UKC

Further details here: http://www.alpinist.com/doc/web08s/newswire-rodden-yosemite-hard-trad

5.14c = 8c+, which makes this one of the harder naturally protected routes around. It sounds absolutely nails.

In reply to duncan:

>"ultra-thin finger crack"

...might not see too many repeats from banana fingered strong men.

In reply to duncan: Thanks Duncan,

Now up on the News page: http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/

Awesome effort.

Jack

In reply to duncan:

"Instead of clipping gear to her harness, she connected three vital cams with duct tape. This system allowed her to rip them off her harness easily, saving time and energy in the most desperate situations."

Nice

In reply to duncan:>

"The grade checks in at around 5.14"
No mention of what the 14? is, where does the C come from?

*OT* Loving the saucy pic on the news item

In reply to duncan:


"Instead of clipping gear to her harness, she connected three vital cams with duct tape. This system allowed her to rip them off her harness easily, saving time and energy in the most desperate situations."

This isn't new. It's been in circulation for years.

A case of: 'A person that doesn't know history,often ends up repeating it!'

C

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Tod Skinner rigged something similar with velcro for a route "The Gunfighter" at Hueco back in the 80s. Wild Country even marketed a harness of the same name for a while.

In reply to tobyfk:

Didier Berthold (sp?) had a similar system when trying to do Cobra Crack.

In reply to duncan:

Oh, and a pretty waesome effort by Beth.

What grade did Cobra Crack get? 5.14c too? Pretty cutting edge stuff.

In reply to 220bpm:

hah, why don't we get pictures of the likes of Ueli Steck pouting provocatively to accompany news items about him? (etc)

good work Beth!

In reply to duncan:

Does lots of small gear but `pretty serious fall potential' count as 5.14c W or 5.14c R?

Awesome effort. OK, It and Cobra Crack, the hardest bits of crack climbing in the world, no?

In reply to CJD: I'm working on him!

In reply to Jack Geldard - Assistant Editor:

guffaw!

In reply to CJD: good lord. They realy are VERY short shorts.

In reply to lummox:

I'm not sure that the 'oiled' look suits her - i think of her more as climbings answer to felicity kendall

In reply to lummox:


The piccys do look like they're aimed at fans of the "Barely Legal" school of potography.

In reply to galpinos:


Hmm a bit disturbing. I take it she is technically a grown up ? She looks worryingly young.

In reply to lummox:

Don't feel too guilty about those thoughts lummox, she's at least 20 something (and married).

In reply to galpinos:

She's 5 days younger than me - 27. So barely legal is a bit far off.

In reply to es:

"i think of her more as climbings answer to felicity kendall"

That's very erotic

Felicity however would have to pull quite a few prize-winning marrows to equal this kind of physical achievement.

In reply to galpinos:

lots of pictures of her climbing, on http://www.bethandtommy.com

In reply to duncan:

Wow, good effort from Beth Rodden!

In reply to ebygomm:

Lummox doesn't need to feel like such a dirty old man then.

You've got to admit, she does look pretty young in the oiled up short shorts one (not that I'm complaining mind).

In reply to galpinos:
LOL ! I was just commenting on the shorts- doesn`t do much for me. Way too blonde and "nice" looking.

In reply to CJD:

Blocked at work unfortunately. I'm sure I've seen the footage of her on the Optimist and there was a Petzl short about her, Tommy Caldwell, Arnaud Petit and a french girl (name escapes me) on the Lotus Flower Tower (which made me add it to my must do soon list).

She comes across really well, obviously very talented but very driven too.

Pretty fantastic that a women is matching the men at the cutting edge of crack climbing (trad in general, is Rhapsody 8c/8c+ too?).

In reply to lummox:

"Beth Rodden, Yosemite poster child"

From the first line of the report. Get feeling guity again!

In reply to lummox:

and enormous feet if the photo on the right is anything to go on

In reply to lummox:

Yeah, I don't like fit blond girls either!

In reply to duncan:

Congrats to Beth great achievement.

As an aside, I'm sure UKC could have found a better picture to illustrate this, it's not like Beth has no public profile. Didn't Mick use those images in his Climb like a girl series? BTW the guy in the first pic is not Tommy I believe. A shame to detract from a major ascent by getting into the world of glamour photography IMO.

In reply to TRNovice:

You say so but that is one tantalising glimpse of gluteus maximus, leftside.

In reply to Owen W-G:

Would you like to see Dave MacLeod in his tightie-whities in an article about Rhapsody?

In reply to TRNovice:

>"the guy in the first pic is not Tommy I believe"

Strange... I didn't even notice.

In reply to duncan:

Clearly the climbing community is "institutionally sexist" - oh hang on, I guess I was on the other side of that argument...

Still think Jack could have picked a better picture given what Beth had accomplished.

In reply to TRNovice:


Why not? It's a new UKC policy. All first ascent stories will be accompanied by a piccy of said climber, oiled up in skimpy clothing.

Mick siad, "It's what the punters want"

In reply to duncan:

Nice one. If I did have a climbing idol, which I don't (well, except perhaps Dawes), I think it would be Beth.

In reply to TRNovice:

Be fairer to ask CJD or another of the ladies that one. Mick and Jack let us ogle the girls with their coice of photos, maybe they'd like to ogle the guys?

In reply to chris j:

I kind of just wish they'd found a better picture for this one.

In reply to Craig Smith:


Nobody is claiming that it's a new idea, Craig

In reply to TRNovice: Hi,

In an ideal world we would have a great photo of Beth on that route, but we don't. The only photo on our database that we have of Beth is the one I have used (unless there is one I missed in my search - quite probably).

Check out the Alpinist link, they don't have a shot either. I've blasted out several emails trying to get A. more of the story, B. a picture of the route and C. a quick interview with Beth.

Until any of that comes off (which it may or may not - for an example see the Katy Whittaker article: http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=858 ) I have to put a pic up to accompany the news story. Beth is obviously happy with this pic as she posed for it!

I don't have rights to any online pictures of Beth Rodden, so we don't have much to choose from.

Personally I think it's a great shot. I'm working on a similar one with Kenton Cool on the summit of Everest...

Jack

In reply to TRNovice:


I completely agree.

In reply to Jack Geldard - Assistant Editor:
One of her sponsors might have one they would let you use

In reply to Ian:

I'm sure her husband would be delighted to hear that...

In reply to Jack Geldard - Assistant Editor:

Hi Jack,

I appreciate your position (and your atypical respect for property rights on the web) but given that, maybe no photo at all?

-- TRN

In reply to Jack Geldard - Assistant Editor: Why not contact Corey Rich, who the article say took the photos? corey@coreyrich.com I'm sure he'd like his work on such a large site, with a link to his page perhaps?

