UKC

I'm told that the UKC forum isn't the place for the following, which is fair enough. In the thread on Dave B's great ascent of Walk of Life, pigeonjim posted:

"I hope this does not turn into a slagging of James Pearson. He has put up a stunning route and at the time he highlighted how hard it is to grade top end routes."

Agreed on the stunning line bit. But, are we to believe that the grade was a genuine mistake from a level-headed retiring lad in no way interested in media attention, kudos or sponsorship? Given how hard it is to grade routes at the top end was it entirely sensible to err on the side of the hardest trad route in the world?

At the time I was one of the unqualified punters spouting off on UKC and I stand by my earlier posts. Sorry to stir it up, but come on... Two repeats later and it's benchmark E9 and potentially onsightable.

To be honest I don't overly care what the grade is - it's a stunning line, great climbing etc etc. What I DO care about though is other people's acheivements falling into the shadows of hype.

Ben

In reply to Ben Darvill:

It doesn't really matter that much, does it? What harm does it do? It's certainly provided me with plenty of entertainment.

In reply to Ben Darvill:

I believe James, I just think he was rubbish at grading routes.

In reply to Ben Darvill:

No harm done, is there?

If he repeatedly overgrades, he'll lose credibility. If he made a genuine mistake, he'll have learnt something.

In reply to Ben Darvill:

Gimongous face palm.

In reply to Ben Darvill:

Had James climbed E11 when he graded it E12?

In reply to Ben Darvill:
I seem to remember at the time you getting the knives out, why do feel the need to have another go?
I think you should move on.

In reply to Ben Darvill: The guy made a mistake, like you say he's a young climber trying to make a name for himself and trying to make a living. So he overgraded a few routes? Do you think Dave Mac wanted to give Rhapsody E11? Seemed like the sponsers wanted it a lot more to me. I'm sure he feels bad enough without people rubbing salt in.

In reply to Ben Darvill: next time you get the first ascent of a climb that hard, begin judging him,

the people qualified to comment upon the grading of this route could be counted on one hand.

At the top end of grading, there are going to be so many factors that make useful grading difficult, you cant really blame the guy...

whatever happens, Its still one of the hardest trad routes climbed to date and deserves as much respect as any of the others, regardless of the fannying about with grades. (which I personally feel, are nigh on irrelevant at this level)

In reply to Ben Darvill: "What I DO care about though is other people's acheivements falling into the shadows of hype."

lets be honest, this just isnt going to happen.
Any new route at this level or similar will receive the respect it deserves.

In reply to Ben Darvill:

Great thread title!! Very funny!

In reply to Ben Darvill: a person grades a route on their personal experience of said route and how they found it.james found it hard and sustained and death and graded it accordingly.dave and dave found it bold but fairly safe and graded it accordingly.its just down to one personal interpretation.plus most trad routes are supposedly graded for an onsight lead which hasnt been done yet so maybe it is E12 after all

In reply to murdster: but it should have been if 9 were 12 though shouldn't it....

In reply to Steeve:

Whilst I agree it's all a storm in a teacup...that remark is nonsense.

You're suggesting that if a person does not climb at the grade they can't comment on ethics/grading/the gravitaitional effect of the media etc.?

I'll never wear the yellow jersey in the Tour - but I feel quite comfortable despising drug abusers that do. I'll never have a number 1 record - but I feel quite comfortable wincing at the bum notes.

I don't know what grade it is...but it's perfectly valid for me to interpret two rapid repeats by two well-travelled climbers that are consistent in saying it's waaaaay overgraded as suggesting, well, that it is.

In reply to beastofackworth: It's funny you should say that as I was just thinking a headpointer is probably actually in a better position to give an onsight grade for a route than someone who has just onsighted it is.

Why? Beacuse the headpointer will actually know the route properly, how hard and sustained the moves are and how good the gear actually is. They have much, much more information to base their guess at a grade on than an on-sighter who has done the route once, who has possibly missed gear or a crucial hold or just gotten scared and made the route feel much harder for themselves than it really was.

The onsight experience is by it's very nature going to be much more hit and miss and therefore harder to judge accurately how it went?

In reply to Ben Darvill:

I don't think James would have got and be getting as much stick had he repeated a good number of Dave Mac/Dave B/John Dunne's E9s, Indian Face, that Hells Lum climb, Rhapsody etc before grading WOL. If you've mainly climbed hard but short, technical and bold grit routes and haven't done many such hard mountain trad routes, the criticism that has been and is being seen from others is foreseeable.

