UKC

I mostly climb around E1. I can normally pull 5c on the lead. 6a after a few falls, and if I practice real hard (i.e. time on a top rope) the odd 6b.

Kevin Jorgeson has just led Parthian Shot, E9 6c. From what is reported, he took several goes to get the 6c move. This only leaves one or so tech grades between the two of us. He is one of the world's best. I'm Mr Very Average.

This shows that UK tech grades get very much harder as one goes up the scale.

Is this sensible for any grading system? In any sport? Or will it just mean the French system will end up being the way to go?

Well from your lead grades I reckon you should be good for E3...(anchor grade for E1 being 5b).

The key grade for Parthian Shot is the E9 bit. 6c moves above 1 protection point with high risk of serious ground fall.

So the difference between Mr average and world class may be about the adjectival grade rather than the tech grade.

(As many climbing wall hero's find out on the crag)

But hey what do I know.......

In reply to David Coley:

You also need to consider that although one of the 6c moves is the crux, there will very likely be other 6c moves and atleast a few 6b ones too and moves of different style.

I'm not saying this isn't a problem with UK grades, but why there is a big difference between someone having the ability to do some 6b moves and someone being able to do the business on an E9.

I also agree that you should be able to push the boat a bit

In reply to David Coley:
Thats one thing about climbing, sometimes you feel like the best in the world, the next day like the worst..

In reply to David Coley:

>6a after a few falls,

So you could not do continuous 6a-b for 30ft and THEN do a 6c move to finish off, that is one of the reasons some routes get higher overall grades, I think.

In reply to David Coley:

You missed the whole point of UK grades - you climb E1, he climbs E9 - I make that eight grades between the pair of you which sounds about right!


Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs:

Which is very common.

In reply to Chris Craggs:

I don't think I have missed the point at all of the E grade.

I was only talking about tech grades. I know he climbs 8 grades harder than me. BUT I have seen several very good climbers fail to on-sight 6c moves, just like me on 6a ones. That gives the impression of very little difference between us on the tech front, but a massive difference on the E front.

My point was that I know there must also be a massive difference between us on the tech front. But the scale does not have the capability to reflect this. Another way of saying this is that 6c is a lot, lot harder than 6a, and a covers a much bigger leap than say 5a to 5c. I assume most climbers feel this to be true?

I also have the feeling that the French system does not have such a non-linear feel to it.

Am I wrong?

In reply to David Coley: You have missed the point a little bit. The E grade and the tech grade are not isolated from each other.

A safe route with one 6a move might get E2, a safe route with 15 6a moves might get E5.

5c is quite a bit harder than 5a, its just that most of us manage to train to 5c without too much bother. Once you get to 6a and above you are starting to weed out the men from the boys.

I have climbed 7a+ with a fair bit of effort required to get there, but have never climbed 7b. Does that mean that 7b is a magnitude of effort harder? No. it just means to break that grade and going to have to make a magnitude of effort to train harder!

I think the uk grades are just fine for most of us. I think maybe there is a problem for the absolute elite.

In reply to Daniel Armitage:
I disagree - I think he's spot on. British tech grades are wack at 6c and above. The bands DO get wider higher up... The vast majority of my climbing partners also think this - 6c is anything from maybe flashable to totally fricking desperate.

In reply to abarro81: At 6c and above.... How many folk really climb 6c and above!!!!!

In reply to Daniel Armitage:
Maybe i should point out I mean French grades here of course...

In reply to Daniel Armitage:
Since his OP included an explicit reference to/question about 6c, it hardly seems unreasonable to include it in the debate.

In reply to abarro81: I get your point. But the OP is discussing the difference between 6a and 6c.

I feel that this grade band is where climbing starts to get hard. A climber has to make sacrifices and really train at these grades because he is nearing the boundary of how far talent can take him.

Some people, due to injury or genetic misfortune will never be able to perform consistently at english 6c. Not because the grade is wrong, but because we are starting to push the body beyond its design envelope.

