UKC

Seen the comment "In trainers" several times in the public logbooks. Wonder why this needs to be said? I wonder of its a machismo statement...?

"and jeans" on one recently.

I do tend to note when I've done something in approach shoes, more for myself to remember that and to note that approach shoes really are bloody good these days, as opposed to as a show of intentional handicap.

Whenever I get back to Cornwall, however, I am gonna get on Sensible Shoes in flip flops or bare feet because with that name I just have to. :-P

Maybe it's to highlight how much the climber is doing to add polish to the holds...?

Just count how many of the comments were made by males and you will have your answer.

Some people like to add details of the style of their climb, even if just for their own records.  I feel like applying your logic you're only a small step away from saying people logging climbs as flashes or onsights are showing off.

I'm sure some do. A cleaned pair of Boulder X however is quite precise, sticky and edges exceptionally well, no kicking and slipping around.

What about 'in big boots'? That's pretty traditional. Also VS (rubbers) for historical footwear reference.

Down with the males! 

Pathetic. They need to up their game to: “in roller skates”

When I log climbs, if I can be bothered, I make notes as to the condition of the climb and I'll note "trainers" if it is relevant, just like I'd note lead, dog, 2nd, solo, bloody freezing, howling gales, got caught by a big wave, crampons, dropped my sandwiches or any bad jokes shared along the route etc etc.

Last time I logged this it was because I left my shoes at home and to explain (to myself) why I struggled on the route, to make a note that I could come back and expect to do better and to remind myself not to be such a foll.

I suppose some misguided idiot out there possibly thinks it looks well-hard and will impress the ladies if they've logged a vdiff in trainers but why do you care?

Can I also raise a compliant about 'Sent DNF'? It's a two move boulder problem

I've always presumed it was a not-so-subtle slight designed to undermine and piss off other punters. Obviously works as intended

and boxing gloves for the full tick

I think so. 

"In trainers", "in big boots", "in the dark", "in the rain", " in the damp"; wanger-waves, every one of them.

I use a few of them myself.

"Path"  is used quite a bit which I don't like. Even though it may be a path, many are very enjoyable.

I used to know someone who had a habit of proclaiming a route was "trivial" if he had found it easy. Although he was a bit of a knob. 

I'm sure I've done this. My logbook is a record of my experience, for me, and that's part of the experience. It never occurred to me that other people would read my logbook and think I was showing off. 

The whole idea of a log book or indeed social media is showing off.

Also those crushing pub comments after you have really struggled on something, only to hear "soloed it last week".

Online willy waving. I am very much aware that I am indulging in OWW. "look at my willy, I am above using logbooks" 

I don't entirely agree. I love reading my old logbook comments (though they're often essays). 

It might be egotistical for some but I use the UKC logging for me.  I like setting myself targets, maybe ticking a whole boulder, or ticking a climb in each section, but also I like looking back at stuff I’d forgotten about.  It’s totally arbitrary.  I’m not showing off if I tick a Font 4 or Font 5 am I?

That famous lakeland ascent involved some cheating.

Indeed. A gap cut in the boxing gloves for fingers to get through if I remember correctly.

I was tod the  skates were modified as well, as we watched the then fairly elderly climber responsible solo a VS below us.

Or 'done as a warm-up'

Log-book machismo - great name for a route though! 

Agreed! They look awful, and are quite expensive, but great for climbing in. 

Ah, breakfast at Shepherds was never the same after his demise

One of the best putdowns I read was in the old Northumberland guide from the eighties. If you were struggling on the local 'VS' sandbag you'd be encouraged to hear 'Yer sh1te ye' drift across from one of the experts

.

"in my Elvis suit" for a shaky legged ascent. 

Personal log books are a completely different thing to online. 

Logging climbs at all is showing off

/thread

Guilty of that one too, but only managed to annoy myself. I remember making a right meal of a route and really struggling to get up it. Went to log it and discovered to my surprise that I'd done it a couple of years before. My previous logbook entry just said "easy warm up".

my first introduction to the concept of rock climbing was when my friends big sister reportedly climbed a route in flippers having claimed it was too easy for sticky shoes (which we likely HB's or plimsoles in those days). Photo were produced.