In reply to duncan:

This sounds like an exceptional performance. Anyone care to speculate on an E grade ?

In reply to TRNovice:

Why not? What are the grounds for your objection? She's obviously happy with the image it portrays, it's not obscene so why should it not be included?

In reply to Ian:


Too right. 8c+ is top end trad right? Man OR Woman it's really impressive.

If she minded the picture being shown she wouldn't have posed for it, she doesn't care so why should anyone else...

In reply to Jack Geldard - Assistant Editor: Absolutely amazing acheivement. Shame people on this site always find something to winge about. Hardest trad route in the world?

In reply to thomasadixon & Tyler:

Reasonable points. A few things to consider:-

1. How long ago was the image taken and is she still happy with it?
   
2. If she was happy with it, how come the web is not full of other, more recent, images of Beth posing in such a manner? [my take - perhaps she felt it wasn't the best of ideas in retrospect]
   
3. Let's assume that she is happy with it for now; is the image what Beth would choose to have associated with her finest climbing achievement?
   
4. Rather is it something that was done as the sponsors thought it was a good idea at the time and she went along with for contractual reasons? [speculation on my part I realise]
   
5. How come a number of female climbers on this thread have said that maybe another image might have been more suitable?

Finally, I have never met Beth, so my impressions are solely from reading about her and watching interviews. However from this, admittedly limited, perspective the images seem to be a world away from what she is like (inasmuch as you can judge this from videos etc.); either in personality or looks. It seems a shame that an image that appears not to represent who she really is becomes how she is viewed after making a notable FA.

To be clear, I am not suggesting that a fatwa be declared on UKC and I understand where Jack is coming from, but I still think it is a bit unfortunate that this photo was used and believe that it detracts from what Beth has done – as may be seen from this ongoing discussion.

In reply to TRNovice:


If she wasn't, she probably would've asked the photographer not to use it again or bought the rights. That's pretty common.


Because she's known as a climber; there's not much market for such shots. Various campaigns have tried this approach in the past and few have been successful.


What a truly bizarre idea - that a world-famous climber signed a contract which mysteriously (and illegally) signed away her right to refuse to do things she found unsavoury.


What would they (and you) prefer - that she only ever appear fully clothed, with no more than a contractually specified amount of skin showing? Is it the 1800s already?

In reply to TRNovice:


I see, so you are doing this to protect Beth from herself not to protect UKC readers from lascivious images, I wasn't sure of your motivation.


She may not be happy with it but until we know you might be jumping the gun or at least making a moiuntain out of a molehill. Even if she doesn't like the photo I'd be surprised its as big a deal to her as it seems to be to you.


Because, thse days, that is how we are supposed to react. Is anyone actually offended by it or are people just looking spare Beth's blushes? Some may deem it to be a little unflattering or embarassing for her but its not a big deal really, is it?


It may detract from it for you and a few others who prefer to be morally outraged by everything than be impressed by something, but it doesn't for me and probably most others. I read the article, saw the pic and thought "That's an amazing achievement" I didn't think "That's almost an amazing achievement, if only she didn't dress like that!"

In reply to duncan:

Amazing and inspiring stuff!

In reply to niggle & Tyler:

I'm not a female climber (honest) and so I can't speak for why they thought that this wasn't the best choice of photo - perhaps they could explain more. I have explained why I think it is inappropriate in this context, because it is a world away from what she has achieved and entirely unconnected to it. I would have liked to have seen a picture of her climbing. If she was climbing in a bikini or nude that would have been better than a posed picture which is clearly intended to be titillating.

I think it is a bit of a stretch to accuse me of expressing moral outrage or to say that I am not focussing on the achievement. In every post I have made on her I have acknowledged what Beth has done. My issue is that, IMO (though clearly not in either of yours) the photo sits really badly with the achievement.

It is like if you did something recently that you were really proud of and I chose to illustrate it with a photo of you comatose from drink at a party 10 years ago. I know I'm exaggerating to make the point, but hope you at least see what I am trying to get at, even if you disagree.

This conversation would not be taking place if what had been posted was a photo of her climbing, or even just a stock head-shot.

In reply to TRNovice:

You can add me to that list. I found the picture quite unfortunate given the story. says the woman with a number of shots of her in backless tops on this website.

No picture would have been better or maybe a Yosemite landscape?

In reply to TRNovice:


So when did being sexy become inappropriate? And when did finding women sexy become inappropriate?

Did I miss a meeting?


No, it's like if you chose to illustrate my achievement, in the absence of a photo of me doing it, with an older pic of me stripped to the waist. And that would bother the people seeing it a lot more than it would bother me, since I'd posed for, seen, agreed to, been paid for and released the shot.

In reply to Jenn:


Ha, there's enough bikini shots of me on UKC that I can't really talk either. Though they are at least all of me climbing!

I don't know what it is about the pic that I don't like. Obviously she's posed for it, she's happy with it so there's no problem. But there's something about a sexualised shot of a woman with artfully arranged climbing gear that seems somewhat distasteful.

In reply to climbingpixie:

She doesn't look awfully happy in the photos - uncomfortable would seem a better discription - and I don't mean because of her body positions.

In reply to climbingpixie:

sorry but thats not true. I've looked everywhere and cant find any...

:op

In reply to niggle:


......... oiled up wearing skimpy shorts whilst covorting with a hot lady.

In reply to TRNovice:


This is the classic anti-sex rationale:

"She must have been forced to do it"

"I've decided that she's really unhappy because of it"

"She's exploited by evil evil men"

Well, newsflash mate: it's incredibly unlikely that anyone held a gun to her head and threatened to kill her if she didn't do it and it would be illegal for her to be contractually obliged to do it if she didn't want to.

In fact, she almost certainly did it of her own free will, enjoyed it and got paid well for it.

In reply to galpinos:


I think I could handle that kind of exploitation. I think you'd be surprised how tough I can be when it comes to making myself oil up with nubile women.

In reply to climbingpixie:

I don't mind climbing shots that area bit revealing but yes, there is something about the posed / glamour look that really turns me off. It was one thing for Mick to use it in his article, but it just seems wrong to associate it with such an accomplishment.

Do we know this though - she doesn't look too happy / comfortable to me.

In reply to niggle:

Not sure where I said that either of those things were inappropriate, maybe you could find a quote and post it. Or perhaps you are making an unconnected comment and seeking to attribute it to me in order to prop up your argument?

Again an exaggeration - supposing Beth had posed for Playboy (and got paid for it and was happy with it). Let's assume further that you (and even I) found the photos really sexy. Given all this, would these shots be the ones that should be used to illustrate this ascent?

I take your point about an old image of you topless being used to illustrate a story (and I said that I was exaggerating), but it is a bit different IMO. Perhaps I'm exhibiting a bit of gender inconsistency - I don't know - I'll ask my therapist.

