UKC

Dave MacLeod has soloed an 8c sport route at Margalef, Spain. Dave had previously redpointed Darwin Dixit 8c but decided to up his game in the soloing stakes in preparation for a line he has in his sights on Ben Nevis, Scotland.

Read more at http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/older.html?month=03&year=2008#n43010

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

That's awesome. Was it Antoine Le Menestrel who soloed Revelations 23 years ago? What is the hardest solo?

The Ent

In reply to Enty:

I think Dave MacLeod is claiming the hardest one with that ascent. That's what I gathered from reading the blog.

Davie

.....and more at Claire's's blog: http://www.velvetantlers.co.uk/2008/03/to-spain-and-back.html

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Consistently brilliant as ever.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: Wow awesome that's impressive. Hats off all round. Really though, what's stopping this amazingly talented guy from putting in a repeat of IF? As I understand it that's a bit committing too.

In reply to Mutl3y:

objective danger (i.e. friable rock) as I understand it.

Seems reasonable to me given what is at stake.

In reply to Mutl3y:



ZZZzzzzzzzZZZZZZzzzzZZZ

In reply to Burnsie: Good point, but no matter what DM does people'll be thinking it (even if they're too scared to raise it on a forum). Check my post history - I'm not a WUM...

In reply to Mutl3y:

It's old news. Very old news.
There are acres of old threads talking about it so- if you want to read millions of opinions on him not doing Indian Face do a search and spare us another, please.

Davie

In reply to Wee Davie: Alright apologies. I have read his blog post about it and seen JD say that he thinks it's "snappy" as well (was that on committed?). So yeah sorry for coming out with the normal boring statement. It's just that IF@7c/8a? looks to me as a mortal as being so much easier than the sort of stuff DM has shown he is capable of etc.

That aside, DM is consistently resetting the benchmark in the British trad scene and generating a legacy that will stand as a high water mark for years to come. As a punter watching from the sidelines this is a very exciting time indeed. Awesome!

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Just thought about this and realised how impressive it is - if any british climber red pointed 8c it'd be news so solo is totally amazing its essentially like him doing another E11. Congrats Dave

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

An truly impressive achievement, no doubt. The thing that stuck out for me was that this was TRAINING for another climb.

"For this climb I need to be able to climb 8c+/9a in an unprotected position."

What on earth type of E-grade is this going to get?

(scratches head....)

12?

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

just to put the cat amongst the pigeons....is soloing with the draws in "easier" than without?

In reply to Morgan Woods:

for me, yes.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: Is he after a Darwin Award?

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: I just find his abilities completely unbelievable... Simply stunning, god knows how he keeps it all together...... gobsmacked.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Wow, that's just an awesome performance by Dave MacLeod! I'm looking forward to hearing more about his new project if soloing 8c is training for it!

In reply to Morgan Woods:

Slightly I guess (since you could grab one if in extremis) - looking at the picture it appears that they're fixed draws so he didn't have a choice to remove them.

Though imo thats of no consequence - an awesome effort that really shows how impressive Dave M is on the world scale. With 9a redpoints and repeats of Birketts hardest routes last year and now this it looks like he's building up to something big.

The scary thing is that from his blog it appears that this all went fairly straightforwardly and is just a training exercise for something properly hard!!

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Obviously an amazing achievement - clearly Dave is improving all the time.

I'm interested and surprised in his motivation for this - I remember reading an article in one of the mags about an 8b or 8b+ solo he had done a few years back and the soul searching he went through after the event.

In reply to GrahamD:

Read

http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/older.html?month=03&year=2008#n43010

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Proper mentalist stuff Mr Mac - we wait with great interest for news on the summer months Nevis project. Best of luck!

In reply to Mutl3y:

Did you not understand his argument?

In reply to Ian Patterson:

yeah i guess on something that steep they would be fixed, and not something you would want to have to use on a solo....sterling effort anyway....can't wait to hear about the main event.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Not quite sure what my feelings are on this. Putting aside the absolute grade, soloing a high route only two french grades below your redpoint limit is a stupid thing to do for most climbers other than maybe someone as analytical and so obviously aware of the nature of risk and margins of error as him.

Does anyone with more familiarity with the Ben have any idea what this project may be? What's the current hardest rock route - the ukc database suggests Agrippa @ E6? That's clearly a massive jump in technical difficulty, so are there many buttresses with sufficiently steep/blank climbing to warrant an 8c technical grade. Maybe there are some well known projects?

J

In reply to orge:

Went to a talk by Dave. It's on Echo Wall, which I think is on the East side of Tower Ridge. From what he said there seems to be an massive potenial for hard E7+ routes on the Ben. Anyone who's done Centurion will have noticed the massive impossible looking overhangs with no routes.

In reply to orge:

Dave's own route, Anubis E8.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: Anyone know how high the crux is on the route he soloed?

In reply to beegsyboy:
Cheers,

He mentions it specifically in this interview:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/outdoors/features/resolutions_2008/

In reply to Norrie Muir:
Ta!

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

What's particularly impressive is that he isn't wearing a harness with a cow's tail which would have made it possible to clip in if he got gripped. Good effort.