Anyway - does the down-grading really matter? Both Daves have confirmed the stunning quality of the route, just like they did with John Dunne's Divided Years.

So well done James for having the vision to get the first ascent of an incredible route on an amazing bit of rock.

And well done Ian Vickers for the brilliant first ascent of Dyer Straits in 98. The photo in the North Devon and Cornwall Guide is awesome.

In reply to Profanisaurus Rex:

He does seem to have form though, eh?? The Promise, The Groove.
Maybe he just needs to get better people around him.

In reply to hexcentric: Nobody else has done the promise without pads, and the americans drop tested the gear where James was assunming it wouldn't take a fall. The Groove hasn't actually seen a full repeat as whichever american it was headed right into the end of fern hill.

In reply to @ndyM@rsh@ll: assuming, dammit.

In reply to a13x: He originally gave the groove E11, which i think went down to E10, then he graded walk of life E12.. But he used "mathmatical" reasons, tring to transfer sport grades, using past experiences, etc etc.. theres an interview somewhere.. all these added up to his decision of E12.

In reply to neil the weak:

Don't agree Neil. That just doesn't make sense.

Of course on a headpoint you'll know the route better - that makes it more of an imaginative leap to guess what it *would* feel like to onsight. The cumulative experience of several people onsighting it should give a more accurate reflection. If most of them say miss a useful hold or gear, making the route feel harder than it 'is', then that is presumably because the hold is non-obvious, and that is part of the nature of onsighting the route.

In reply to Ben Darvill:


Benchmark McLeod/Birkett E9, which I've long suspected is significantly harder than the Peak equivalent.

*Disclaimer* I dont actually climb E9 so may well be talking out of my arse.

In reply to El3ctroFuzz:


To be more precise, he gave it E10, but after giving WOL E12 he explained that he felt in retrospect The Groove was probably E11, which was a factor in his guessing E12 for WOL.

I blame it on grit E9s.

In reply to Jamie Bankhead:
Ben has a handy grade conversion chart for this very issue. Crap to explain, funny to see. Maybe he'll link it??

In reply to neil the weak:

and thats why its always going to be harder to onsight than to headpoint.some climbs have trick moves and sequences that people dont get first time which will obviously make the moves alot easier after practice all the things you described are why its harder grades for onsight than headpoint,that great big unknown

In reply to Ben Darvill:

If I were to take a 70ft gear stripping whipper off that wall, I'd probably over-grade it, assuming I'd have the balls to get back on it!

In reply to beastofackworth: Sorry. I'm now confused. I can't see any realtion between what you posted and what I posted.

In reply to andy moles: That's just it though - if there were a large pool of people who had onsighted something I might agree. What gets me is when people say that we'll know the grade as soon as someone has done it onsight, ie one person.

Onsighting by it's nature gives an unrelaible experience (think how different various benchmark routes of grades might have felt to you when onisighting even though they were all actually much the same difficulty - some you get "right", others not and they can feel grades harder) so you need lots of ascents to come to some concensus. If you are going to base the (inital) grade of a route off only one or two ascencionists experiences I still suspect the headpointers are more likely to get it right (unless they are James Pearson apparently).

(Only joking...)

In reply to Jamie Bankhead:

And Kevin J said he thought E8 for the lower crux bit to reach Fern Hill. Everyone else seems to think E7 or 8 for the Promise too, so 3 down for one and two/three for another.

In reply to neil the weak:

He possibly did overgrade The Groove and the Promise, but perhaps this was because he was using well-established grit E9s as a benchmark? Had he been on routes like If 6 Was 9 and The Fugue he might have had a different take.

I have an abiding suspicion that grit grades got stretched from E7 to E10 too quickly, which in turn forced McLeod to grade Rhapsody E11 as he knew it was harder.

In reply to Jamie Bankhead:

It took 30 years from the first e7 to the first e10. I think that's the same on average as the rest of the progression. For what it's worth in the handful of routes I've done above e6 I've always found a fairly big gap between e7 and e8 amd e8 and e9. I knew the promise wasn't e10 but going round saying it was e7 was a little inflammatory I think. There's plenty of comparisons you can make to other grit routes that show its harder than e7, and you can look up the whole dicussion that surrounded it at the time. Don't forget James still maintains he finds equilibrium easier than the promise. At the top end it just becomes a little more personalised, unless of course you're Birkett. Macleod didn't want to lead indian face but managed WOL without too much drama.

