a new bit of technology, but always graded my routes accordingly.
The only true way it doesn't change, apart from stickies etc, is if you top rope it, even seconding changes if you now have to take modern gear out.

In reply to Al Evans: But I beleive that the routes should be graded for the best protection possible to place on the onsight, which in this case has changed and the route needs regrading. The latest optimum protection is often expensive, and creates a divide between rich and poor climbers, but the divide is also created by the different types/weights etc. of pro that people have, so it would be contradictory to take into account protection availibility/price.

In reply to Al Evans:

Is that right?

There is/was an in situ threaded chockstone where the crack narrows. I'd assumed that had always been there.

In reply to JR: The route was graded for a lead not a solo, or was when I led it. The threaded chockstone was duly clipped when I led it.
Modern boots make bugger all difference Al, and yes you could (if you were strong enough and they didn't impede progress) lace it with huge cams. However the route is graded for the sheer physicality of the ascent, and hence modern gear makes no digfference, indeed if you did manage to lug all those cams up, it might deserve E4!

In reply to JR:


Not when I did it (G), to quote history too, the fourth ascent of Sentinel crack was done by Jim Campbell, on the lead he threw the chock inserted by Geoff Birtles on the third ascent (not Whillans, perhaps Sutty could help here as he was belaying when DW did it) out as it was getting in the way of a jam. Ron Fawcett on probably the 5th ascent also did it without a chock, I have a picture if you don't believe me.
The same applies to Right Eliminate, the supposed chockstone was neither there when I did it or when Royal Robbins did it, and I'm damn sure it wasn't there when Joe did it. Some supposed 'traditional' chocks were inserted way after the first ascents!

In reply to Anonymous: Who are you anyway?

In reply to kareylarey and Al Evans:




From Burbage, Millstone and Beyond

"Those in possession of very large cams... <funny bit> ...will lose an E point".

Which couldn't be much clearer...





In reply to Al Evans:


Climbed a lot of offwidths in this way have you Al?

In reply to kareylarey:

There was team out on this today, and they looked like they where having a right old ding dong, good luck however you do it!

In reply to Al Evans:


So 6a/6a+ then

In reply to duncan:


No, I climbed them before big cams, and in an enviroment when top roping was frowned on.

While I'm not 100% sure about this, I might have downgraded Goliath.

It was always given E5 6a, then many years ago, I got bored with comps and set about working my way through all the classic off-widths that I knew about, I did everything except Ray's Roof, which I didn't try until years later. I had all the cams leant or given to me on account of an article I wrote for OTE (it's still on planetFear if you care to look - it's entitled off-world), anyway, with cams I figured it was not E5, and so wrote up the article with it in at E4 6a, I was just curious to see if that grade would stick, and to my slight surprise, it's been E4 6a in every guide ever since. So just to clarify, in my opinion, an onsight ascent with the right gear is well worth E4, it's still hard!

Lastly, you don't actually need an enormous can for the final hard bit, I vaguely recall a Friend 4 will fit at the very top. A really fun eliminate is to climb just the right arete of the crack, actually more fun than the crack!

In reply to duncan:
>In reply to Al Evans:
No, I thought I had answered this but its been pulled like so many of my posts are these days? Strange.

In reply to Adrian Berry:

lol!

In reply to Al Evans:

You answered it 2 posts up, at 0750. Your posts aren't being pulled, you just can't remember them.

AJM

In reply to Al Evans:

Interesting stance. You're no doubt more familiar with the history of virtually all routes than myself, but didn't Whillans lead this with a peg that he intended to hand place on lead, but when up there found it too strenuous to place so he powered through?

Another story I remember reading about Sentinal Crack was that during a BMC guidebook committee meeting this route was discussed, and despite improvements in the type of gear available there was a motion to upgrade the route. It came down to a vote, and only two or three people actually voted for it to be upgraded. When a show of hand for those who'd actually led the route was made, it was the handful of people who'd led the route that felt it deserved to be upgraded (unfortunately I don't remember where I read this, nor were there deatils of when the ascents of those who'd led it were made in relation to the voting).

Presumably the notion of changing the grade only relates to adjectival grades since the technicallity doesn't change with improvements of gear.

In reply to Al Evans:

Ron Fawcett, 5th ascent? Surely there were more in between? What year did he do it?

Re Goliath, there were no chockstones in it in the '70s, which is when it was the norm to solo it, but in this case if not Right Eliminate, weren't there in fact two chockstones in for the FA?

In reply to slacky: Presumably the notion of changing the grade only relates to adjectival grades since the technicallity doesn't change with improvements of gear.


My impression is that balanced against the improvement in crack protection is the contemporary deterioration in technical crack climbing skills compared to 50 years ago. So whilst cracks like Sentinel are better protected they are harder to climb for the current climbing population or average climber (whose ability grades are surely based on).

The title of Dawes' video on jamming 'Best forgotten art' has multiple meanings.

In reply to slacky:

Sentinel was top roped two or three weeks before being led. While TR the route Whillans found the rope ran in the crack, getting in the way so making it harder so elected to try and place a peg for protection in a break.

When it came to leading it he had the peg in his teeth ready to place but found with no rope in the crack he could get better jams so had no need to place it and just carried on.

The chock was placed later on by others.

Who has soloed it on sight since, that would be the first true onsight?

In reply to sutty:

Cool, thanks for the clarification Sutty.

I've not seen Best Forgotten Art yet and was just bemoaning the fact that it was only available on VHS the other day to a friend.

Just checked Johnny Dawes web-site and its now available on DVD, excellent

(Apologies to forum Moderators for any unintended and unpaid for commerical connotations to the above, which were unaviodable in pointing out the above).

In reply to AJM:

I dont want to go into this, or I am sure I will get banned, there is no way of beating the mods. And of course there shouldn't be, they own the bat and the ball and I respect that.