----------------

Just to clear something up. On this thread: -

http://www.ukclimbing.com/forums/t.php?t=273424&v=1#x4048831

I was one of a bunch of people who were complaining that some one else was focussing on tick-marks in an article about James Pearson bouldering. My issue there was that the other poster was having a go at James without knowing anything about what happened to the tick marks later and was ignoring what he had achieved flashing multiple hard problems.

I am not attacking Beth, I am delighted to hear about her ascent which I find inspiring. I am concerned (not outraged) about an editorial decision by UKC (sorry Jack) on how they have reported this.

In reply to niggle:


Are you tough enough though. If you're not up to it and want a body double, count me in.

In reply to TRNovice:

The thing is I do agree that this is probably not the best photo that could have been used, and I'm sure that so does Jack. What I object to is your presumption that because the photo is of Beth in (for want of a better word) a 'sexy' pose she should be ashamed or embarassed about it and that she needs to be protected from it. For one thing I doubt it was taken 10 years ago or that she was drunk. It is an attitude peculiar to the climbing world that all women should wish to be portrayed as asexual frumps (I'm exaggerating prehaps but you get the point). I doubt she was coerced into having the picture taken as you suggest, she strikes me as someone strong enough to do what she wants, she may actually like the photo. Just beacause you have a view on how women should be portrayed it is not necessarily shared by all women, many women would enjoy to have a photo like this of themselves. If there are women who dislike the photo it could be that's because of their own insecurities about how they look not Beth's herself, in the same way that that some women object to seeing skinny models in magazines (and I object to seeing that bloke in the Aero advert on my TV!). To piously claim not to like it for *her* sake is a bit disingenuous.

<dons flameproof suit and heads for cover>

In reply to TRNovice:

Oopse... I guess we think alike

In reply to duncan: Well done Beth. Can you guys start another thread about provocative pictures and leave this one to her achievement on the rock?

Glyn

In reply to niggle:

You accuse me of extrapolating - maybe you have been guilty of this as well. In my opinion, she doesn't look very happy or comfortable. Perhaps I am influenced by some deep psychological problem in thinking this, or maybe she looks really uptight. If so I can sympathise, I have had to do photo-shoots at work (no oil or shorts were involved) and felt darned uncomfortable as well.

I still don’t think it is the best choice of image to accompany the news. You disagree. We are both entitled to think this and are unlikely to come round to the other’s PoV, so perhaps should agree to differ.

In reply to Tyler:

Really... I've never felt that way. Go to any climbing shop and try to find decent 'outdoors' clothes. In the summer they consist entirely of strappy tops and cut-off trousers - very practical given the UK climate!

In reply to TRNovice:


FFS this has appeared three times as some sort of daming evidence of coercion, is that really what you're saying, that she was forced into having these photos taken?

In reply to Tyler:

He pisses me off to, i keep thinking I'm looking at a mirror. Anyway.....

I seem to remember a few "racey" photos of Chris Sharma (stills from King Lines, my gf saying phwoar etc.). If those had been used with an news article on Chris' lastest new route, I don't think there would have been the same opinions put forward. I could imagine lots of the ladies saying, "Doesn't he look hot" but not many chaps whinging about him becoming sexualised and it eclipsing his achievement etc.

Admittedly, it wouldn't have been my first choice of picture but if it was my only choice, then why not.

In reply to TRNovice:


She didn't pose for playboy and the photos were not used to illustrate this story.

If you really had a case, and there really was something inappropriate about the pic, would you really have to keep making up unconnected, imaginary scandal scenarios to make your point? No, you'd be able to stick to what actually happened.

In reply to niggle:

She posed for Playboy? When? Links?

I don't think she looks uncomfortable in the pictures. It just looks like she's trying (and not quite achieving) to look "hard".

Storm in a tea cup compared to climbing E10/11!

In reply to galpinos:


Chris Sharma was featured in Sports Illustrated for Women’s “2002 Sexiest Men in Sports.”

And why not? He's a good looking guy and has a smoking hot physique. Aand are our puritan pals here horrified by this scandalously raunchy publication?

In reply to Jenn:

So why the uproar about an ever so slightly sexualised image? This is the point isn't it, she's posed in such a way as to look sexy and people feel uncomfortable with it in a climbing context, to the point where some people can't see beyond the image and contextualise the ascent itself and have got all flustered. They try to justify the strange stirings they feel by pointing out they are only seeking to protect poor coerced Beth.

In reply to niggle:

<covers eyes>

I'd like to put in a vote for more pics of men looking smouldering, with just a hint of buttcheek showing, to accompany articles about them please.

whether or not there are other images available, I don't care.

In reply to niggle:

I guess you decided not to take the olive branch. Oh well, I have to interview a Canadian underwriting manager about their management information needs right now - back later .

In reply to CJD:


You should see if you can dig up those Sports Illustrated shots of mr Sharma. They were superb.

In reply to Tyler:

That is a very politician sounding reply.

How does your statement match up whatsoever with what I said about gear shops in the UK selling clothes that didn't make people look like 'asexual frumps', despite the complete unsuitability of the climate??

In reply to TRNovice:


I was writing my reply to your previous post when you offered it I think.

By all means agree to disagree.

Thanks!

In reply to Tyler:

My Canadian underwriting manager is on the 'phone so back for a few mins

The issue is that it is a wholly sexualised image, which might be OK (according to your tastes) for selling gear or clothing, but is not necessarily OK for reporting a notable FA at an unprecendented grade.

In reply to niggle:

Any time!

In reply to TRNovice: I don't understand your concerns here.

She's very attractive to the opposite sex so is using it to increase her profile, and she obviously knows that's a selling point, many many atheletes do it, from Beckham, Ronaldo, Sharapova, Kournikova to name just a few.

She posed for the shot, and I take it she's happy for it to be used, I guess very happy because the choice of photo has helped keep the thread at the top of the page. I now know who Beth is. Broadening her profile.

In reply to IainRUK:

Maybe the difference is that I knew who she was already and my view of her is a million miles away from those images.

In reply to TRNovice:

FWIW that photo shoot of Beth Rodden with Chris Macnamara - the Supertopo guy and one-time office-buddy of UKC's Mick Ryan - has been around for a while and prompted plenty of discussion over the pond ... generally less p.c. than the comments on this thread .. I guess the assumption there was that Beth was in on the joke?

http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.html?topic_id=158909&tn=0&...

http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.html?topic_id=165871

http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.html?topic_id=244047&tn=0&...

etc

In reply to TRNovice: Well sone for keeping a great acheivement at the top of the page. But im sorry your whole argument is based on assumptions about a person youve never met and so makes no sense whatsoever.

In reply to cider nut:

Love this. If I did, but I dont, except i do, but its him, it would be her but I dont, so it isn't!