In reply to JR:

What was the first E7; Beau Geste? The system just seems a bit messed up when grit E9s are getting multiple repeats, solos, ground-ups etc while McLeod/Birkett E9s (which tend to be a bit more like un-bolted sports routes) dont get looked at.

I think Indian Face is a bit of a red herring to be honest; it's so far at odds with other big numbers in terms of risk factor and insecure climbing that I'm starting to wonder if it will ever get another repeat.

In reply to Ben Darvill:

I think it would be nice to just give the guy a break. For what it's worth I also think James was convinced his route was harder than anything else. And even if not, any short term gain is more than balanced out in the long term when the grade comes down. There's no need to kick another boot in.

You are right that it's really hard to grade hard routes correctly. If you find Nalle Hukkataival's blog on google you'll find his recent article on how nearly all the world's hardest boulder problems have lost their original grade following repeats. Nearly ALL of them. It seemed a bit ridiculous to me when folk were questioning whether the E grade was making no sense, when a lot of the hardest trad routes in the UK have actually held their grade.

As I've moves through experiences of it, the lessons in grading new routes have been nothing new - climb a lot of other peoples routes on different rock types and types of crag. Especially the ones that are likely to be hard, like Birkett's! Play devil's advocate with yourself a lot before deciding on a final grade. If you had a gripper or a nasty fall on the route, understand that this creates an even bigger tendency to overgrade. Understand that opening a new route often feels a good bit harder that repeating routes, especially when they are only a few metres long and ten minutes from your house.

At E9 this is still one of the harder trad routes around, and it is important that James opened what already seems to be a super classic route.

In reply to Dave MacLeod:

Fair play Dave. A lot of sense spoken there, as usual.

You make the point, as others have, that you really need to repeat a lot of other people's routes in that broad grade range and on different rock types etc to build grade experience. With the exception of Equilibrium, maybe that's where James went wrong? His frame of reference wasn't quite right.

Anyway, if it was a genuine mistake then you're right, it's more than time to let it lie. Which of us hasn't made an embarassing cock up/error of judgement in the past that we'd rather didn't keep resurfacing?

Ben

In reply to Ben Darvill:

I don't think there is a simple reason James got it wrong. As you say, a lack of breadth in rock types, but also easier grades and different styles of climbing. I'd say the main one though, was how quickly he improved. Going from bouldering as a teen, to a first route headpointing E7 at 16?, and then to E9/10 in two years is a massive achievement but not a great baseline for steady grading. Each time he climbed a harder route he'd improved, so it only felt a little bit harder. That gave him a perception of grade width that, as he began to plateau in his twenties, didn't hold up.

I don't think he got great advice on the subject either. No doubts on his ability or the quality of the routes though. Equilibrium has shut a lot of climbers down, including Team America, and James's ascent was by far the fastest. The benchmark grit E10 I think?

In reply to Adam Long:
"The benchmark grit E10 I think?"

Which would make it a harder route to climb than Indian Face or Birkett and MacLeod's E9s?

In reply to Jamie Bankhead:

To be fair no grit E9 (no E9 anywhere for that matter) has as far as I know been climbed ground up without mats. It's true that Parthian Shot seems to have been climbed 'ground up with pre-placed gear' but if that isn't a contradiction, I'm not sure what is! How did the gear get there, was it catapulted from below?!

Grit E9s have seen more attention but is that not just a reflection of the coveted medium grit is, along with the accessibility of the routes?

In reply to Adam Long:

Quite right. Also, it's worth bearing in mind that when he first started climbing hard grit routes including things like equilibrium he was almost recklessly bold. A few scares later (Knocking, for example) probably gave him a more rounded appreciation of risk. Perhaps he hasn't factored this in when comparing later ascents to stuff like equilibrium.

I can only second Dave and Dave's comments that James isn't getting enough credit for what a quality route WOL is. In particular, his vision in stripping the top half of its in-situ gear has left one of the most inspiring hard routes in the country. Having been on this route when there were many pegs I know for a fact I'd have left them in for an ascent, much to the detriment of the route's quality.

The Groove, too, will be remembered not for it's original grade but for the fact that it's a stunningly inventive piece of climbing up a lovely feature.