In reply to Graham Hoey:

Would kind of defeat the point of the solo if he did that.

In reply to orge:

Quite from the BBC article:

I have to spend a lot of time climbing to be good at it, because I don’t have much natural ability.

WTF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Imagine he did have some

In reply to orge:

No, it's on the east side of Tower Ridge.

In reply to orge:

unfortunately he hasn't speculated on the grade as yet, has he?

In reply to Martin Rogers:

Perhaps not directly. But the fact that he sees benefit in soloing an 8c as training towards this project suggests that it will be 8c/9a X .. X meaning a death fall from the crux.

In reply to Martin Rogers:

From his blog:

"Right now I am preparing for a very special project I am trying on Ben Nevis and I already completed one or two of my training climbs which I saw as benchmarks for a prerequisite physical level. But it’s obviously just as important to spend time doing some psychological skills training for a climb where the seriousness of a fall could not be higher. For this climb I need to be able to climb 8c+/9a in an unprotected position. So I must have great confidence in my ability to make good decisions in a situation close to my physical limit but under a lot of psychological pressure."

In reply to beegsyboy:

Aye, right enough, that was a question I asked at his Edinburgh lecture as i couldn't figure out where it was from the photos.

In reply to orge: Good lord. My palms are sweating just thinking about it.

Great effort Dave, good luck for the summer.

In reply to beegsyboy: Maybe someone needs to put together a trad equivilent of the Petzl Road Trips? No idea who'd have the money or sponsors connections but still.

In reply to Lemony:

Somehow I can't see Sharma, Graham, et al swapping the South of France/Spain for the Highlands... Or the huberbaum making the trip from Yosemite.

That's not to say that they shouldn't - it looks inspiring, to me.

J

In reply to orge: It sounds like it would be a good opportunity for some of the superhuman eastern european/scandanavian climbers to raise their profiles then? They don't seem averse to a bit of bad weather

In reply to Lemony: The BMC international meet usually has some pretty top climbers, and sees E6/7 onsights.

Really good and worthwhile event.

Jack

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Its interesting what he says here compared with what he said about the wisdom/selfishness of soloing in his magazine article a few years ago after soloing 8b (8b+).

This looks like a change of heart.

In reply to GrahamD: Interview with Dave now live on UKC:

http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=868

In reply to catt:

Absolutely, but people do. A hanging rope, or cop out rope coiled on top with knot+ krab ready to be thrown down are often used (but not openly declared!). All these things reduce the commitment of the solo, which is why Dave's ascent is that more impressive.
I know of at least one first ascent that was done with a hanging rope alongside the climber!
Graham

In reply to Graham Hoey:


They reduce the commitment of course, but not the difficulty of the climbing or the consequences of a fall.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Great effort but the fact the route is around 7-8m high with most of the hard climbing on the 4m roof was prob worth including in the write up.

Similar effort to Mark Leach soloing that 8c roof in Blackwell Dale.

In reply to Jcodley:

Sean's Roof?

In reply to all.;

i don't think it counts as a solo as the quickdraws are still in place. he could just grab one if he wanted and then get rescued.

he is an amazing climber though.

In reply to Jcodley:

Dave replied to a comment on his blog:

'Anonymous - the route isn't that long really, maybe about 50 feet, but unfortunately the climb overhangs a road so a fall from the technical or redpoint crux means the worst consequences. At least the route finishes at the top of the crag, so you can top out like a normal trad climb.'

Certainly doesn't look like Seans Roof from the pictures.

In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:

It makes interesting reading alongside his earlier magazine article (on his web page):

'Hurly Burly - 8b free solo'

Apparently much less introspection and need for self justification this time round.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:
Amazing.

In reply to Ian Patterson:

I don't know about the worst consequences - I agree it's not Sean's Roof but it's not the Dolomites either. You might well live, put it that way. Still pretty amazing, of course.

jcm

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: It would be easier to understand this solo if we had an E grade for it (assuming that it is in the E grades and not HVS 7b).

In reply to Ackbar: it would probably equate to a Grit E20

a solo is a solo, if its that safe why isnt it soloed all the time by the super strong spaniards?

In reply to Ackbar:

Try 8c R/X.. that's all you need. Fall and you get injured or die.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Oh for goodness sake Mick of course it isn't all you need especially if you have no idea what those terms mean.

I will hazard a guess at saying that this would be 'only' E11. It doesn't seem as though Macleod himself regards it as a bigger thing than Rhapsody, though I might be wrong.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

8c is the sport grade, well understand.

X is a death fall. R is long fall serious injury.

The E grade is useless in ascents like this, it tells you zip.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:
Agreed - in fact as a a solo while I guess falling off is not something he would want to consider neither does it look like some enormous euro stamina fest with the redpoint crux 100 foot up.

Despite these discussion their seems little argument that it is a full on solo and as you say an amazing achievment.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

That sounds about right as a guess - he may even think its 'just' hard E10. As you say he doesn't give the impression on his blog that he thinks it a massively big deal so may consider it easier than Rapsody! Also since each e-grade should cover the equivalent of 2 french grades so there's plenty of room there.