In reply to duncan:

Can someone please try to put this into some kind of context ? similar prospect to Cobra Crack ? E11 if it was on Scafell ?

In reply to Mick Ryan - Editor - UKC:

Hi Mick,

Happy to be back in the UK?

I mentioned Climb Like a Girl way up at the beginning of this thread .

In reply to GrahamD: Its fcuking 'ard. I dont think many on this forum (including me - obviously) will really know what 14c/e11 or 8c+ entail.

In reply to JoeL 90:

I'm sorry but that is twaddle, whether you agree with my argument or not (and you are obviously free to to either), my point has got nothing to do with whether I have met Beth or not and a lot to do with how her amazing achievement has been reported.

In reply to Mick Ryan - Editor - UKC:

FWIW I still think the Jason Kehl image is the most offensive one in the article

In reply to GrahamD: Why would a Uk adj grade be suitable anyway? Its an american climb and it was worked.

In reply to JoeL 90:

Like, oh I don't know, Rhapsody, Equilibrium, If 6 Was 9, Indian Face...

In reply to JoeL 90:

all you need is a sport grade and an R, R/X or an X.

This route of Beth's ... 8c+ R

Rhapsody 8c+ R/X

Possibly....that's a translation with absolutely no understanding of the language spoken here.

All I can say is that Rodden is freakin amazing, as is Dave Macleod.

Bouldered with Beth in Bishop many years ago - at the Happies and Sherman Acres - my how she has grown and evolved.

You would never have thought that she would have achieved what she has - it's all in the the mind, the personality!

Right, I'll say it then...

Women are underrepresented in climbing particularly at the highest levels.

Beth is obviously a counter example to this statement and as such is an amazing inspiration.

To me however [and by the looks of it quite a few women (and one man!) on here] seeing a 'sexualised' (whatever that means) image of her being associated with the accomplishment seems to belittle what she had achieved.

Sexualised images are by definition attention seeking. This achievement should gather enough positive attention based on its merit alone.

In reply to TRNovice: Im sure if you look through your posts youll realise some of the assumtions youve made. You seem to have retracted some of them though. which makes that post of mine a little late - sorry. Anyway an incredible acheivement - at least everyones agreed on this.

In reply to JoeL 90:

Worked.....oh you mean what we call headpointing?

In reply to Mick Ryan - Editor - UKC:

Why not?

In reply to JoeL 90:

I got a bit carried away in one post and have acknowledged that - sometimes we all pull at whatever is at hand in the middle of a debate - thanks for acknowledging my acknowledgement .

In reply to Mick Ryan - Editor - UKC: Is that a patriotic we? I prefer worked personally as im not really sure what a headpoint is.

In reply to Jenn:


I'm not sure I understand why her being attractive or sexy would detract from her sending a hard route.

If anything I think it's even more of an achievement to be feminine and beautiful when at the highest level of what is a dangerous and male-dominated sport.

In reply to Jenn:

For what it's worth, it gathered my attention based on merit alone, and I don't really follow the climbing press and its reports of the exploits of those at the top of the game. But, despite having only vague knowledge of what 5.14c means, this somehow caught my attention. I read the Alpinist report and skipped the UKC one for a while. I assumed there were no pic on the Alpinist report because this is breaking news and the photographer and photo editors are still choosing how to illustrate it.

It is a great shame that approximately 80% of this thread is occupied with chatter that a) is almost wholly irrelevant to the news in question and b) brings nothing new to the table.

I'd expected (not to say that I wanted) more pontification about how 5.14c compares to UK grading. I think I've seen one poster questioning whether this could be the hardest trad line completed (admittedly a few more references to Rhapsody).

In reply to niggle:

I think there is a difference between "being attractive or sexy" and "a sexualised image"

In reply to niggle:

Agreed! However there does come a point...

In reply to Blue Straggler:

All good points!

In reply to Blue Straggler:


But always bare in mind that 98% of the readers of UKC..the forums and the news page....never post.

Some people like keeping their opinions to themselves.

In reply to TRNovice:

They're theoretical grades when the route hasn't been done first attempt. Why give an American route a theoretical British grade when you can grade it much more acurately with a YDS grade such as 5.14c R, has this been confirmed Mick?

In reply to duncan:

Duncan, the yanks are having hissy fits over the meaning of 'trad' again:
http://www.supertopo.com/climbing/thread.html?topic_id=551416&tn=0&...

... looks like you need to re-post that thing you wrote when they were arguing about Rhapsody.

In reply to JoeL 90:

I agree, my comment related to you saying that it had been worked (I italicised and bolded only that phrase in my reply).

In reply to JoeL 90:

YDS translates perfectly to French sport.

R is long falls
R/X is long dangerous falls
X is death

Hence, sport plus the R/X etc, could be universally understood......the only sticking point is the headpoint grade, as you know, which is a hypothetical onsight grade.

This is where the E grade system fails.

In reply to duncan:
wicked route achievement
wicked picture

now the rest of you stop taking everything so seriously

J

In reply to tobyfk:

and rightly so....

What exactly is a trad ascent?

Is it to do with gear or the style of ascent, or a mixture?

In reply to Mick Ryan - Editor - UKC:

Unfortuately I only tend to read the parochial UK press and so 5.14 W/X/Z personally give me no context. If Birkett had done this route on Scafell, what sort of grade do you think it would have been given ? I'm guessing that because its as difficult as Rhapsody without the same prang potential it might be E10 ? I'm just asking for comments from those that understand how these things work.

In reply to Mick Ryan - Editor - UKC:

A little history (for Americans)…

In the beginning, rock-climbing was a development of Alpinism so naturally the accepted style of climbing was ground-up. In the UK, cliffs are small, so the occasional crafty top-rope or abseil inspection is quite easy to rig up and was used on the quiet from quite early on. The fractured nature of the rock meant that most routes had some natural protection and so an anti-piton and then anti-bolt ethic arose to maintain the challenge. By the 1970s the supply of new routes was perceived as drying up and more obscure crags were developed. Frequently these had to be scraped out of the hillside (eg Goat Crag in Borrowdale). In case north American readers are not aware, it rains quite often in the UK and cliff vegetation is frequently prolific, so this required heroic gardening with crowbars and yard brushes. Not something that can be done ground-up. Additionally, the growth of sea-cliff climbing inverted usual practice: you start at the top and frequently abseil down your route to start. The effect of this was that abseil cleaning and inspection became widespread, which lead fairly rapidly to checking holds and the sneaky practicing of sections on the ab. rope. By the early 80s this kind of ‘cheating’ was widespread but frequently unacknowledged, a bit like the practice of ‘yo-yo’ ground-up ascents that were also popular at the time.

