UKC

Dave McAllister has made a quite extensive interview with Chuck Fryberger, the man behind Pure and the recently released Core. Like I said, it's quite long, but also very much worth reading. I liked it.You can find it here.

Read more at http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=54481

Some of these replies were posted on Björn's old blog website, and so won't be from registered UKC users

unless one is really really bored, or really really gay... this article is too long to even start reading it

I found it to be quite interesting. Who would have thought that Nalle was a sniper with the Finish military. I also like Chuck's opinion about red-tagging. It is a good middle way.

I found it quite interesting, and anonymous number 1, articles are usually more then three paragraphs long

very interesting. I like his new take on climbing films - adding in rehearsed acting fills to mix things up a bit. Can't wait to see Core, looks like it's filmed beautifully.

i am totally with Red-tagging.

and the ones that stole that proj in Rifle are real assholes, i thought they were cool people, not anymore

"and the ones that stole that proj in Rifle are real assholes, i thought they were cool people, not anymore"

You of course only heard one side of the story. If Andy had been there actively working the thing (he wasn't), if there were unlimited stone in Rifle that didn't mandate that projects get sent in a timely manner (there isn't), and if the crew working it hadn't already sent every other route in the canyon (they had), you might be right. Also Chuck's point about the permit system somehow validating Andy's point of view could just as easily be used the other way around. Chuck doesn't sport climb anyway, correct? What does he care?

it's not a matter if he was actively working on it, nor the matter that they had no more routes!, he bolted it, and without his effort this route wouldn't be ready for them to climb on. And he said it was still new - after 1 climbing season.

So if you are trying to tell me, that it's just a matter that they were bored and wanted something to climb on, i would strongly disagree with you. Because they sent it publicly, and named it like that. So it's not an innocent pure fun thing, it's bit assholism thing, and you probably defend them because you invested money in them. And not to really show me that they were right.

Are you trying to say that what they did must be a Role Model for all the Climbers (old and young) to follow? "Stealing Projects just because we are stronger than the guy who bolted it"

Yes I am saying that they were justified because they had nothing else to do. If there was tons of other routes to develop (any new hard routes in Rifle since then?), and they hadn't basically already done every other route in the canyon, *and if Andy had been actively working it*, then no. At some point you make a decision balancing what is fair to Andy vs. what is fair to everyone else. You could just as easily accuse Andy of selfishness as whatever you're accusing the others of.

Real quick, I want to stress the fact that Chuck likes and admires everyone involved...he just thought it was a lame move. I won't speak for him, but I will say that throughout our interview and after (not recorded), he stressed the fact that he likes all the guys, he just thought this one move was a bit suspect. We all do funky things.

-Dave