In reply to Ian Patterson:

Good to see the UKC crowd again spouting uneducated, unqualified boll*cks about hypothetical E grades where they are entirely irrelevant.

Anyone who thinks this was somehow less of a solo because they think it is safe should consider that you'd be falling 30,40,50 feet onto solid tarmac, and due to the angle, quite possibly on your head or back. That sounds likely to be fairly terminal to me.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Mick, why do you bother with this nonsense? You know that isn't true, so what's your agenda? I don't get it.

If it does nothing else, it enables the uninformed to compare this as best they may with (eg) Rhapsody.

jcm

In reply to catt:


I'm assuming that since you are registered you consider yourself to be part of "the UKC crowd" ?

In reply to catt:

Don't be silly. Explicit guesses are not 'spouting bollocks'.

That rather depends where the hard bit is. Someone higher up seemed to think it was about 15 feet up. I don't know what 'less of a solo' means. I'm sure we'd all sooner try falling off this than off the top pitch of the Nose, is the only point people are making.

jcm

That

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:


>

bit like the over extended use of the E grade on grit routes, as i say this 8c would be an E20 on grit

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

No agenda. E grades are for onsight leads of British trad routes, not rehearsed solos of sport routes.



You can't compare the two.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: so UK rock climbing has reached the dizzy heights of E7/8 then?

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

I agree with you Mick. Totally different types of climbing.
Sometimes people are interested in debating a hypothetical sport grade for a trad route but never the reverse. An E grade for a sport climb solo!!!?

I doubt Dave Mac will bother to reply after the last pointless UKC debate about how the upper E grades work.

Davie

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:



Anymore than you can compare the difficulty of Hubble (short bouldery route), Rainshadow (longer pumpy route with hard crux), 50m Spanish 9a <insert name here> (very long full on stamina route) - doesn't stop us using the same grading system.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:Hi John,

Of course you are right in the fact that this is a different type of ascent to something like the solo of the Fish route on the Marmolada and as you said - soloing the Nose or something similar, however it strikes me as an important ascent for various reasons:

It is possibly the first solo of an 8c in the world, regardless of the type of route. 'The Fly' at 9a was soloed by Jason Kehl, but in a bouldering fashion (the crux is only 12ft up) - with mats and spotters and a few falls and it is considered highball V13. The whole route is only about 20ft.

Darwin Dixit was climbed as a route - Dave obviously had the ability to 'know' that he could climb 8c successfully on 'that' go - when I redpoint near my limit, sometimes you just fall and it takes several goes to succeed. This was clearly different and that's the distinction in my mind.

He didn't boulder the route out - I mean, there was no jumping off from the crux several times before getting the 'solo'.

To me it is a very impressive ascent. It looks worse to solo than Revelations, and I wouldn't solo that!

And if someone did solo one of those huge hard routes, then the comeback could be - "well it's not really 8c, it's just graded that because it's so far up the big wall".

With a fairly well travelled accessible route like this - the grade is likely to be fair.

Jack

In reply to Wee Davie:


Or don't as the case maybe.

E grades are for onsight trad leads but have been adapted for trad rehearsed leads (headpoints) without anyone ever giving a full explanation.

That is where the confusion lies!

The top climbers need to get together and explain how E grades are applied to rehearsed trad leads.

In reply to Ian Patterson:

We climbed at Laboratoire last time we were out there. It's not very high at all....the meat of the the steep routes is in the roofy, super steep bit, just off the ground.
Lakes lads would have this down as a highball boulder problem You'd break a leg or summat but death is unlikely if your hard - which I'd imagine Dave is, being a Scot and drinkin' irn bru. No less, a fine effort.

In reply to richard kirby:

Thanks for all the comments. I wouldnt get too worked up about that route in terms of the difficulty of the solo, it was just a bit of mental skills training for another climb I want to work on. I mainly chose it because liked it but also because it went to the top of the crag, the moves were solid and it was short enough that continued life might just be possible should I blow it. Avoiding danger is my business, not going all out for the highest, gnarliest landing, loose death show I can find. Maybe some folk on here can land on their back on stone from 40 odd feet and walk away to perform their next trick, or maybe you watch too many hollywood movies? The ground is pretty hard folks. I you've never done it, hitting the ground out of control from a great or even not so great height has consequences. For every parachutist that falls 10,000 feet, hits a tree, and lives, there are 10,000 who fall 15 feet off a VS or an 8c and don't make it. And if you do miss that crux slap and plummet remember to grab that quickdraw on the way down. It worked for Tom Cruise ; )

I wonder how many people who want to know just how deadly my solo would be had I fluffed it have had a friend die in a fall? What about you Richard? I have, and can tell you it changes your perspective (to one more respectful of falling in case thats not obvious).

On the subject of falls, I took two minor falls on Ben Nevis today. I must say that climbing new routes on Ben Nevis is a nails hard game at times. I went from feeling in super shape and great confidence to feeling like a useless unfit bag of nerves in the space of a couple of hours. Respect to the serial new routers on this mountain, Kellet, Marshall, Smith and so many others that inspired me. They just inspired me even more.