Sport climbing came along and changed the rules, ‘Cheating’ was out in the open and became codified. A certain amount practicing and pre-inspection was usual in the local traditional form, so the difference between “trad” climbing and sport climbing was perceived as being bolts. Trad = no bolts; sport = bolts. Battles raged between the bolters and non-bolters in the mid-80s but eventually everyone agreed to get along (mostly).

Head-pointing must be trad. as it doesn’t involve bolts.



A little history (for Brits)…

In the beginning, rock-climbing was a development of Alpinism so naturally the accepted style of climbing was ground-up. In the USA, cliffs are big, so top-rope or abseil inspection is usually damn hard to arrange and people generally didn’t bother. The un-fractured nature of the granite meant that many routes had no natural protection and so the use of bolts was permitted, if placed ground-up to maintain the challenge. In case our UK readers are not aware, those American cliffs are clean, blank and smooth and climbing without bolts is inconceivable. No-one has climbed El Cap without bolts (now there’s a challenge for some ethical Brit…) and no-one thought The Nose was anything less than an awesome achievement despite Warren Harding drilling over a 100 holes on the first ascent. By the 1970s ground-up climbing reached it’s zenith with fearsome routes climbed replete with epic tales of drilling from tiny stances. As standards rose, the routes got steeper and drilling ground-up got harder and harder. Ethics got stretched to permit drilling from hooks or other forms of aid, so long as it was ground-up. By the early 80s this kind of ‘cheating’ was widespread.

Sport climbing came along and changed the rules, ‘Cheating’ was out in the open and became codified. A certain amount of bolting was usual in the local traditional form, so the difference between “trad” climbing and sport climbing was perceived as being one of style. Trad = ground-up; sport = top-down preparation. Battles raged between the rap-bolters and ground-uppers in the mid-80s but eventually everyone agreed to get along (mostly).

Head-pointing can’t be trad. as it involves prior practice.

© duncan

In reply to GrahamD:

According to Alpinist she placed 8 pieces of gear in a relatively short route (all of them very small) - I guess an E grade would rather depend on whether any of them would bear a fall either individually or in concert.

In reply to tobyfk:

Good post - I really enjoyed that.

In reply to tobyfk:

absolute class

In reply to TRNovice:


Maybe it's like Parthian Shot. That's got about a dozen bits of gear.... but they're all rubbish RPs and all stuffed behind one wobbly flake at half height!

In reply to everyone: Photo now updated.

Congratulations to Beth again. Looking forward to more info on the route, it sounds desperate.

Jack

In reply to niggle:

Sounds likely, would be interesing to get some more details. No doubt articles will be forthcoming.

In reply to Jack Geldard - Assistant Editor:

Thank you - I can now die a happy man

In reply to TRNovice:

so this is all i missed today....glad i've weaned myself off UKC at work

the only problem with the photo of Beth in the article is it's NOT BIG ENOUGH!

In reply to Jenn:

Should emphasise those are the words of duncan not mine, hence italics and © symbol

In reply to Morgan Woods:

Here's another one for you - a cyclist

http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/imageBank/v/Vicky-P.jpg

The Ent

In reply to Morgan Woods:

It's a different photo now Morgs

In reply to niggle:

Fair point but greased up in chicken fat certainly wouldnt have helped with friction on the day!

OK beth are yo ready for this?
Harness - check
shoes - check
chalk - check
hotpants -check
lathered up with chicken grease - check

LETS ROCK

In reply to jazzyjackson:

That phrase always takes me back to Twin Peaks .

In reply to Mick Ryan - Editor - UKC:

>> In reply to Blue Straggler:

>> It is a great shame that approximately 80% of this thread is occupied with chatter that a) is almost wholly irrelevant to the news in question and b) brings nothing new to the table.


And thus they are not occupying the thread - so your comment is not a relevant response really! I am talking about the thread, not about numbers of UKC readers. :-P

In reply to TRNovice:


Do you type it in reverse then look at it in a mirror, to replicate the reversed backwards talking?

In reply to Blue Straggler:

.neerg si ruoloc sti ,acimroF si elbat sihT.

In reply to Blue Straggler:


Oh yes they are. You only have to be present.

In reply to duncan:

Even more impressive considering the weather out here at the moment!

In reply to duncan: The article does say 'around 5.14' and 'if 5.14c'. this thread is then assuming 5.14c.

Not Beth's fault as the article also says she hasn't given a grade!

In reply to Mick Ryan - Editor - UKC: But always bare in mind that 98% of the readers of UKC..the forums and the news page....never post.
Some people like keeping their opinions to themselves.


It is not a requirement to have an opinion on everything. I dont have an opinion on whether the photo was appropriate/inoffensive/unimportant or inappropriate/offensive/important. Being unopinionated is OK in my view - I would go so far to say that in fact IMO it is preferable than having an opinion on absolutely everything like the archetypal taxi driver or disgruntled of Tunbridge Wells. The lurking sane may fall into this category - they may be keeping their opinion to themselves or have no opinion at all.

BTW for future reference it is 'bear' as in a weight rather than 'bare' as in Beth Roddens legs.

In reply to Simon Lee:

And that would be "Rodden's legs" - sorry just couldn't resist .

In reply to TRNovice:


Its a funny thing. I quite like leaving typo's in even if I spot them (which just then I didnt) as it lends a certain immediacy which is appropriate to messages on forums. However, using words in a way that have a diffrent meaning to that intended makes the hair stand on the back of my neck.

In reply to Simon Lee: 'hair stand on the back of my neck'

A hare could stand on the back of your neck. Hair stands up.

In reply to Simon Lee:

I know, it was a lesser sin. It was just the juxtaposition with you pulling Mick up was rather striking - to a pedant like me anyway. I probably have some error in this post now .

In reply to John2:

"Hair" is an interesting word as it can be singular as in "a hair stands up on the back of my head" or plural "the hair stand up on the back of my neck". When I refer to "my hair" I won't often mean a single stand (unless it has just fallen in my meal), but referring to "my hairs" is also OK, if a bit awkward in some circumstances. Words are weird aren't they?

In reply to Richard Bradley:

<bows>
However another way of putting it would be to say that I don't really believe in climbing idols, as I like to learn from myself. However I do have masses of respect for the top climbers and their achievements. Dawes and Beth in particular. Dawes because of his originality, and Beth because I think she's a person I/one could learn a lot from, although I don't know a huge amount about her.

In reply to Simon Lee:

Did someone say it was?

In reply to TRNovice:

I prefer "the hair on the back of my neck stands up" as it scan better imo.

Anyway lets get back on topic. Isn't Beth hot.

In reply to Simon Lee:

thats just ...... like, your opinion man

In reply to galpinos:

is a classic in [contradictory] self-reference - I take my hat off to you .