I agree that maybe above 6c the grades don't make sense, but I wouldn't know, because like most people I have never been there!

I reckon for trad climbers from average punter (VS to E3) to competant plus (E3 to E5) british trad grades work fine!

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:


I should have also said that I don't think there is a "problem" with E grades, just the tech bit.

UK E grades, USA and French grades, and bouldering grades, seem linear. British tech ones don't.

What is the history of this difference?

In reply to Daniel Armitage:

While I'd agree on the trad grades front there, I must also suggest that it's possible to be a competent climber at *any* grade (ie not just E3 and above).

In reply to David Coley:

I always thought UK tech grades to be linear - as far as I go (a few 6bs) - whether it goes to pot or not above that I don't know. Each tech grade is quite 'chunky' though - like your 6c grade I could do some 6b moves and make no impression on others.


Chris

In reply to Chris Craggs: VS to E10 is 11 grades, 4b to 7a is only 9 grades.

In reply to Chris Craggs:

I think we are saying the same thing: Tech grades seem more chunky than E grades. It is often hard to tell an HVS from an E1, or E1 from E2, and there have been some HVS's that are now E2 or even E3. That is 3 grades. I don't know of any 5b's that are now 6b!

I've used UK trad grades for the last thirty years and I like the system, but it seems to me that the tech grades do get chunky at 5c and above. This doesn't help with the E grade doing its job. And I have a feeling that many routes are given a higher E number, when an increase in tech grade would more clearly indicate the form etc of the climbing, but to go from 6a to 6b (for example) can not be justified.

The French (?) introduced the "+" symbol. I assume it was to add resolution. Why don't we do the same?

In reply to David Coley:

Increments in the tech grade get relatively smaller at the top end but take a huge amount of effort to achieve (like any gain at the top end of an athletic sport) Combine this with an innate unwillingness to extend the system and you can get compression and overcrowding of some grades.

In reply to David Coley:

this went from 5a-b to 6a over the years

http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/c.php?i=10352

In reply to David Coley:


Right diagnosis, wrong treatment. Medium-Hard climbing (5c and above) is rarely about the difficulty of one move, which is why no other grading system uses a one-move difficulty scale.

Which is why we should keep the E-grade and combine it with a useful physical difficulty grade. So rather than (UK) 6b you could have (Fr) 6c - 8a which gives you all the gradations in difficulty you are missing at present. It's also a familiar system to most.

In reply to Al Evans: 11? seems to be 12 to me

In reply to sutty: Isn't that because all the holds fell off?

In reply to Chris Craggs: Above 6a, brit tech grades are utter nonsense. 6b and 6c cover such a huge range of difficulty that they are rendered practically useless!

In reply to sutty:

Not that they were wrong. I remember doing that in 1982 very shortly after I started climbing, and it wasn't so bad. By 2000 or so it was definitely 6a. It also needs renaming as ExRugosity Wall.

jcm

In reply to David Coley:

It's an interesting historical question why British technical grades just came to a grinding halt at 6c. I've never found the 6b grade a particular problem myself (as in its width; obviously from time to time one or two of the moves have proven a problem). 6c I don't know much about except that that's what the Jackaloupe ought to be graded. But it's obvious that there must be moves on routes harder than 6c; why they aren't graded that way I don't know.

This is where midgets comes along and spouts some bollox about how once you reach these rarefied grades the concept of a single move is too elusive to be useful and that the hard part of the Dominator was some 5b move in the middle (I may not be doing his argument full justice here). Eventually I forced him to admit that this was posey bollocks and that the same was true at 4a, but I can't be bothered to find the link just now.

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Maybe polished Rugosity wall.