In reply to Dave MacLeod: Ive been thinking about soloing pain pillar at aberdour (the harkcraig) for a couple of weeks... I read your blog just yesterday and what you say about if you are ready you will know you are - it just hit home.

I was over there today (flirting with the idea of doing it but not actually seriously considering it), showing two mates how to lead climb - dandered over to have a look, and did it.

Its "only" VS - but it was amazing...

The mental side of the climbing game is incredibly complex: a lot of what you write is about that - thanks for that, and thanks for writing about it so clearly. I still think nails hard climbers are from a different planet: but as a result of reading stuff that you have written since I started climbing, I at least believe that I can similar adventures: they just happen to be more than 10 grades lower than you!

In reply to chembhoysh: *hawkcraig

I guess strictly speaking the hardest solo in the world must be the Es Pontas arch in Mallorca!

In reply to Dave MacLeod:

Climbing an 8c is a great effort, no matter what the style. I just think it would have been worth including the fact that the route is more of an extended boulder problem than a full-on route. Many of the problems on the swiss granite are just as high.

In reply to Jcodley:

You've seen the video right? It is what it is.

VIDEO: Dave MacLeod redpointing Darwin Dixit 8c

http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/older.html?month=03&year=2008#n43039

It was climbed as a route and has now been soloed. It is 40/50ft high with a low crux and sustained all the way. A fall low down would break bones, a fall higher up could push your spine through you skull.

See Dave's reply above.

This is a similar but harder effort to the solo of Revelations and The Fly - and yes there are many climbs that have been bouldered of a similar height all around the world.........and many hundreds of feet high which put you in as Bachar defined - the zone...... zone 3 being terminal, like soloing Astroman.

Mick

In reply to Dave MacLeod:
Well said, Dave.

In reply to Jcodley:
Err, have you watched the video?

In reply to Dave MacLeod: Thanks for talking sense as usual Dave.

As far as an E grade making this easier to understand - what's hard to understand about it?? You need to be strong enough to climb 8c and know you won't fall off - that's pretty f*ckin hard. How many people speculating on E grades have actually climbed hard enough E grades to say - 'oh, so it's E11, right, now I can relate to it??'

As for the height, there's a lot of stuff on here about 'oh it's only about 30 feet, that's pants'

I fell off a solo from about 15 feet a couple of years ago, and spent the next four months on crutches. I had operations and several months of physio on a seriously f*cked up ankle that will never recover. I spend the first half hour of every day hobbling round until it loosens up enough that I can walk on it. It wasn't fun, and I don't solo any more. I don't think it's just a question of either you'd die or you wouldn't die, falling off from any sort of height is not a good idea.

If thhe weather was better, would we all spend more time out climbing and less time engaging in pointless debates?

In reply to Jcodley: I can't believe the critcs on the sidelines sometimes.
How about a bit of perspective here: How many gritstone E9's and 10's are higher than 40-50 feet? And which ones have F8c climbing?
Equilibrium - 35 feet.
The Promise - 30 feet.
Cratcliffe Groove - 35 feet.
Doctor Doolittle - 45 feet.

When somebody headpoints an unprotected, technically F8c 40-50 foot grit route people on here will be creaming themselves over the latest E double digits.

In reply to Steve McQueen:

This is ukc, what do you expect?

J

In reply to orge:

You are talking about the UKClimbing.com forums where people, if they want, can express themselves, regardless of their level of experience or knowledge.

You will find that readership at weekends and when the weather is good is very low compared to mid-week when people are working or when the sun does shine. People who visit UKClimbing.com are very active climbers.

This particular thread and the news items it is linked to, INCLUDING comment on this thread by Dave MacLeod is a good debate, very informative I am sure. In fact we not only have the news reports, comments from many including Dave, an interview with Dave by Jack our Editor, but photos and a video.....and extensive explanation on Dave's and Claire's blogs.

What more do you want?

It is useful not to focus on some of the uninformed posts or rants.

Mick

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:
I think you missed my tongue-in-cheek-smiley.

Fully agree with you that ukc has both broad readership and content. It does have a small minority who seem to relish the opportunity to rubbish any achievement (both big or small), but I don't think that's exclusive to this forum and it's relatively easy to ignore them.

Keep up the good work!

J

In reply to orge:

I ignore them Ogre.



You are right, it pisses me off too.



We will.

M

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:



I do agree - your coverage of Dave's solo is really good and quite multi-dimensional in the way that the best of the web can be.

Maybe i'm in a good mood today, but it seems the level of UKC content has really stepped up of late.

Cheers Mick and Jack!

In reply to DrGav:

and we appreciate your recognition Gav.... we will work hard for the UK climbing community to bring us all the best of climbing coverage......

In reply to Dave MacLeod:

Excelent effort. That move (almost slap) just before the 5th(i think) clip made my hands sweat.

Great solo effort but glad the video was of the redpoint attempt!

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

According to 8a.nu and Carin.com the route was on-sighted by Sharma last year and is now regarded as 8b by the locals and Sharma.

from Kairn.com...

