UKC

I clipped what was left of the bolt with a wire, did a couple of moves, watched it fall off, reclipped it- better 2nd time with a smaller nut sitting under the bottom of the bolt stub. E5 now? Not quite the same as a bolt, but prob would hold....luckily not tested

In reply to morganator: Errrrrrr, I thought the bolts had been chopped on The Cad years ago, so what is one doing there?

In reply to Al Evans: It is a bolt stub.

In reply to Stig: But if its been chopped it should not be effective in the grade? Stub or not, its infradig!

In reply to Al Evans:

It was never properly chopped, the hanger was just removed. You can still get quite a decent wire over it, which seems sensible to me!

In reply to morganator:

E5 with wire over the bolt.

In reply to morganator: that stub of a bolt must have been there 20 years now? how reliable?

Felt bloody hard for E5 even with the bolt in!

In reply to Dom Whillans: Yes, I agree, hence the question about the grade. According to the Gogarth Wiki webpage Nick Bullock and others reckon is probably soft E6 in its current state. Be intersting to see what the new guidebook says when it comes out

In reply to morganator: Don't any of you understand my point, it either should have a bolt or it shouldn't. If it shouldn't there is no point in winging about being able to cheat with a bolt head, if it should then it should be replaced. What is the point in basing a routes grade on a crap bit of gear just because its crap. In or out, stop pussyfooting, as the first ascencionist of The Cad, I only didn't lead it because I had not the ethical authority of RF to place the bolts so this really pisses me off. It's make your minds up time.

In reply to Al Evans: But then once the bolt head comes out maybe you might be able to place a sky hook in it? Or some kind of small camming device?

In reply to Al Evans:

What is it that is so difficult to understand, skyhook, small cam in the hole? If a bolt is cheating fill the hole in, if its not replace the bolt.

In reply to Al Evans:

You're even boring me now Al

The Ent

In reply to morganator: the kit on the cad is bomber all the way, just a bit runout really, personally think its E5 with the bolt threded, its not as hard or scary as other E6 6a's. quite comparable to right wall. good route non the less, but not an uber classic as it says, bit chossy really

In reply to Enty: Ent, please tell me why I am not making sense?

In reply to Al Evans:

You are making sense but let it lie. I love talking about mates who have taken the whipper onto the bolt, I want to go there one day and see what all the fuss is about.

Chop the stud you're removing some history.

The Ent

In reply to Enty:

Quite right. This sort of complex evolution is echt British climbing. I can't stand this sort of reductionist 'either it's sport or it's trad' stuff.

In fact every time I am reminded of it the fact of the bolt being chopped but still threadable makes me giggle. It's so very, very British.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously: I'm not sure I buy into this in this particular case, but maybe I'm too close?

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

That's exactly the point I'm trying to make. We need to hold onto these little anomalies as much as possible.

The Ent

In reply to Enty:

Keeping the exceptions that prove the rule

In reply to kevin stephens:
*pedant alert*
the exceptions which disprove the rule! 8o)
i'd love to climb hard enough to do the route and comment on it... i'm drawn to JCM's view whilst understanding al's position. bloody fence-sitting libran.

In reply to Dom Whillans:


The first rule of pedantry is always be sure of your corrections! The phrase is "the exception which proves the rule" from the days when proves was also used to mean to test.

In reply to Tyler:
http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/exception-that-proves-the-rule.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exception_that_proves_the_rule

In reply to Dom Whillans:

Have you not just backed up Tyler's point?

In reply to galpinos:

no...
from wiki

"It is sometimes said that the word "proves" means "tests", and that "the exception proves the rule" therefore means something like "an exceptional case can be used to test whether or not a rule is valid". This explanation is usually dismissed."

In reply to Tyler:

No way.
The stub is going to be garbage now after 35 years, think about it.
How far will you fall without it?

In reply to Dom Whillans:

That's not how I understand it being used in this case, more the correct "exception confirms the rule in cases not excepted" way, where in this case the exception is to leave the bolt stub.

In reply to The Purple Pimpernel:

But the bolt always was garbage, I know people did fall on it and got away with it but really it was one of those where you'd never have full confidence, rather like the stub now? In some ways threading the stub might be better as the old bolt was one of those with a big screw on eye which a)Might itself break when rusted, b) Provides more leverage than putting a wire over the stub whihc, presumably, is u close to the rock. Also no there is a (apparently, I have no personal experience) a lower insitu thread to pack it up which was not there when the bolt was.

In reply to Tyler:

I think you're confusing pedantry with splitting hairs.

In reply to galpinos: my post was to show the incorrect usage of "prove" and had nothing to do with the case in point. my post that said "disprove" whilst more grammatically correct (to me anyway) is not in common usage, but no-one has corrected me on that yet! regardless, the bolt stub is probably gash and i'd love to be able to be confident enough on repeated 6a moves on the sharp end to have a crack at the route (bolt stub or no)
i don't want to get drawn into a argument regarding syntax and semantics.... because i'd lose! (i'm not nearly pedantic enough)