In reply to Simon Lee:

you should get your barber to do a more thorough job ;o

In reply to duncan:

I'd just like to this deviant thread is a perfect example of what can be bad about UKC.

I mean, well known rock athlete climbs hard new route - turns into a debate about sexism and a profile picture.

Lololololololololol

Climbing site my ar$e

In reply to 220bpm:

Just what would you like to do to this deviant thread?

The thread sounds pretty much like a bunch of climbers talking to me, plus Morgs as well of course.

In reply to TRNovice:


I'm glad you picked up that. I was worried no-one would notice my deliberate pun.

In reply to IainRUK:

FWIW I don't have a problem with the picture - she agreed to do it as had been endlessly pointed out - just with it in the context of her FA.

In reply to TRNovice:

Jenn will be upset when she finds it's your new wallpaper.

In reply to duncan: Look, I imagine that most people on UKC have been raised on the Brit Trad grade system and have little experience of the American system. But I also imagine that most people on UKC would like to gain more of an appreciation of the American system and other grade systems. So when something is reported in a different grade system, could someone try to give us a british comparison. I assume that the R or X is a combination of the distance of the fall and the crapness of the gear. And 5.?? is the overall difficulty of the route. From the info so far it seems to be similar to Rhapshody but I guess it is morpho because of the thin hand jams so maybe Beth found it easier. E10 at least I expect so fair play.

In reply to Mick Ryan - Editor - UKC: Did someone say it was?



It was a small observation prompted by your comment. Trading daily as you do in the currency of opinions, you might (understandbly) overlook that some people stay silent because they prefer to, others because they have nothing to say.

In reply to Ackbar:

In X.YYy Z the X indicates the type of activity (5 is a climb, 4 is a scramble). YY indicates the difficulty of the activity, currently running from 1 to 15. y is a refinement of this running a...d so 5.14b is harder than 5.14a. Z relates to the safety of the route and follows the US film classification paradigm. I may have this a bit wrong, but G - General Release, PG - Parental Guidance, X - Adult, R - Restricted (aka Porn). Not sure where W and Z fit into this.

For equivalency in UK or French grades, try searching on here or typing "grade conversion" into rockfax.com - most modern guidebooks have a comparison table - you will find that they are not 100% consistent.

In reply to TRNovice:

If you are too lazy to search: -

http://www.rockfax.com/publications/grades.html?

http://www.thebmc.co.uk/Download.aspx?id=108

In reply to TRNovice:

Really? I hope that's true. It's brilliant

In reply to Blue Straggler:

My "knowledge" comes from The Gunks Select Guide.

In reply to TRNovice:

Not sure where NC17 fits into the above either .

In reply to TRNovice:

You also sometimes see the same classification applied to high-ball boulder problems. See the Soul Cal DVD for example - though last time I checked Jedi Mind Tricks is V4, not V3x.

In reply to TRNovice:

Nope - wrong...

http://www.filmratings.com/

G
General Audiences. All Ages Admitted.
A G-rated motion picture contains nothing in theme, language, nudity, sex, violence or other matters that, in the view of the Rating Board, would offend parents whose younger children view the motion picture. The G rating is not a “certificate of approval,” nor does it signify a “children’s” motion picture. Some snippets of language may go beyond polite conversation but they are common everyday expressions. No stronger words are present in G-rated motion pictures. Depictions of violence are minimal. No nudity, sex scenes or drug use are present in the motion picture.

PG
Parental Guidance Suggested. Some Material May Not Be Suitable For Children.
A PG-rated motion picture should be investigated by parents before they let their younger children attend. The PG rating indicates, in the view of the Rating Board, that parents may consider some material unsuitable for their children, and parents should make that decision.

The more mature themes in some PG-rated motion pictures may call for parental guidance. There may be some profanity and some depictions of violence or brief nudity. But these elements are not deemed so intense as to require that parents be strongly cautioned beyond the suggestion of parental guidance. There is no drug use content in a PG-rated motion picture.

PG 13
Parents Strongly Cautioned. Some Material May Be Inappropriate For Children Under 13.
A PG-13 rating is a sterner warning by the Rating Board to parents to determine whether their children under age 13 should view the motion picture, as some material might not be suited for them. A PG-13 motion picture may go beyond the PG rating in theme, violence, nudity, sensuality, language, adult activities or other elements, but does not reach the restricted R category. The theme of the motion picture by itself will not result in a rating greater than PG-13, although depictions of activities related to a mature theme may result in a restricted rating for the motion picture. Any drug use will initially require at least a PG-13 rating. More than brief nudity will require at least a PG-13 rating, but such nudity in a PG-13 rated motion picture generally will not be sexually oriented. There may be depictions of violence in a PG-13 movie, but generally not both realistic and extreme or persistent violence. A motion picture’s single use of one of the harsher sexually-derived words, though only as an expletive, initially requires at least a PG-13 rating. More than one such expletive requires an R rating, as must even one of those words used in a sexual context. The Rating Board nevertheless may rate such a motion picture PG-13 if, based on a special vote by a two-thirds majority, the Raters feel that most American parents would believe that a PG-13 rating is appropriate because of the context or manner in which the words are used or because the use of those words in the motion picture is inconspicuous.

R
Restricted. Children Under 17 Require Accompanying Parent or Adult Guardian.
An R-rated motion picture, in the view of the Rating Board, contains some adult material. An R-rated motion picture may include adult themes, adult activity, hard language, intense or persistent violence, sexually-oriented nudity, drug abuse or other elements, so that parents are counseled to take this rating very seriously. Children under 17 are not allowed to attend R-rated motion pictures unaccompanied by a parent or adult guardian. Parents are strongly urged to find out more about R-rated motion pictures in determining their suitability for their children. Generally, it is not appropriate for parents to bring their young children with them to R-rated motion pictures.

NC-17
No One 17 and Under Admitted.
An NC-17 rated motion picture is one that, in the view of the Rating Board, most parents would consider patently too adult for their children 17 and under. No children will be admitted. NC-17 does not mean “obscene” or “pornographic” in the common or legal meaning of those words, and should not be construed as a negative judgment in any sense. The rating simply signals that the content is appropriate only for an adult audience. An NC-17 rating can be based on violence, sex, aberrational behavior, drug abuse or any other element that most parents would consider too strong and therefore off-limits for viewing by their children.

X or XXX
Isn't an official movie rating - someone made it up.

In reply to TRNovice:

Thank you for posting these differing conversion tables. Which one is correct for trying to make an E grade estimate of Beth's route ?

In reply to IainRUK:

She might, indeed, be hot but not on the evidence of these misguided promo shots - they make her look like a lanky tart.

In reply to GrahamD:

Sadly neither - just as no one seems able to agree whether a route is E10 or E8 in the UK. They are just guides.