"Mais
en fouillant un peu plus dans l'historique de la voie "Darwin Dixit",
il s'avère que l'année passée celle-ci fût réalisée à vue par un
certain Chris Sharma, la décôtant à ... 8b!!
"Le pas dur se trouve au raz du sol, et la voie ne monte pas haut" nous précise également un local de Margalef."

Still a great effort

In reply to Jack Geldard - Editor - UKC:




Chris Sharma recently on-sighted this route and gave it 8b.

from Kairn.com...

Mais en fouillant un peu plus dans l'historique de la voie "Darwin Dixit",
il s'avère que l'année passée celle-ci fût réalisée à vue par un
certain Chris Sharma, la décôtant à ... 8b!!
"Le pas dur se trouve au raz du sol, et la voie ne monte pas haut" nous précise également un local de Margalef."


Many here have maintained that regardless of where the crux is on this route the concequences of a fall would be dire, which I'll not argue. This is a great achievemnet for anyone and should not be diminished.

However, up to this point I have still heard nothing as to where the exact location of the crux is on this route and how sustained the climbing is after the crux. This is important information and should be included in the reporting by the ascentionist. It is my opinion that Dave should have reported the nature of the climbing and also the history of the route in terms of the consensus grade. This information should not be left to the gallery. Let me also add that I am a big fan of Dave.

My main concern is the perceived ("perceived" being the operative word here) lack of trasparency in the reporting, and I don't mean that in a accusatory manner. Where the crux comes on a potentially dangerous route or solo IS important because it lets us understand how much risk is associated with this act. Even a 10 metre fall may not kill a particularly gifted athlete, but falls of less height certainly have killed many.

If we are to accept for a moment that our heros and roll models have characters worthy of imitation, then it is also important that we see that their decision making process is available for scrutiny, because people will naturally seek to learn from such acts. Anyone who is genuinely passionate about learning should question the quality of the information they are meant to digest. Conversely, anyone passionate about teaching should try and be upfront regarding the information they choose to impart.

This subject obviously delves into various shades of gray.

In the end, the quality of a person's character will shine through. There will always be those wishing to add fine print to others achievements in our sport, but this can certainly be diminished by brutal honesty in the way you choose to report your activities.

In reply to dwt: Good point and well made.

In reply to dwt:

Have you ever thought that perhaps Dave didn't know?

In reply to dwt:


I dread the day climbing ever get to the stage of your ideal - everyone reporting every detail and feeling obliged to. I go climbing, I do climbs, and if I like, I talk about them. I do not owe anyone any information about my climbing! That said, I do like to talk about them, so I write a blog where I sit for hours describing in quite a lot of detail both the approach I have, and the events they lead to. But some folks always want more eh? On this climb, there are already 1000 odd words of my writing, more from my wife, a video, and lots of pictures. There are another 2500 words of detail on it going into Climb magazine shortly. And, we filmed the solo and me talking about it which will be in a DVD we are making this year. Perhaps you should give me a break?!


There is no need for fine print here. I have said on my blog and higher up this thread that you should not get worked up about this climb. If you do, you are missing the point. It was just a training exercise that kept me busy for a couple of days. The climb I am training for is what is worth talking about. For now, all I want to talk about is the mental strategy I am trying to develop with my wee solo in Spain. I'm just not interested in dwelling on the exact number of broken bones or messed up lives If I fell off from a certain height. Its not what I go climbing for.

In reply to Dave MacLeod: Quite frankly I think you're response was incredibly restrained Dave; I think I would have told some posters on here to poke it! Well thought out reply.

8c solo on a route where a fall is going to hurt (and hurt a lot), done in good style is fantastic! As always its good to see Brits leading the way. Look forward to seeing what this project on the Ben is all about.

In reply to Dave MacLeod:


Thanks for the response Dave. You're an inspiration.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

The reason 8c R/X doesn't tell you what you would need to know is that it doesn't tell you whether the 8c bit and the R/X bit occur together or not.

Hypothetically, 15 foot of stick-hard climbing followed by let us say 100 feet of 7a climbing, is by no means the same proposition as 100 feet of 7a climbing followed by 15 feet of stick-hard climbing (assuming the route to be completely unprotected). This is reflected in an E grade and not in a French grade with an R or X attached.

I don't know why I bother continuing to make this point to you since you obviously have some agenda of your own (as do our Scots friends, of course, who seem to find it very important to denigrate gritstone). But those who ask what E grade such a proposition would get are frankly showing more knowledge of what it's about than the posers who mock them.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:


In a quick scan through the thread, the only people I saw mentioning grit routes were Erik B (Scottish) and Petejh (Welsh, living in Canada, according to his profile). Are you suggesting these two views are representative of all Scots?

Other than that, you make some sensible points in your post.

In reply to Stuart S:

Yes, you're right, I had mentally misattributed petejh's comments to Wee Davie, who was only making some (IMHO misguided) comments about E grades as such. My fault. Substitute 'some of our Celtic friends' for 'our Scots friends', then.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Much more accurate

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: I don't know why I bother continuing to make this point to you

I dont know why you continue making this point either. No grading system is going to completely encapsulate the physical and mental difficulty of climbs.