Now that wall was one you WOULD have got your rope cut on, or more likely thumped if you were caught top roping it. In fact the only route a rope was put on for was Via Media, to bring a second up. The rest were all solos. If you were not good enough you stayed off them till you were.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

>This is where midgets comes along and spouts some bollox about how once you reach these rarefied grades the concept of a single move is too elusive to be useful and that the hard part of the Dominator was some 5b move in the middle (I may not be doing his argument full justice here). Eventually I forced him to admit that this was posey bollocks and that the same was true at 4a, but I can't be bothered to find the link just now

Now this is where having a pint in your hand helps, in the pub after climbing.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

I think you should dig up that link John! I can imagine admitting that the same *could* be true at 4a, but I can't see that it is generally true...

Around 4a-5a, most moves are between stable positions where you are stood in balance on your feet. Almost all climbers have legs strong enough for climbing (who trains their quads?), so everyone from your 4a climber can rest and recover between moves. This isn't true in the harder grades, where your weight is still on your (relatively weak) fingers. This means moves can blend together. So whilst it is sometimes true at 4a, it is often true at 6a, and almost always true at 6c...

A good example of this is Hubble, in which the crux is not so much the moves themselves, as adjusting your feet and body position between the moves. The dominator example was that the sit-start went undone for some years, yet only adds a single 5b move to the existing, english 7a, problem.

Anyway, the ceiling hit by english tech grades at 6c probably has nothing to do with that, but more to do with a reluctance to stick your neck out in a culture where overgrading and hype are seen as some of the worst sins a climber can commit...

In reply to DuncanTunstall:


You are right, I forgot HVS.

In reply to midgets of the world unite:

Perhaps but, to the less technically able climbers to whom the differences at these grades matter more, these positions may not all seem as 'stable' as they do to you, so IMHO the argument still stands.

In reply to Alasdair Fulton:

In their (mis)application maybe - not in the grades themselves. As the OP said loads of folk can do 6a/6b moves therefore and it doesn't take much imagination to visualise 6c/7a/7b

In reply to Daniel Armitage:


It's funny how on these forums, when people make an arbitrary statement about what grade one becomes a decent/competent climber at, it often just so happens to be one or two grades below their own best onsight. Hmmm. Obviously, I am of the opinion that you become competent around VS/HVS.

As for the British tech grade, I find them to be "chunky" when I am struggling to breakthrough a grade. i.e. I am currently climbing 5b/5c so find that I can do most 5b moves and some 5c ones, so I find those grades chunky: when I was climbing 4c, I found that chunky until I got on to 5a, then the same again. As has been said on other posts, when people get close to the limits of what is (currently) possible in any sport, it becomes increasingly harder to make even small improvements so the difference between 6b/6c/7a may not be as big as it seems; it's just that it's harder to make the improvement. Of course, this is all just conjecture on my part and could be way off the mark since I can't climb anywhere near that hard and probably never will be able to.

In reply to midgets of the world unite:

From knowing people trying these things I'm with you. For punters like me I can get the same sort of thing where moves blur when bouldering (especially indoors at Nottingham climbing centre, sometimes as low as 4c!!)

In reply to Al Evans: hello al why do you bother with this crap

In reply to brian a:

I think he is bored out there. I look and don't comment.

In reply to David Coley:



You can stuff the french grading system right up its own arse and keep it there.

In reply to David Coley:
I'd say not, on the whole. You should remember though that with the E grade included you're looking at a more complicated composite grade, which may include overall number of difficult moves: a better comparison might be how you'd fare on an E5 6c.
That said, the upper tech grades are quite compressed, covering a big range of difficulty. British 6c bouldering can start at 7a font,: there's 11 more font. grades to the top of the scale, 2 British, and British 7b is rarely claimed.
Yes, both the French grading systems are more linear.

In reply to Daniel Armitage:


I disagree. Degrees of talent are as varying as climbers are numerous. Same in any sport.

In reply to David Coley:
After only really sport climbing for a few years, I now feel that I can tell what sport grade a route is, but have no idea of UK tech grade any more. Dont know why, but this troubles me somewhat.....

In reply to mrjonathanr:

Thank you. That was all I was trying to say.