In reply to Michael Gordon:


And because they are more amenable to strong boulderers, who make up the majority of the good climbers in Sheffield. Many people who could repeat routes like Equilibrium and the Promise lack the sport climbing fitness for the hard routes in the Lakes/Scotland. It doesn't make one easier than the other.

In reply to tim carruthers:

Well that's hard to say since MacLeod's E9s haven't seen much in the way of repeats (only Holdfast by Dave Birkett, using side runners). Objectively, though, the answer to your question would probably be Yes. Neil Gresham has climbed both Indian Face and Equilibrium, and confirmed the grade of the latter.

In reply to midgets of the world unite:

Agreed.

In reply to Michael Gordon:

In short, yes it has, but it was a team effort. Ben Bransby and Pete Robbins tried the route ground-up, placed the gear on lead, but were fell off higher up. They left the gear in for subsequent attempts. Team America than joined in, and eventually (days later) Kevin topped out. Not a perfect ascent by any means but a significant step forward in style.

I'm not a great fan of the cult of the individual in climbing nowadays - you can't trad climb on your own. Alternate goes by an equal pair is the natural approach to a hard lead. Highballing is also often a collective effort, and not just to carry the pads, good beta is established a lot quicker with three or four climbers than a single hero.

In reply to Adam Long:

One of the main explanations must surely be (as you say) the exposure to a limited amount of different styles of climbing. He points out in the Walk of Life film that he is used to bouldery problems and the main difficulties on a route generally being over after 15m or so. If you go from that background to a sustained and intimidating 55m pitch then perhaps it is inevitable that you are going to get a shock and think "wow, this is the living end!", when really this type of route is not unique in that respect?

In reply to Adam Long:

OK, cheers for that. I was unaware of the finer details above. As you say an important ascent which may point the way forward to further improvement.

In reply to Michael Gordon:

My point was more about styles of ascent (specifically those supposedly more relevant to the E-grade), but yes, quantifying a big Culm slab against a baseline of grit routes is never going to be straightforward.

In reply to Adam Long:

You've also got to admit that Birkett and Pearson are applying what are/ were essentially different scales completely. Dave is working on the premise that E9 'is the top grade' whereas James had already climbed a 'benchmark' E10 in considerably less time.

Exactly the same issue, as Dave MacLeod mentions, is being played out at the top end of bouldering. You've got one sequence of numbers but effectively two scales being used by various climbers - some assuming narrower grades, and hence a higher top grade. And then Dave Graham's scale.

In reply to Adam Long:

Agreed, Adam. This is the point I was making in my (admittedly tongue-in-cheek) grade conversion table:

http://www.photobox.co.uk/my/photo?album_id=90269403&photo_id=183242611...

Ben

In reply to Ben Darvill:
>In the thread on Dave B's great ascent of Walk of Life, pigeonjim posted:

That is very unfair of you to single me out and then use it as an excuse to start the very discussion that I was asking people to avoid. As I posted later on that thread people like Dave B just like climbing which to me is what it should all be about. Just having fun and challenging yourself. Not a competition with anyone else or an excuse to have a go at someone you dont know over the grade they gave a route.

In reply to pigeonjim:

Sorry pigeonjim - not having a dig at you in the slightest. It was just your post that prompted me to reply, that's all.

If this was 'all about climbing' then I agree, all of this bickering would be very petty. But it's not. At least not for this climb. This climb sold hundreds if not thousands of pounds worth of magazines, photos, DVDs and associated advertising revenue. I really don't think it's unreasonable to be a little sceptical.

You have to wonder about the people close to him at the time. To what extent did they influence his train of thought, and did they stand to gain anything from big headlines?

Ben

In reply to Ben Darvill:

Let it go. Done to death already.

In reply to midgets of the world unite:

>Many people who could repeat routes like Equilibrium and the Promise lack the sport climbing fitness for the hard routes in the Lakes/Scotland. It doesn't make one easier than the other.

Not an obviously true observation. One might think that if more people exist who can do route A than who could do route B, then route B is harder. After all, what else does a grade mean?!

jcm

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

It really doesn't. Far less people could onsight a lakes E5 compared to a grit E5, but people realise that if they put the effort in to get sport fitness the lakes E5 would probably seem easier. I imagine the same applies for harder grades.

But lets stop discussing this route as it's a bit sad. It's a great line and Pearson did a great job putting up an increadibly difficult line, which wasn't even his style- just goes to show how good he is, that he can compete with Macleod and Birkett with routes that don't even suit him.