The 8c R/X type grade is going to lend some more objectivity and information at the cutting edge for routes of a reasonable length than an E for Onsight grade guesstimated from a headpoint. E-high-number is virtually devoid of meaning for most of us - attaching a french grade allows us punters to give it some context and perhaps offers more useful info for an aspirant onsighter.

As for gritstone it was always difficult to grade and increasingly so with mat technology and varied styles of ascent.

In reply to Simon Lee:

>No grading system is going to completely encapsulate the physical and mental difficulty of climbs.

No of course not, but the system Mick advocates is so fundamentally conceptually flawed that it annoys me hearing people get smug about it.

>E-high-number is virtually devoid of meaning for most of us

I don't see that. The better type of punter knows what Fr 8a+ or 8b or whatever feels like and can extrapolate, but then the better type of punter knows what E8 feels like and can extrapolate from that.


Yes, this is a fair criticism of the upper end of the E-grade system and will continue to be until cutting-edge trad routes are regularly onsighted, which will be never. But then it's also a fair criticism of the sport system (ie that the grade is for a redpoint). Given that this sort of ascent is rehearsed there's a case for saying French grades have some merit when referring to them, but this has to be balanced against the huge flaw I've described.

In my own limited experience of headpointing (or that matter onsighting) punter routes I can say with complete confidence that it would have conveyed no useful information to me at all to hear that punter route x was 6a+R, or indeed 7bR.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: sport system (ie that the grade is for a redpoint).

You have made this point before and its simply not true. It is an aggregate measure of difficulty effectively covering both onsight and redpoint seeking to measure physical and technical difficulty objectively.

At the fringes where a route has unusually hard to read the moves it might be deemed to be hard to onsight at the grade but this is the odd exception.

In reply to Simon Lee:

Well, we've had this conversation before as you say, and opinions seem to differ about whether a sport grade is truly for a redpoint or an amalgam. But so long as it's not actually for an onsight my point stands. What is certainly true is that the relationship between the two is more linear on the sort of steep limestone route sport grades are usually applied to than on, e.g. gritstone, which has got to limit the utility of such a grade when assessing the difficulty of on-sighting routes.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: I don't see that. The better type of punter knows what Fr 8a+ or 8b or whatever feels like and can extrapolate, but then the better type of punter knows what E8 feels like and can extrapolate from that.


The bandings between french grades are narrower offering better incremental information on difficulty compared to E grades where not only are the bandings wider they are inconsistently wide comparted to each other - E5 being an especially wide band and also when sport routes were also at times given E grades would cover 7a,7a+ and 7b - three whole french grades. How many steps would E7 or E8 cover ?? Extrapolate that.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: the two is more linear on the sort of steep limestone route

I am sure even you are aware that there are chamonix granite routes graded in the vernacular

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: conveyed no useful information to me at all to hear that punter route x was 6a+R, or indeed 7bR.

It would give you an indication if you opened your mind to it and then opened your eyes at the foot of the route to assess how this grade was arrived at which is what you would/should do before setting out on the onsight. Only an idiot would trust the E grade so implicitly not to even bother making this sort of visual assessment and launch themself upwards.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

and when he's not soloing bonkers hard stuff in Spain, he's doing bonkers hard stuff on the Ben and in the Cairngorms
http://hotaches.blogspot.com/2008/03/back-to-back-xi11s.html

Astonishing efforts by the sound of it.

Presumably the armchair critics will be lining up...

In reply to tony:

so what E grade does XI 11 get :¬

In reply to tony:

Holy cow!

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: JCM I think you were seeing 'denigrating of gritstone' where none existed in regards to my comments above. I love gritstone, it's almost as good as canadian chossy limestone death routes. If you were to have interpreted my views as denigrating of hyperbole in general and a grading system which is mocked at by many people outside britain, you would have been much closer to the mark.

In reply to petejh:

Pray tell, why?

boB

In reply to bob

Because it comes across as slightly absurd and old-fashioned.

In reply to petejh: This is a different topic from the main point of this thread however.

In reply to petejh:

That says more about the commentators than the grading system.

In its current incarnation it's actually the youngest grading system (other than those for bouldering) being only 33 years old or so.

Always nice to see JCM and Simon have a go at each other over this, both completely missing each other's point!

boB

In reply to petejh:

Since when has deviation from the subject been banned on UKC?

OK, so back on point, well done to Dave for soloing something so close to his limit. Not many choose to do that. Those sniping at this would appear to have missed the point of why he did it.

boB

In reply to Bob: Perhaps if you wanted to be pedantic. But it's amongst the oldest in spirit. One of the stock arguments in favour: it's long history.

In reply to Bob: What, pray tell , does it say about the commentators in your opinion?

In reply to petejh:

That they denigrate that which they do not understand.

I'll admit that it takes a bit of getting used to (and that many people get it wrong - but that's not a fault of the grading system) but it is actually a very good system and provides a lot of information (always supplemented by looking at the route) about how hard a route/pitch is. The one thing that is skewed about the UK system is the technical grade. For various reasons (read macho bullsh*t) from 5c/6a onwards the grade bands are just too wide.