If I've got history right, there was much debate when I was young about whether the British Tech grade should be used to identify the hardest move or the overall difficulty of the climbing (e.g. same as the E grade BUT without addressing questions of rock quality or gear). Which sounds very like the French or US systems. Anyone else out there remember this debate?

In reply to The Pylon King:

There is an OBE on it's way to you right now!

In reply to Bulls Crack:

Presumably for services to British parochialism ?
And where do you intend to insert it?

In reply to David Coley:

I think there is a classic quote in Dave Jones climbing in Britain coffe tablle book which says something along the lines of 6b is pulling on holds the size of the side of a matchbox and 6c is pulling on matchsticks.

With stuff like that knocking around you can see why nobody dared grade anything 7b.

In reply to David Coley:

The real problem with UK grades...

Is that so many folk seem determined to disprove that they work fine for most of us? :-/

In reply to petestack:

Re 6b & c being very wide grades.
I can't comment personally but I found the graded list in the back of the CC southern sandstone guide interesting in that the 6b & 6c routes are quite mixed in overall difficulty.
In fact something like 10 of the 6bs are supposed to be harder (overall) than the easiest 6c.
This might imply that (at least on sandstone) the grades are working as they should, given that the danger factor is pretty much the same & they can't be all that sustained on little rocks.

In reply to petestack:

In general people adopt the grading system they find most useful (the media included).Hence the sport climbers' adoption of French grades, and the boulderers' of font grades. If you like the system you use - keep using it.

In reply to mrjonathanr:

Yep, that fits (always been a 'trad' climber, as in what we used to know as simply 'climbing')...


No problem with that, but some slight concern about losing it if this 'UK grades are broken' movement keeps punching above its weight!

In reply to petestack:
They're not broken, just increasingly vague as you go up the ladder. But although I think that French+Protection grade would be more useful, I doubt it'll be adopted. People just ask around to find out 'what grade it is really' if they're really concerned.

In reply to mrjonathanr:

As regards bouldering grades in the UK there are three: Font, V and English tech... all accepted by climbers, although it is down to personal preference and climbing experience which one you use - the most!

The climber, Simon Panton, says that he will be using all three in the second edition of his North Wales bouldering guidebook.

French sport climbing grades were accepted by climbers in the UK because so many of them climbed sport routes in mainland Europe - and they made sense.

Mick

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Now that could produce some interesting talking points!

In reply to petestack:
Talking point 1: what's the point? I'm sure all boulderers are clever enough to convert between the V and font scales easily enough in their head. If not the practice will do them good. Jeez, he'll invent some crazy grade between V8 and V9 to make them directly comparable the whole way up next...

In reply to abarro81:

Because, if it was that simple, they'd all be using a single scale. So publishing direct comparisons (as opposed to making personal mental conversions) is bound to ruffle a few feathers and strikes me as an interestingly bold move (no climbing analogy pun intended).

In reply to abarro81:

But it makes sense to use all three. I'll explain.

Climbers who go bouldering, boulderers if you like, use a variety of grading systems often dependent on where they did their formative bouldering - some never got to grip with these new-fangled bouldering grades and use English tech, besides everyone is familiar with English tech grades. ...and they work well on short cruxy boulder problems. Always good to know whether there is an English tech 6c move on your V6 rather than an succession of 6a/b moves.

Brought up in Sheffield? Boulder at Font? Worship Ben and Jerry? - you'll want Font grades.

Prefer Heuco and Bishop to France? You don't live in Sheffield, you'll want V grades.

Simon has to cater for all these preferences - not just just yours or mine.

It isn't a competition to see which grade wins, all three are good and better if combined for the good of all.

Mick

In reply to David Coley:

I've 2nded and top roped a few 6a and 6b routes in my time.

All I can say is that 6a is doable - 6b damn near impossible. 6c, well that's just rediculous.