In reply to Ben Darvill:

Ben, while I am quite happy for Neil Pearson to be given the benefit of the doubt, are you trying to make a more general point in your last sentence about the insidious commercialisation of climbing for financial gain by "professional" climbers, possible grade inflation being just symptom? If so, I am right with you.

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:

Well, there are plenty who are fit enough to do Lakes E9 but lack the requisite skill/ bouldering level for some grit routes. Though most stamina climbers these days seem only interested in sport.

The obvious reason why grit routes get lots of ascents is because they are nearer (much) the big centres of population. And Sheffield has a disproportionate number of top climbers, very close to the hard routes. So they get done more...

What would really sort things out is a Birkett repeat of Equilibrium. Wouldn't it?

In reply to Ben Darvill:
Re the grading of the Groove at E10/11, and it's subsequent downgrading

Lets not forget just how long this line had been regarded as one of Grits LGPs - pretty sure it was mentioned as such in the Derwent Grit guide in the mid 80s. So how many of the greats of the last 20 years tried it and didn't succeed ? Certainly looks fairly plausible that it would be harder than Equilibrium

In reply to Robert Durran:

Hi Robert,

Look - I've stuck my head above the parapet here and said out loud what people are all happy to chat about down at the wall. I increasingly just feel sorry for James. He's a great climber who made a mistake of one sort or another which hopefully he'll learn from. That mistake doesn't take anything away from the great E9 - the route of most people's dreams (nor his other acheivements in climbing and bouldering). I'm inclined to agree with those who say that we should move on now.

To answer your question though. At the time of the ascent James was surrounded by "a climbing DVD company", "a climbing magazine", "a leading climbing photographer", "a climbing luminary with a track record of grade inflation" and was sponsored by "an outdoor clothing company" and "a climbing gear company". James is getting all the grief for these downgrades but you have to wonder to what extent his enthusiasm was carried along by all of the above. Some of these parties will have gained financially from the initial overgrades but will not have been damaged by subsequent downgrades.

Ben

In reply to Robert Durran:

I am sure Neil Pearson(s) (former Climb Editor) would love to have done Walk of Life, but I think he'd agree that it is probably beyond him, however James Pearson is a different matter.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - UKC:

Oops!

In reply to Ben Darvill:
"...but will not have been damaged by subsequent downgrades."

Oh, I dunno about that. I certainly won't be buying any North Face stuff if it makes things feel three grades harder.

In reply to Adam Long:

>Well, there are plenty who are fit enough to do Lakes E9 but lack the requisite skill/ bouldering level for some grit routes. Though most stamina climbers these days seem only interested in sport.

That wasn't midgets' point, though - he seemed to think there weren't many who had the required skillset for the Lakes E9s but (a bit like Franco) lots of people who could if only they were interested. Which of course takes one back to the whole sport-wads-could-piss-Indian-Face thing.

Agreed grit routes are ascended a lot for demographic/logistical reasons.

jcm

In reply to JJL: thats not what I'm suggesting,
what I object to, is people grading from living rooms...
the vast majority of people commenting on the subject are in no position to judge how dangerous, or hard this climb is.

In reply to Steeve:

Very?

In reply to Steeve:

At the last count 26 have voted on the grade of The Walk of Life:

http://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/c.php?i=113057

I'd quite like UKC to identify them (must be possible).

In reply to Ben Darvill: Given that sport grades in general are 'higher' than trad ones, would it not make sense to define criteria for things above E8 before they get climbed? Ie. we know protected F8a standard climbing = E8 6c trad because there's enough routes like that to form a concensus. So does protected F8b = E9, F8c = E10 & F9a = E11? If it's unprotected then how should that bump up the E grade - one notch or two? Does the UK tech grade screw the system up?

In reply to johncoxmysteriously:


As far as I'm concerned on that - if they could, they would. The fact that none of them have is a rather more important fact than any supposed potential.

The demographic thing isn't really an excuse here either. Lakes, Scotland etc, yes. But not North Wales.

In reply to Adam Long:


Does that actually hold true Adam? The top routes, E9 and E10 don't get that done that often despite 'Sheffield (having) a disproportionate number of top climbers'

In reply to bouldery bits:
my point exactly,
for such a huge majority of people, with the top few routes the specifics of the grade dont matter that much, rather that theyre just in the list of "very hard" routes....
any route that gets into this list recieves very similar regard, and publicity so far as I can see...

as Dave said, the consequences of overgrading at least match the benefits of grading high...

maybe we should get rid of grades above E9 and just have FD (f*cking difficult)...