Single parameter systems (French, Ewbank et al.) cannot differentiate between sustained routes and those that are basically one boulder problem move. Simon Lee often moans about the UK system spreading across several French grades but equally I've come across bolted routes given the same grade that would spread across several UK grades.

The UK adjectival grade states how hard a route/pitch is to climb.

The French grade describes how hard a route/pitch is to climb.

Notice any similarities in the above two statements?

In fact the UK adjectival grade and French grade are roughly equivalent (not equal but equivalent), so E1 equates to F6a; E2 to F6b; ... E7 to F8a. That is it takes an equivalent level of competence and skill to climb an F8a as it does an E7. That is not to say that the two skill sets are the same, they aren't, though there is a large overlap.

It's like comparing a four pack of Stella to a bottle of wine: they both contain the same amount of alcohol and cost roughly the same but you can't say they are equal. They are *equivalent*.

boB

In reply to Bob: 'one thing that is skewed .....'
Well yeah, exactly! Half of your grading system makes no sense when applied to routes of 5.11a and harder. That's alot of routes. Calling it a skewed system is being kind.
The biggest failing of the british system is it has this crazy old fashioned 'adjective grade' which is open to abuse by 'macho bullshit', as you put it, in a way that the other popular systems (YDS, french, yewbanks, font, V) aren't.
Look at adjective grades in this way: Alpine new routing in alaska makes do with six possible adjective grades. If alpine climbing on Denali in winter can be covered by grades 1 - 6 plus tehnical difficulty then how come Burbage North on a summer afternoon needs 16 possible adjective grades (vdiff-e10)????? I mean, I know the roads are bad sometimes...
The same argument holds for scottish winter in my opinion. I mean, come on, is there really 11 grades of overall seriousness?
Climbers using the other systems don't invent new adjective grades for dicey routes because they don't need to. An X or R with a brief route description says enough. It's not open to abuse in the way the british system is.

In reply to Bob: In reply to Bob:

Your semantic distinction between 'state' and 'describe' is going to escape most of us - ie those who rely on grades weekend in and weekend out and if the distinction comes down to that level of subtlety it will fail the usefullness test - which is the only test that really counts.

E grades are as often an artificial psychological barrier as they are an inspiration or ego trip. They are loaded with subjectivity, occupying too much self-limiting mental space. There are routes I have done previously with no great trauma that have subsequently been given a higher E grade which if they had been assigned that grade at the time I would have walked on by. Similarly it worries me that an impressionable young climber might end up in a wheelchair purely because they wanted to score E highnumber if they havent already done so.

A french grade tells you how difficult a route is to climb - if on top rope. If you are capable of top roping onsight at that grade you are then in a position to judge if you are on for the onsight lead of a specific route. The route is therefore within your climbing ability but how much margin for error are you up for ? Looking at the R/X rating you can decide in conjunction with visually assessing the route if you are inspired and up for it that day. This makes for a far more objective assessment of the risk and your capacity to onsight the route than I am or not an E<insert grade>climber.

Sounds pretty usefull to me if it catches on, which with Mick's persistence it might. A dual use of the two systems would continue to test its usefullness. Most trad climbers are now familiar with french grades from indoor walls and Spanish bolt clipping.

In reply to petejh:

I get the feeling you don't quite get the system. The adjectival grade isn't just for seriousness, but takes into account the tech grade and how sustained the route is.

In reply to petejh:

i grew up with "yewbank" (sic) grades in Australia and they work fine there. It took me a while to get used to British trad grades but after a couple of years i think i have an appreciation of how the system operates (at least in the low-mid part of the spectrum). I think it suits the climbing ethic over here, gives me an idea of the hardest move plus a picture of the overall seriousness. Not sure what the debate is about. As i've improved and moved through a few grades i didn't "invent new adjective grades" but just ticked bigger numbers for harder stuff. If i was doing the same back in Oz no doubt i would be clipping the odd bolt on blank stuff hence there would be no need for an adjectival grade of any sort.

In reply to Morgan Woods: I also grew up wuth Ewbank (although the slightly modified SA version) and it took me a while to get my head around the UK system, but the fact remains that the UK system works for the UK style of climbing, had done for years and will most likely continue to do so, as no-one has found anything better yet.

In reply to petejh:
If these same routes were given US grades, it would cover what, 25 grades? Without even considering the Rs and the Xs?

In reply to Chris F: Yes it would, 25 technical grades describing overall difficulty instead of countless obscure adjectival grades.
I understand the system very well, I've climbed enough in different countries. What's not to understand? I know the adj grade covers more than seriousness. I'm just fortunate enough to be in a position to be able look at things from a different perspective.
Funnily enough my canadian housemate was reading something about the route Gaia yeaterday and asked me what E8 6c means. He found it strange that 6c could cover such a wide range of difficulty. In his opinion X or R is all the info you need for the seriousness whilst a more accurate tech grade is the most important part. I agree with him. What's the point in having a tech grade which can mean so many different things?