In reply to Jenn:
>

I think I might have said "not 100% accurate" so :-p

And when did you ever see PG13 or NC17 applied to a climb?

In reply to GrahamD:

To be slightly more helpful, if it is 5.14c (some doubt as to whether Beth has graded it herself, but she has climbed 5.14b [sport] before and seems to think Meltdown is harder), then I think that is pretty universally accepted as F8c+ (see Mick's comments above as well). What that translates to in E-grades depends on the pro and the fall. MacLeod grades Rhapsody at F8c+, so it could be E11. If the pro is bomber (which it doesn't sound like), it might be E8. I guess the only thing you could safely say is that it is probably at least E9 and possibly E10/11. But as all of these are for hypothetical onsights, not headpoints, it is all moot anyway.

In reply to TRNovice:

About E10 was the sort of conclusion I came to above as well. Bloody good effort from a burd

In reply to GrahamD:

Firstly you need to wait for Beth to confirm the grade. Then if it has an R suffix its going to be in the higher E grade which is listed as a comparison to the French or YDS Grade. Finally why do you care what e grade it is, its an American climb and YDS/French grades are the correct grades for a route done in such style why do you care about an E. To me whether its a high e grade a french 8 or a 5.14 does very little for my understanding of a routes difficulty as its simply too hard to even imagine.

In reply to JoeL 90:

But it clearly helps some other people who are less used to other systems, so what's the problem? Even if it is a partially inaccurate translation of an unconfirmed estimate projected to a hypothetical onsight.

In reply to JoeL 90:

Why do I care ? I'm an anorak who likes to put these reports into a context I'm more used to seeing (E for trad, French for sport). I like to know how it compares with climbing achievements on these shores and, as a single pitch trad route, a UK trad grade should have some meaning for it.

In reply to duncan:

Apologies if someone has already answered this, but what was the previous hardest trad line by a woman? And the nose free doesn't count (too disparate).

In reply to GrahamD: Maybe a more a more accurate comparison could by made by comparing it with the information known about hard british trad routes rather than trying to give it an e grade. For example that macleod thing gets 8c+/5.14c so Meltdown is of similar difficulty to climb while ignoring commintemnt/danger. For danger/protection comparison you really need to know how good the gear is which isn't clear. Uk adk grades are onsight grades they dont work for worked/projected ascents as is clear at even low grades.

In reply to JoeL 90:

Is there an echo in here?

In reply to JoeL 90:

>Uk adk grades are onsight grades they dont work for worked/projected ascents as is clear at even low grades.

All top end E grades are worked so I'd have thought it was as valid here as for any other E9/10/11.

I take your point about gear. The description implies (to me) longish non fatal fall potential. 8 bits of gear aint bad even if some of its pretty small.

In reply to Dom Orsler:

Embarrassed to say that I don't know the answer to that one :-o. It's E8 in the UK, most (but not all) of the high-end climbs in the US are bolted (see Toby's quote above for how that relates to trad - maybe "natural protection placed on lead" would work better). There are some very good Continental and East European women climbers out there.

In reply to Dom Orsler:

I don't know but I bet it was in N America somewhere. I can't think of anywhere else women new-route hard trad.

Best I could offer would be Lynn Hill's Vandals at 5.13a from 25 years ago, but I'm quite sure there are harder.

"(too disparate)"

And too much on bolts, or are we having a little transatlantic what's-trad discrepancy again?!

jcm

In reply to TRNovice:

I assume Dom means a new route established by a woman, in which case I've no idea what the answer is either here or globally. Quite interested to hear.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Again, Beth with The Optimist at 5.14b [bolted] at Smith Rock has to be in the top 5 I would think.

In reply to TRNovice:

That's neither trad nor her own route, surely? Not to mention nowhere near top five - loads of European women we've never heard of have done 8c+, I'm quite sure.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

But you said "established" by which I thought you meant FA - and you dropped "trad" from your second post as well - hence my misunderstanding.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Oh and yes Beth put up The Optimist, which was sort of my point in mentioning it. I'm sure that there are some others where one of the Continental females was the FA, but I don't know what they are I'm afraid.

In reply to TRNovice:

So she did. The Alpinist article says it was the first female ascent, which I assumed meant it was an established route, but I was wrong.

>I'm sure that there are some others where one of the Continental females was the FA, but I don't know what they are I'm afraid.

Other clip-ups, you mean? There might be, I don't know. I don't recall reading about Josune doing any FAs, but then I don't read about Eurosport much anyway.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

My problem as well I guess .

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Well, I'm interested to hear that too, but I really just meant hardest trad line ever climbed by a woman. Don't care about headpointing, OS, new route. Just hardest trad.

In reply to Dom Orsler:

Would have thought that someone on her would know about this issue from a non-UK perspective. It's E8 here right? Rands, Creamer...

In reply to duncan:

Photo here: http://tinyurl.com/2olm3f

In reply to duncan:

Now that's more like it. Looks even harder, thinner and blanker than I thought it would! Cheers for posting the link.

In reply to duncan:

That barely qualifies as a crack - sheesh! Looks unbelievably hard.

In reply to TRNovice:

The absolute minimum well-protected 8c+ trad could be would be E9 - it would never be rated E8. See p11 of the 1990 Yorkshire Limestone Rockfax grade conversion table.

Well protected E7 generally equates to bolted 8a/8a+.
Well protected E8 generally equates to bolted 8b/8b+.
Well protected E9 generally equates to bolted 8c/8c+.
Well protected E10 generally equates to bolted 9a.

I accept that it is not an exact science but given perfect gear, this is the conversion system used for 'E for effort' climbs. With hard grit death routes the system gets distorted so that E9 could 'only' be 8a but of course the E is for death risk and not for effort.

Ben Moon suggested an E grade of E10 for Hubble, a bolted 8c+ at Raven Tor but accepted that it might only be hard E9. Nobody even talks about E grades for sport routes any more as its not really relevant. However, its still useful to know the sport grades for trad climbs as the English tech grade is notoriously woolly and does not give an impression of the overall difficulty of a pitch. Given that Beth's route is a bit runout and the gear might not be bomber, I would expect it to be at least E10 if it is indeed 8c+ although this is only speculation.
Well done Beth, an amazing effort!!!

In reply to teddy:

The obvious comparator, looking at the photo is Welcome to the Cruel World, although I forget the French and indeed English grades offered by DB and others. Clearly this is harder. It looks like Ryley Bosvil only with no peg, no crack, steeper and going on for four or five times as long. Shudder.

jcm

In reply to teddy:

What I said was: -


Maybe it wasn't clear what I meant, but I intended "bomber" to mean something better than just "well-protected", i.e. that all of the placements were easy-to-place sinkers and any single one of them would 100% take a fall – basically the equivalent of a line of bolts (so shoot me!). I realise that this is an extreme case (and as I said most unlikely to apply to this route given the descriptions of the gear employed and just looking at it), but this might bring it down to E8. I was being conservative (not always a trait in talking about grades) and saying that the absolute floor on the grade might be E8. I then went on to say that it was:-


Which is pretty much what you said.