Wrote it on a recent climb. Logbook is for my records really. My opinion. Everyone's got an arse, you don't have to look at someone else's, no one is ramming theirs in your face, if you choose to look up another then don't expect it to be pretty. 

If I climb something naked and then record it like that on the logbooks, do I get two willy waving ticks for a single ascent?

If so, I'll bet I'm one of the best willy wavers on the whole of UKC!

Got some fine photos of a mate climbing at Stanage in one of those sumo suits inflated by an internal fan. Not easy to mantel though. It's still on my bucket list to do The Sloth in a sloth onesie. Looking forward to logging that. Done with three toes.

You'd have to climb it really slowly too.

So, what of the people with private logbooks who may state their ascent was in trainers? Where does that feature on the machismo scale?

Some people are detail oriented and a note re: wearing trainers may explain the quality of their ascent and that record will provide a helpful comparison should they repeat the route.

Seems an odd axe to grind, especially when the logbooks are full of dnf's where the style isn't recorded thus suggesting an ascent...

I'm thinking that stating you climbed in 6" spike heels whether to boast or not is better than lieing in your own logbook, but here we are

I forgot my climbing shoes at Sharpnose once so ended up seconding a couple of routes in approach shoes and noted that in the log book. Felt like a natural thing to note as it was a bit unusual for me.

That’s just a factual statement. Usually I use ‘warm up’ for routes I’ve done before and which are just that. I could not log them but I like to log most things. 

I suppose you could keep your ukc logbook private but it’s not unusual to include some useful comments about the route or the conditions, so it’s a bit of a public service (I suppose there’s the feedback functionality now). Plus I like reading how other people (especially those I know) have found the route and I think some people like my comments as well sometimes.

I know people used to keep diaries and I’m sure some still do but a ukc logbook is much better in my opinion as it’s much easier to search etc. 

Well, to be fair, all climbing is showing off really...

My thoughts exactly bud.

That's number Wang!

One of the best, maybe, but unless you also soloed it, then definitely not the best.

That's number Wang!

One of the best, maybe, but unless you also soloed it, then definitely not *the* best

I looked in the logbooks today at a big arete at burbage South, someone had top roped it. It comments claimed it was not as hard as such and such or xxx route. I searched these routes knowing the name expecting him to be the f. A. Yes I was correct

Maybe as much as an excuse for a poor ascent  as anything. Found it hard but the route was dripping, wearing big boots etc

I keep my logbook hidden but my partners can see, and any comments are for them.

I now very rarely log routes, that way with my failing memory I can convince my self I have on sighted them, again, problem is there is always one move where I get a Deja Vu feeling.

With you there ! I ued to be obsessive about ticking off routes in guidebooks, but once you get to the second or third version of the guide or the same area, different publisher, it's just too much trouble to transfer the ticks.  Before on line logbooks, obviously.  Now I ve missed logging so many ascents it seems pointless starting now.

Maybe I could just curl up at the bottom and log Sent CBA.

I still tick my paper guide books and often add comments such as in trainers, solo,or blindfolded etc whatever makes the accent stand out to me.  If I adopted the ukc logbook I wouldn't seek to censor my comments for fear of offending any other readers. There may be an element of machismo in there somewhere,  but I would enjoy seeing the comments myself, it adds to the story.

roller skates and boxing gloves

It can be quite a come down to struggle up a route only look back on your past log book entry and read "soloed as a warm up"

A correct accent should already stand out by definition.

I often add notes like those that seem to offend you, for my own benefit. Thankfully though, my logbook is private, and will remain so as long as random Internet strangers are wound up by inexplicable triggers.

Bah gum, there's some reet smart alecs on 'ere .....

Thanks. My words were 'I wonder...?'. Hardly a signal of either being offended or wound-up. I'm a registered UKC user, so not massively 'random' either.

You seem a bit wound-up. 

Nope. It was just a quiet musing...

I'm only wound-up when Johnson's name gets mentioned. But he's not done anything in trainers, boxing gloves, flippers or roller-skates - at least, not on the rock.

I mostly do it as a reminder to myself that I beat my mate who climbed the same route in rock shoes like a grade A schmuck.

Yes, but it's even worse when you discover you were wearing trainers like a proper rock ninja.

Surely most UKC users are "massively random"

Hahaha, they were all solos, I'm shy that way... This means I am truely _the_ best then?!