In reply to petejh:
>What's the point in having a tech grade which can mean so many different things?

err it doesn't....it just means the hardest move.

if you mean the E grade....then it's supposed to cover a wide variety of situations.

In reply to petejh:

Is it the fact that they are adjectives that bothers you? It would be just as easy to substitute those "obscure adjectival grades" for anything, be it a number, a letter, a roman numeral or an representative atomic element. The fact remains that a two tiered system does suit the style of climbing in this country, and i am fortunate enough to be a position to look at things from a different perspective too, having lived and breathed assorted grading systems throughout my career.

In reply to petejh:

>If alpine climbing on Denali in winter can be covered by grades 1 - 6 plus tehnical difficulty then how come Burbage North on a summer afternoon needs 16 possible adjective grades (vdiff-e10)????? I mean, I know the roads are bad sometimes...
The same argument holds for scottish winter in my opinion. I mean, come on, is there really 11 grades of overall seriousness?

Either you haven't got the faintest clue about the English gradings system (probable) or this is a ludicrous misdescription of it by someone who should know better. It's not surprising it's denigrated abroad if this is how badly you understand it. To be fair, Canada does seem to have a particular chip on its shoulder in this regard.

jcm

In reply to Chris F:

>Is it the fact that they are adjectives that bothers you?

Pretty quaint to call E11 an adjective, really. What's more adjectival about that than W11, say?

jcm

In reply to Simon Lee:

Your last sentence was a bit stupid. Only a idiot would trust any grading system so implicitly as not to look at the route first.

It depends what I'm launching up, of course. If it's Fear and Fascination, then I would agree the French grad gives me a decent approximation of how many ergs I'm going to have put out in order to achieve success. If it's Obsession Fatale, say, or Silk, then I've no idea what French grade it would get, and someone telling me what grade they thought it was wouldn't be helpful. The sport grade just isn't measuring remotely the right thing. It's telling me how hard it's going to be physically to do the thing by the easiest possible sequence (or possibly some amalgam of that and how easy it is to identify the easiest possible sequence). I don't need to know that. I need to know either how likely it is I'll be able to do it o a given occasion after practice, or how likely it is I'll be able to do it first go. It's just not the same thing.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

>Only a idiot would trust any grading system so implicitly as not to look at the route first.

We are not disagreeing here

>It depends what I'm launching up

Hence my suggestion of opening your eyes at the foot of the route to assess how this grade was arrived at

>If it's Obsession Fatale, say, or Silk, then I've no idea what French grade it would get,

I have already passed comment on the difficulty grading these sort of routes on grit using any system - though if you were to choose a French grade the Font one would seem to be the best for Silk at least.

>The sport grade just isn't measuring remotely the right thing

French grades are used elsewhere to grade trad routes including in France on rock types other than limestone such as Chamonix granite a fact you keep deliberately ignoring, instead banging on about grit routes

>don't need to know that. I need to know either how likely it is I'll be able to do it o a given occasion after practice, or how likely it is I'll be able to do it first go. It's just not the same thing.

If you have the French grade difficulty combined with a rating of the boldness combined with sight of the route why would you not be able to compute how likeley you would be able to do the route other than an obstinate refusal to do so ? - or put in a diffrent way what additional info would the broad E grade offer by comparison

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: I am playing devils advocate here you should realise that. Yes some of my points are massive generalisations, I wrote them in the spirit of trying to look at things differently rather than them being absolute facts.
I think most people on here would agree that the british tech grade is fairly meaningless - or at best very general - above 6b,
(and by the way that's what I meant by the tech grade covering so many different things Morgan W).
Consider why do climbers nowadays report hard routes and in their reports they nearly always state the technical difficulty of the route in another system (F,V,font) along with the british tech grade. Why? Because the british grade doesn't work!!! Rhapsody - do you think of the technical difficulty as brit 7a - No way, it doesn't mean much anymore. I bet you think of it as F8c+!
I just see a system which could be improved on, so why not try to make it better or use something else?

In reply to petejh:

Most people would think of it as E11, but I take your point. There are no other E11s, so by calling it F8c+ there is an instant point of reference.

My perspective is from a Brit who has spent 15 years climbing all over Wales and England and is now living abroad. Now that I have tried to explain the British system to numerous foreigners, my personal conclusion is that it is outdated. Either outdated, or inferior to other grading systems.

The simple fact is that "E5 6a" could mean "poorly protected F6c", or "well-protected F7a", or indeed several other things. You may reply that "An E5 climber should be able to deal with all such situations", and you'd be right. But it doesn't really provide that much useful information to the prospective climber!

I've had so many other flaws pointed out to me - no real onsights of E8+, the broad span of the tech grade above 6a, multipitch routes grading each pitch by it's hardest move only - that I've given up trying to justify it.

Nice thread diversion BTW, classic RT.

Wow - that's, like, *one* harder than E11, isn't it?

He already went to 11 .. now he's going *one* harder? Hats off to him.

In reply to petejh:

It actually has a sensible and worked out history, and is still the most potentially accurate grading system yet devised.
http://www.aqvi55.dsl.pipex.com/climb/uk_grades.htm