In reply to Ben Darvill: you have a point, a 3 overall grades reduction after repeats. Imagine in winter someone claiming a IX when in fact it was repeated and found to be VI? or an E9 and it was found to be E6? pretty significant I would say.

The best bit about Daves modest article is the praise for Ian Vickers, well done and good effort Dave

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

They get done more than the Lakes routes. All of Bikett's East Buttress routes remain unrepeated. I don't think that would be the case if they were located in Burbage Valley, as opposed to one of the highest and least accessible mountains in England.

In reply to Steeve:

"theyre just in the list of "very hard" routes.... maybe we should get rid of grades above E9 and just have FD (f*cking difficult)..."

Not sure how serious this was, but I can't say I agree with it. If the same approach had been adopted by previous generations then everything from E1 to E5 would be graded JT (j*lly tricky).

Ben

In reply to Tom Briggs:

True.

But there does seem to be a lack of people trying the hardest routes in any area...whether it be the Peaks or the Lakes.

Anyway Birkett and Mitchell will be publishing a list of cleaned hard routes in the Lakes to entice the hotshots, just hope it doesn't rain.

Birkett has even volunteered to carry three of them at a time up to Scafell if they like.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:


Could that be because they're ... err, hard?

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

Well, although Equilibrium has only had three or four ascents, they were all by locals, I think <racks brain>.

The E8s were getting done by every man and his dog, though perhaps less so now we have a movement towards better style. Seems to be mainly foreigners doing them now. E9s, probably more ascents than you'd think - I'd say enough to mean they aren't automatically newsworthy now.

Either way, I'm confident that more E8+ routes get climbed by more climbers on grit than any other comparable area in the Uk.

In reply to Adam Long:


Yes, you would hope so.

But is top end trad climbing essentially dead in the UK, apart from a handful of climbers?

In reply to Coel Hellier:

Or that there aren't that many people climbing hard?

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com: Doesn't that amount to the same thing? If everyone's doing something it isn't hard.

In reply to @ndyM@rsh@ll:

What @ndy said...

Although the top headpoint grade may not have really advanced, I think we've seen a solid advance in onsighting over the last five years. Partly 'cos its not so fashionable, but also giving a big grade is getting deeply unfashionable. Echo Wall certainly sounds like the hardest trad route in Britain, but it hasn't extended the grade scale yet. I'mk not sure Dave B should be saying E9 is 'the top grade' until he's been on that, Equilibrium, etc.

In reply to Ben Darvill: Why dont people, just go out and enjoy climbing for what it is. All grading is subjective and personal. One person E grade may be another VS and vice versa. I think people are just getting tied up in something that in reality dose not matter. Rather than question it, discuss it. Get out and try it!!!!!!

In reply to tim carruthers:

Priceless - made me laugh out loud!

In reply to Adam Long: I think the grit hard routes are of such a similar nature to bouldering, that you basically just need to boulder well and have the ability to take your brain out for a couple of minutes (something that a lot of people can do) but the longer routes require tenacity, a trait/ability that few posses/develop. Im guessing a lot of grit e8 climbers would loose it completely if they jumped on a lakes e8. But its not to say that one is easier than the other, i know many people who struggle to go from big trad to grit.
Its probably been mentioned but i guess this is where James in his youthfulness struggled to see the comparison. Ie. he is well versed in the short but hasnt/hadnt developed the 'mental stamina' for the long, therefore it felt right on his limit. ?
Effin good effort though & for dave birkett.

In reply to Kaya:

But it does matter. This argument is an argument of ethics, something that most climbers on this forum care about. Personally, I think that the grade should have waited until a few more ascents. The immediate grading did seem a bit presumptious, and it did seem that the grading was given for the benefit of the sponsors (so that they could advertise such a route). Whether this was Pearson's opinion of the grade or his sponsors, there should have been some restraint with the grading.

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

Just check out the latest Chuck Fryburger flick to see where climbing is going. Last time I looked, Birkett wasn't driving a Ferrari.

In reply to Steeve:

OK


Oh dear. You just said it again.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

?????
What, because a few people are better at it than others? Twas ever thus, no? Its the nature of the thing (and every other thing).

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

How do you define "top end" Mick? Headpointing E7, E8 and E9 isn't top end - regularly onsighting E5 and E6 is.