All academic at this stage anyway really as Beth hasn't offered a grade yet AFAIK, let alone having it confirmed by multiple repeats (cf. Rhapsody) and (as I and others have mentioned above) that this is all for a hypothetical onsight. I think the 5.14c comes from others who have projected and failed the route saying that it probably went at that grade.

As far as I can ascertain, this is a breakthrough for women’s trad and could even be one for trad in general (how cool would that be?). Regardless a massive achievement for Beth, whatever the grade settles at and whatever estimated conversion to UK grades anyone comes up with.

In reply to TRNovice:

Yes I did read of all your post and you are spot on about the Meltdown being equivalent to at least E9 or E10/11. However, I think that assuming that the Meltdown is 5.14c which it may well be (as it could be harder than Magic Line 5.14b), suggesting that it could be E8 is a little out.

This is because is as I'm sure you appreciate, it doesn't get any better than 'well-protected' in trad climbing as we all know that the best wires/cams can mysteriously walk out of cracks, pieces can rip, flakes can snap etc., something which just doesn't happen in sport climbing with 3,000kg breaking strain bolts. To make a separate category for 'bomber' gear from 'well protected' and lower the E grade still further from the accepted classification seems to me to be splitting hairs. How an 8c+ could be in the same E8 bracket as Gaia E8 6c, which is 7b+ or Renegade Master E8 6c/7a, which is 8a+/8b would make a mockery of the grading system. There has to be a lower E grade limit for 'ideally protected' trad climbs and IMHO opinion, for 8c+'s this has to be E9. Saying it another way, from the Rockfax grading chart, the hardest french grade an E8 could ever get would be 8b+, whether its bomber gear or well-protected (whatever u want to call it), which is a lot easier than 8c+.

I agree this is a huge achievement in world climbing and deserves to be celebrated whatever numbers get pinned to it!

In reply to teddy:

I agree with what you were saying and yes everything you mention is correct. Me mentioning a line of bolts was a bit tongue in cheek. To put it in the context of something I know: if there were 8 pieces of gear on the route, each equivalent to the single DMM 5 placement that is below the crux of Fool's Gold, it might be a different matter. There may be no route in the world at any level with that many 100% placements (certainly not Meltdown from what I have read and the photo), and therefore my scenario was rather contrived. However, I was making a hypothetical point that no matter how good the gear was and how much there was, it would be at least E8. I agree that for all practical purposes, on what would be normal, but decent trad gear it would be E9. Looking at the line (and going wih the F8c+ grade for now) E10 seems more likely.

The whole discussion was to give some one unfamiliar with US grades a point of reference. My take was: -

1. Inconceivable that it could be anything less than E8 [this grade was chosen advisedly as is that hardest trad grade achieved by a woman in the UK at present].
   
2. Pretty certain that it is at least E9.
   
3. Possibly E10 or even E11.

If what I wrote was inconsistent with that, then I guess I should work on my communication a bit. I think what you are saying is: --

1. Inconceivable that it could be anything less than E9.
   
2. Pretty certain that it is at least E10.
   
3. Possibly E11.

Which from one perspective is quite a difference, but maybe not enough to argue about .

In reply to TRNovice:

No worries TR, its good to air views once in a while, it all adds to the debate, however on this occasion we'll have to agree to disagree!! You are right to say my position is that its inconceivable it could be any easier than E9. I don't see how the position could be any different - to even suggest it could be E8 is in my view not correct...as 8c+ is so much harder than most trad climbs out there.

From another perspective, if the bolts were stripped from Hubble and it was protected by 5 glued, in-situ moacs, it would be rated a minimum of E9 7b, as mad as that sounds!!

In reply to teddy:

You're probably right - I'll bow to your greater knowledge .

In reply to duncan:

So if the "E" grade assumes a hypothetical onsight and the first ascenionist works or headpoints the route how does he/she grade it? Sorry for my continental ignorance.....but we yanks can't even define " trad ".

In reply to alan swanson:

Nick Dixon came up with the 'H' grade for headpointed/ worked ascents of trad routes a few years ago so if e.g. you worked an E8 6c for months and then lead it, you would get H8 6c. However, this never really caught on so most people just take the E grade but just say exactly how they did it ie. whether it on the 2nd attempt or after 3 months of effort etc. Obviously the onsight/ flash is the purest form of ascent but there comes a certain point where it gets too difficult/ dangerous and 'headpointing' becomes the norm. Unfortunately, the problem with this sometimes is that an onsight ascent of a bold E4 or E5 then is in many ways more of an undertaking than an E8 headpointed to death but this is often not really appreciated by people who think that the completely worked/ wired E8 is more impressive. This misses the point somewhat, the two styles of ascent are just different.

In reply to alan swanson:

Guesses.

jcm

In reply to alan swanson:

Random number generator?

In reply to alan swanson: It's a bit like the elephant in the room type of situation - the brit trad grade system doesn't really work anymore in the higher grades, but everybody pretends it's fine.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously and TRNovice and Dom Orsler:

I spent quite a while last summer trying to get the definitive answer to 'hardest line established by a woman' and Beth with The Optimist seemed at that time to be the hardest. But, in a couple of places I came across it described as _equalling_ the hardest line put up by a woman... without saying who the other one is by.

In reply to gingerkate:


I think that was a reference to one of the hardest pitches on the first free ascent of Lurking Fear, also in Yosemite, on which Beth Rodden (again) got the first red-point. Though it was given 5.13c it is now thought to be 5.14b or harder. Bolt-protected granite face so not "trad" in the UK sense.

Again © duncan !

In reply to tobyfk:
No, sorry, I wasn't clear: the reference to which I refer implies there's another woman who has put up lines as hard as Beth's, not just another line by her.

In reply to gingerkate:

No, I am fairly sure you are muddled. I remember the thread you are refering to from last summer ... the answer I just gave is the one that was hinted at within it.

In reply to gingerkate:

If you were thinking about my hints, as Toby said, it was Beth Rodden on Lurking Fear. Yuji Hirayama couldn't do all the moves on P2 and thought 14c or more.

There are very good photos and a description of the climbing on Meltdown at the big UP blog: http://bigupblog.com/

In reply to duncan: Christ, that really is a thin crack. I wish they'd show some shots that give a sense of how steep it is.

In reply to duncan:

Thanks for posting the BigUp link - lots of interesting additional information and video captures there. Interesting that Caldwell coudln't figure out a sequence for the crux - I guess fingerlocks might be a bit tougher for him though.