Fex.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

So, Mick,
Might the idea of sometimes using a "+" in front of British tech grades make sence? Or add any value?

In reply to petestack + Mick:
Does anyone not just convert
v6 = 7a
v7 = 7a+
v8 = 7b, lower half of 7b+
v9 = upper half of 7b+, 7c
v10 = 7c+
etc...? If Simon's going to just write those down next to each other then what's the point in not just putting a conversion table at the front? Waste of ink...

In reply to abarro81:

Read what we said! And then understand that, if he simply does a straight conversion according to your table for every problem, I'll be very, very surprised...

In reply to David Coley:

I suggest people might like to read:

http://www.aqvi55.dsl.pipex.com/climb/uk_grades.htm

And thank you to the person who emailed me this URL.

In reply to petestack:
If he doesn't then i'll be rather surprised... after all, the last guide used the crazy V8+ grade, presumably to make the conversion perfect. Everyone I climb with just converts linearly (with the allowance of the 7b+ discrepancy).

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:



Ok fine but I'm not sure this is what's happening.
There seems to be a conviction that it must be possible to do a linear conversion between Bleau & V grades.

For a number of reasons I supect that life isn't that simple, but in order to make that work the Fontainebleau grading system is being bent to fit.

In other words rather than using both the bouldering systems in parallel what is being used is V-grades with the option of writing the V-grade in a dfferent style V3/6A or whatever resulting in no comparison between Bleau grades & the Uk implementation in some areas.

In reply to i.munro:

You can't have 'no comparision' between two systems that measure overall difficulty - they're measuring the same thing essentially

In reply to David Coley:

I wonder if the problems are anything to do with the old idea that the UK tech grade looks at the move in isolation? I always thought that was daft, you should grade the move where it is, if you arrive at it pumped to buggery it is going to feel harder, maybe much harder!


Chris

In reply to Yorkspud:

But that doesn't mean they have to be measured the same way.
I find (as a wall trained male climber) that thuggy long reaches/dynos are graded quite high in the Forest, not really suprising given the large number of women, kids & oldsters climbing there.

On the other hand I'm led to beleive that in the States the climbing poulation is predominantly young & male & from my limited experience of Hueco most of the climbing is of this style so I'd expect them to be graded relatively low.

In reply to Chris Craggs:

This is what someone suggested to me when I raised this topic a few months back - namely that the hardest single move on a route hasn't got much harder than it was 20 years ago, but what has changed is climber's abilities to string sequences of hard moves together. The french, font, V systems can all take this into account, wheras the british tech grade doesn't.

I'm not sure if I believe that to be the whole story, I think egos play a big part, but there is no doubt that the lack of granularity in British tech grades makes the system pretty much defunct above 6b. Which is a pity, cos below that the British grading system is excellant

In reply to Chris Craggs:

Then it becomes strength and fitness dependant whereasbeing solated makes it relatively objective.

In reply to Chris the Tall:

Granularity ??!! Like it - personally I take one lump of 5c or two lumps of 6a in my tea - or is it the other way round ..and I dont like tea. Graded grades make finer - err what ? Grades ?

If we are going disect things further then what is a move ? I have my own view but I suspect it isnt going to be widely shared - for a change - and what makes a move hard isnt always strictly speaking technical

Tech grades is from a time when everyone was weak - nobody is weak anymore - except in the head and on cracks - I know Ive regressed...

In reply to Yorkspud:

A good example for bouldering punters is the traverse of Royal Soverin on the Birchen 3 Ships. Given V4 6a on the database here but isolate any move and its no harder than 5b the easiest way. However to me thats about stamina and pump which is different from what 'Midgets' means where things like the subtle adjustment of body position in sequencies of moves or sometimes crucial continued momentum mean that moves sort of blur: to improve here you need more 'engram' gains than stamina gains.

In reply to Offwidth:

Should be V45b/c then which then communicates it's pumpy

In reply to Yorkspud:

Either that or its an overgraded V2/3 5b