Onsighting E5 and E6 will always be better than toproping an E8 to death. I was in the UK last month for 5 days and I can assure you that there are members of the Burnley Team, as keen as ever, flashing E5's and E6's like they always have - unfortunatley you don't get free bling equipment for flashing E6's....

E

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

There are lots of people pretending that they climb hard.

Top rope End of The Affair 26 times, lead it, then tell everyone in the pub you've climbed E8...........onsight Lord of the Flies - no chance mate!!!

E

In reply to Enty:


I think you've overdone that a bit. Onsighting E5 or E6 is no more top end than headpointing E7 or 8. Headpointing E9 still is though, otherwise this route would not be news.

In reply to Adam Long:

Ok, I'll give you E9 - but onsighting E6 anywhere is harder than headpointing 30ft of Peak grit.

E

In reply to Enty:


Lets see you headpoint an E8 then if it's so easy compared to onighting E5. You've done one, you should be able to do the other no bother.

In reply to Enty:
I'd tend to agree with Adam with respect to onsighting E5/6 and headpointing E7/8. All are fine efforts but none are top end. I have the impression that onsighting E6 is very much an equivalent "challenge" to headpointing E8.
Or in more general terms:
Onsight E(x) = Headpoint E(x+2)

In reply to Ben Darvill:
They were, of course, at one point. VS, HVS and Extremely Severe were all, I think, the top grade at some time or other.

In reply to jonny taylor:

You are forgetting Exceptionally Severe.

In reply to Toerag:

would it not make sense to define criteria for things above E8 before they get climbed?

I thought the general consensus was that E grades were holistic "experience grades" I'm not sure it's something you can quantify by tacking two grades together or a formula.

In reply to Adam Long:

"I think we've seen a solid advance in onsighting over the last five years"

Im not so sure about that;

1993 E7 on-sights routine, E8 ground up from Vickers and Cameron

200? E8 onsights Birkett

2009 E9 ground up on grit

E9 on-sight?

In reply to dr evil: Were there other 'E9s' done ground up on grit stone apart from Parthian shot- which seemed to be down-graded to E8.

In reply to dr evil:

Routine? By who? Vickers was exceptional I think. There is a lot more breadth of talent operating at that standard now.

Franco - that's the first I've heard of Parthian being E8. Its not.

In reply to Franco C:
Is the suggested downgrading due to Seb Grieve proving the flake would hold?

In reply to Enty:

Yes, like this guy....Neil 'Nige' Kershaw http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=53061

and this gal, ..... Hazel Findlay: http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=53354



Yes, and the odd E7 in the past.

In reply to Mick Ryan - UKClimbing.com:

I suppose top end trad is McHaffie and his countless E7 onsights.

Headpointing isn't really trad to me. It's a distinct category of style of ascent for non-bolt routes. I value it and respect those who do it. I've done a little bit.

Trad for me, is turning up at the bottom of a route and climbing it, 'ground up' as they define it now.

Not knowing what is ahead of you (moves, gear, holds, looseness etc), apart from what you can see, that's the hardest type of climbing.

That's how most of us climb anyway.

In reply to blanchie14c: And the Americans taking repeated falls onto it.

In reply to Adam Long:


Weren't quite a few (well a good handful of people) in the North Wales community of that era, including dr evil himself, onsighting up to that level at Gogarth? My memories of OTE from that period seemed have lots of hard Gogarth action in them; Huxley, Pritchard, Crane, Wainwright, Farquhar, Turner, Dawes, Dixon etc. Surely many of them onsighted E7 around those times?

In reply to Franco C:
Dunno what all the fuss was about then, if Yanks can fall on that flake it must be bomber!

Just my view on the whole thing for what its worth. Quite an old school way of looking at it but when a hard new route is reported and grade is suggested its my view that it takes a few repeats for the suggested grade to settle, I was never taken in by TWOL reported grade at the time, how can you? Same as other big routes of the last few years - Equi, Groove, Rhapsody and maybe one day Echo Wall. All need traffic to arrive at the grade. I think James may have made a slight error but his young years plus possible pressure from sponsors etc may have pushed him to where he didn't want to be - i.e giving a grade. To take nothing away from James, he is a very special talent and this will hopefully make him stronger.

blanch

In reply to blanchie14c:


Good sentiments!

Mick

In reply to Adam Long: Didn't the americans suggest it was E8? It seems quite similar to strawberries from the list of people who have fallen off it.